imdb_id
stringlengths 9
9
| title
stringlengths 1
92
| plot_synopsis
stringlengths 442
64k
| tags
stringlengths 4
255
| split
stringclasses 1
value | synopsis_source
stringclasses 2
values | review
stringlengths 119
19k
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
tt0295254 | Feardotcom | Mike Black Reilly (Stephen Dorff) is an NYPD detective who is called to the scene of a mysterious death in the subway system. The victim, Polidori (Udo Kier), exhibits bleeding from his eyes and other orifices and, by the frozen look on his face, appears to have seen something horrifying before being hit by a train.
Department of Health researcher Terry Huston (Natascha McElhone) is intrigued by the find as well, particularly when several more victims show up with identical symptoms.
When a contagious virus is ruled out, Terry and Mike team up to discover what might be killing these people. Initially they are unable to find anything to connect the deaths together; after some more digging for clues, they eventually discover that all of the victims' computers crashed shortly before their passings. They send each of the victims' hard drives to Mike's friend, Denise Stone (Amelia Curtis), who is a forensic specialist.
Denise discovers that all of the victims had visited a website called Feardotcom, which depicts voyeuristic torture murder. Upon looking at the site herself, Denise is subjected to various sights and sounds of torture that eventually drive her crazy and result in her falling to her death from her apartment window.
Mike feels guilty, thinking that he should have never gotten Denise involved in the case. Terry figures out that people who visit the website die within 48 hours, apparently from what they feared most in their lives. Despite such dangerous knowledge, both she and Mike visit the site in order to figure out what is happening.
As they begin to experience paranoia and hallucinations (like the deceased), including that of a young girl and her inflatable ball, they race against time to figure out if any of it has any connection to an extremely vicious serial killer, Alistair "The Doctor" Pratt (Stephen Rea), who's been eluding Mike for years.
It is revealed that Feardotcom is, in fact, a ghost site made by one of Pratt's first victims, who is seeking revenge because people watched her being tortured and murdered. She was tortured by Pratt for 48 hours before she begged him to kill her, which explains why the victims have 48 hours to live. Mike and Terry track down Pratt and release the spirit of the murdered girl from the website, which kills Pratt. However, Mike is also killed.
The ending scene shows Terry lying in her bed with her cat. The phone rings but she hears no one on the line, only online static. She hangs up and hugs the cat. | revenge, neo noir, murder, violence | train | wikipedia | The film manages to maintain its unwatchability for over an hour, but by that point the viewer will probably have already logged onto www.feardotcom.com in hopes of ending the misery.
Do not make the mistake of renting this movie; there's a small chance it may scare you, but the odds of that happening are not worth sitting through 90 minutes of some of the worst examples of film-making..
About halfway through the movie, I was actually considering giving this a 4, but the complete and utter lack of reasoning in this movie that made me give it a 1 I will now try to sum up.The ghost made a website that people can log (and start hallucinating from) onto only 48 hours later they will be dead unless they find her body so she can exact revenge on someone who killed her on another website that people subscribe to, even though she kills other people in car crashes and train accidents who had no involvement with her death.Things I learned from FearDotCom:-Ghosts are capable of creating websites.-The internet is inherently evil.-People who use the internet are freaks.-People who use the internet are incapable of closing their eyes.-A bunch of weird images on a computer can drive someone crazy and make them hallucinate.-A bunch of weird images on a movie can drive someone so crazy that they hallucinate so they think what they are watching makes one ounce of logical sense.Obviously the producers of this movie wanted the audience to be driven insane by the film and have shut off our brains by the time the "ending" has arrived.
I watched it quite some time ago, expecting it to be decent enough, entertaining at least, because I really liked the tagline and the premise seemed fun, though I have learned to stay away from a lot of "technology killing" horrors over the past few years now, and I remembered before I watched it again recently that I hated it the first time I watched it, a lot, and it was very negatively reviewed as well.
Watching it again confirmed my feelings.The film itself is just entirely ridiculous and absurd from beginning to end with a horrible storyline and lame performances and "thrills".
I especially hated the ludicrous characters and twists, and also the way the story was executed in a poor manner, not being able to stay with one main idea for too long that it is infuriatingly annoying to watch the plot, what plot there is at least, unfold.
The movie resembles a little diddy of a film titled "Ringu/The Ring" an awful lot, though both of those renditions are spectacular and this pales entirely in comparison, and even though there are some nice settings in this movie, that is really and truly the only plus side to it.There are many noticeable errors and plot holes, the dialogue is, for our inconvenience, not as laughable as one would hope, but corny enough to get a few giggles now and then, especially some of the deliverances from the female lead, and the climax/ending is not anywhere near heartracing or interest sparking, just bland and hardly tolerable.
But, when the plot of a film is neither logical nor entertaining you get one movie: FeardotCom. I'd rather watch Anti-Smoking Commercials.
The whole movie is very dark in scenery and in acting.The movie is about a website (feardotcom.com) that if you go there some dead chick asks you if you want to play a game, and then eventually kills you.
Behind the website is a snuff film maker that shows footage of him killing people 'erotically.' The director of this movie must has some screws loose in his head.
This could have been a decent horror film, but all things considered, this movie ranks a 1 on the rating scale and a 10 on the pain scale.My suggestion is to watch a horror film such as 'The Ring' or John Carpenter's 'The Thing.' Both are edge-of-your-seat thrillers that will show you what horror is meant to be...
Certainly not the movie I watched) and that people paid money to see it because I just assumed, based on the quality of the film as well as where I watched it, that it was one of those low budget, poorly acted, nonsensically over the top, made for TV SyFy original movies.
Lastly, the movie is about a website (feardotcom.com) that when visited, causes death in exactly 48 hours.
Stephen Dorff is one of those actors who needs to fire his agent, he is talented and easy on the eye, and has made some good films like Blood and Wine, and World Trade Centre.
After this and In Dreams (a big mistake for Neil Jordan!) he is gonna need about 10 movies as good as Interview With The Vampire, The Crying Game and The End Of The Affair for him to sink his acting chops into again, before he can wash the taste of this experience out of his mouth!
blah blah blah, it didn't work Billy, your film makes everyone look like they need a good wash and a shot of tequila ...
Too many of the "scares" were laughable, too many of the scenes pointless.The only saving grace for my $5.50 was the trailer for "Ghost Ship" before the movie.The lead actress, Natascha McElhone,looks like a cross between Crystal Gayle and Meryl Streep, with the acting ablitiy of Tawny Kitaen.
Actually, it deserves a half point for showing boobs and another half point because Natascha McElhone gets hotter as the movie goes on (BUT THIS IS NOT NEARLY A GOOD ENOUGH REASON TO WASTE ANY TIME ON SEEING THIS MOVIE!!!).
The plot had potential but it's poorly executed and makes "The Ring" look like a masterpiece.The f/x are CGI mediocrity and there isn't any remarkable production value.My advice is : forget about this movie.
OK, one should not expect too much logic from a horror movie, but the rest is poor quality as well - bad acting, a lot of cheap violence, and very little real thrill.
Avoid this film, unless you are one of these guys who never lose any horror movie.
i loved the movie because it had a good creepy feeling thats awesome in a scary movie and also the secret between the little girl and her mother and the scientist and that the little girl had a problem i diden see that coming she was a hemophiliac or something like that i haven't seen the movie in a long time i was 14 or 15 when i seen it yea the movie had tons of cool things to it that I'm not all going to whrite down but i am going to say that I'm going to get that movie for my movie collection fear.com was a rental so i wasn't able to keep it but years later while i was online it hit me fear.com lol kinda weard huh well I'm saying goodbye and to the ones in or made fear.com.
brilliant, twisted artist) A FASCINATING book of GREAT horror films that never got made, because Studio Execs are Complete Idiots, who think Giger is too shocking for us, and we're too stupid to know the difference between good films and bad!!
He told some of us at the screening, that after HOHH it was the only script (fear dot com) he'd gotten, where the producers weren't suggesting having the writers of `Friends' do rewrites, or wasn't a remake of Frankenstein filled retard CGI like "The Mummy" remakeSo anyway on to the film...
This film is all about piercing your psyche and i think that it really is a good movie (for about the first 45 minutes)then it just completely changes track and spins out of control to a very anti climactic ending, a waste of Good actors both Stephen Dorff and Natascha McElhone are actors who deserves much better, feardotcom was a good movie if you only watch it once or just watch for 45 minutes as i've said before, it just spins out of control and you don't make sense out of anything.
the only reason that i gave it a two is that Stephen Sorff and Natascha McElhone, have great screen chemistry, don't watch this one unless you haven't seen the ring or the grudge which both rock in comparison to this one , a waste of time is the only thing i can think of.
When I think back to when I saw the Ring and compare it to my reaction to the other William Malone (director of Feardotcom) films that I saw that year, House on Haunted Hill, I came to realize that had I seen Feardotcom that year, it would have scared the pants off me.
Not 3, which you would clearly see if you actually took the time to watch the film instead of turning it off at the first Ring similarity that you see..
While I did think that the main idea of the website was good, it went nowhere of merit.What was left was simply a lot of flashy MTV camera shots and cinematography to try and give the impression of weirdness or an impressive film.
Well, they all died 48 hours after logging into the site FEARDOTCOM.COM....yes, it's feardotcom.COMSounds like the ring eh, well it is and it isn't, because with the Ring, you get more into the reasoning behind the video tape, in this movie you have some guy filming himself killing people, then people die from their worst fear after going to feardotcom....sorry feardotcom.com.
This film falls into the category of "RIPOFF".After seeing the opening scene I know that this movie would be average at best....I was wrong, it was below average.
Even the great Combs was underused and abused."I think your perfect for the lead role, come with me" "well, I don't know you, and you look kinda freaky, but what the hell, I'll go with you and tell no one, and surely sign my death warrant" Well, maybe that last bit wasn't in the movie but it might as well should have been.PLEASE!!!
Now I know you all have your right to your own oppinion, but someone tell me straight out why you didn't like this movie instead of just saying how bad it was..
I know they wanted it dark since it was a dark subject but it would have been nice to actually SEE the movie ;-) I really enjoyed the storyline and all the acting, though.
This movie was great and anyone who doesn't think so, has no taste in horror films.
A police officer (Stephen Doriff) and a health department inspector (Natascha McElhone) team up together to find out what is going on while a crazed killer (Stephen Rea) who kidnaps and tortures young women is on the loose and is somehow connected to the site.Under rated horror film is one of those films that doesn't make you jump out of your seat, but instead slowly works on adding layer upon layer of tension.
This is not a summary or review.This movie, Fear Dot Com, was not great and I will admit that, but it was not bad, and does not deserve to be on the IMDb bottom 100.
So I gave it a 10, and hope you do too, to get it off the IMDb bottom 100 list.Guys come on, We have all seen tons of movies much worse than Fear Dot Com.It had good music "Sonne" by Rammstein..The plot was interesting, it just wasn't filmed the best, and it was kind of confusing..
I actually found this movie to be not that bad...not saying that it was the greatest horror movie ever, but I believe it was worth watching.
While the story line was similar to The Ring (which I suppose is a "remake" of Ringu), I still think it was original enough to not call it a copy-cat (even though the release date for The Ring was after FearDotCom, I have no idea which was actually in development first).Either way, it has a fairly descent "creepy" factor, and enough little shocks & gore to certainly make it better than one of the bottom 100 movies rated on IMDb (as of June 2004)..
FearDotCom is by far the most stylish horror film to come around in a long long time; unfortunately, that's about where the good points end.
Likewise, the events in the film also never seem to click together very well; everything has a vague and illogical connection to each other, but before long you stop worrying about trying to follow it and just enjoy the visuals or turn it off to find a movie that makes sense and you can follow (and if that's what you're looking for, why the hell did you visit a horror film in the first place?).
Feardotcom isn't the greatest horror film I've seen, but I'd recommend it over some so-called `cult classics.'.
"Fear dot com" is a really good horror film.
At times I think the movie is too short to really get into the plot, but then I realize it's up to the viewer to get it and get sucked into it.
FearDotCom uses elements from Ringu (Better known as The Ring), the strong Japanese horror film.DVD has an terrific anamorphic Widescreen (2.35:1) transfer and an strong-Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround Sound.
The visuals of this film is so creative that the movie is so bad that is actually worth seeing.
yet, my heart is pumping and blood is rushing to my nose while watching this film.the only persons that i would not recommend this movie to are people with cardiovascular or neurological disorders.
This movie is no worse than 'The Ring', (a thriller with a very similar plot line) which was also released last summer, each of which has the same premise: Once the object is observed (videocasette/website), the watcher has a specific time frame in which they die (2 weeks/2 days) due to a malevolent spirit of a murdered female extracting her vengance on the voyeurs brave enough to watch.Granted, Naomi Watts is a much better actress than Natascha McElhone, but the rest of the cast of each film are on equal ground.
This film is indeed graphic, actually showing the scenes of horror and torture, while 'Ring' typically implies these until the climatic ending.Herein may lie the answer.
And very, very good.True, it's ruthlessly unpleasant to watch (in this regard, the comparisons to Se7en are very accurate) but the visuals are brilliant and the film succeeds in creating a true atmosphere of suspense that relies on genuine terror rather than cheap sound effects for its scares.
The bad acting doesn't really get out of control though, so the movie maintains cohesion.All in all, a really good ghost story that is really closer to _What Lies Beneath_ than _House on Haunted Hill_.
The only reason I watched "Feardotcom" is that it's currently #53 on IMDB's infamous Bottom 100 List...the 100 worst rated majoy release films.
For a film as bad as Alone In The Dark (AITD movie has a 1% on Rotten Tomatoes), it probably comes nowhere as near or even close.
He was humorous at times, twisted at others, but always made you feel like he was a sick puppy that needed to get his.All in all, I give this movie a 9 out of 10.
FearDotLu. When reading the plot summary of Fear.com it seems that this is just another one of those flawed murders-through-internet-thriller-movies but fortunately, this one gets it right.Not that the story is that fantastic, but the movie keeps one interested until the end to find out what this murders are all about.Cinematography and lighting are well above Hollywood average, the movie sometimes really surprises one with its greats shots and well done effects.
I don't know why most of the people, do not like the film fear dot com!It wasn't the best but still good and solid work.
Ok, I had a lot of dejavues to Ringu but that is all right for me.This film has everything I expect from such a kind of movie.
I Thought the plot of this movie was really good because the internet is a big fear among "todays society"...
Honestly, I feel if the film were a short movie, my rating would be higher.
Granted, the film is no masterpiece, but it's actually a pretty good movie.Detective Mike Reilly (Stephen Dorff) is tracking down a sadistic killer who calls himself "The Doctor." But more importantly, is a series of mysterious and gruesome deaths which may or may not be a disease.
This is an effectively made film, although the editing is bad, and the story is stolen from better movies ("The Ring" in particular).
I own this movie and I've watched it at least 7 or 8 times, and it never gets old!
i think all these people who posted these comments should go watch the movie again...
Alas, the film isn't too frighteningly plotted.**** FeardotCom (8/9/02) William Malone ~ Stephen Dorff, Natascha McElhone, Stephen Rea. A good horror film: creepy and frightening.
At time of writing Feardotcom is down as the 53rd worst rated movie on IMDB and I truly don't understand why.
Sadly those tweaks aren't very good and the movie has come out as a bit of a confused mess.I get what they were trying to do and disagree with other reviewers that the film didn't make sense, it really did.
It just wasn't very good and it felt like such a great cast were thoroughly wasted on this, especially considering it's a blatant ripoff of The Ring which had its US remake the very same year this came out.Bad film?
Hardly.The Good:Natascha McElhone and Jeffrey CombsThe Bad:Stephen Rea and Jeffrey Combs feel wastedPlot falls apartTakes a lot from other films.
When action starts to take place movie is becoming just another "survival horror" and the end of production finishes it.This film isn't anything special. |
tt0082138 | Carbon Copy | Roger Porter (Washington) is the long-lost black son of Walter Whitney (Segal), a respectable businessman who lives in the all-white community of San Marino, California. Walter, who is Jewish, has been hiding that fact for purposes of professional advancement in the business which his anti-Semitic father-in-law (Warden) heads.
Once Roger turns up at Walter's office, it turns out that he is the result of Walter's relationship with a black woman, who is now dead. Walter's father-in-law had warned him that the relationship would be harmful to his career, so he broke it off.
Walter attempts to help Roger by telling his wife Vivian (Saint James) that he wants to adopt him. She accepts, but soon regrets the decision and ends up kicking Walter out. Her father also fires him, taking his car and benefits in the process. Penniless, he and Roger check into a motel, and later move into an apartment. Walter ends up as a menial manual laborer, shovelling horse manure.
The final ten minutes makes the transition from comedy to drama, where Walter has to choose between either acceptance that Roger is his son, or alienation of Roger to salvage his own position in society. | blaxploitation | train | wikipedia | A white man told his white wife that the black teenage boy with them was his son.
Over the years, I quoted that line many times, mostly in arguments with my mother and maternal grandmother about inter-racial marriage.
Walter Whitney (played by George Segal) is a wealthy businessman who lives a high society lifestyle with his snobbish wife Vivian (Susan St. James) and his equally snobbish step-daughter Mary Ann (Vicky Dawson).
That changes one day when a 17-year old black boy named Roger Porter (Denzel Washington in his first movie) arrives at Walter's office and, after an extensive display of crude behavior, cheerfully says "Hi, Daddy!"It turns out that Roger was the product of Walter's relationship with a black woman, now dead, who he loved.
But he left her when his longtime employer and now father-in-law Nelson Longhurst (Jack Warden) advised him that it would be harmful to his career to be with a black woman.
It's also revealed that Walter changed his last name from Weisenthal to hide his Jewish ethnicity.Walter is shocked to learn that he has a son and nervous about the way it might disrupt his life.
But he attempts to help Roger by telling Vivian that he wants to adopt a poor child for the Summer to show him a better way of life.
Vivian reluctantly agrees, then changes her mind shortly after meeting Roger, which leads to the scene that I mentioned to start this review.Vivian proceeds to kick out Walter and her father fires him, takes his company Rolls Royce and his many job benefits.
But in the town of San Marino, his reputation turns out to be ruined and out of desperation to make some quick cash, he ends up shoveling horse manure.As the movie progresses, it's obvious that Walter regrets leaving Roger's mother.
And now he must decide whether to keep Roger at a distance for the sake of social acceptance or try to make up for the mistakes of his past by attempting to build a close relationship with his son.Throughout the movie, the interaction between Walter and Roger is fabulous.
The movie does a great job striking the very difficult balance between having fun with racial stereotypes but still condemning racism.And during the last 15 minutes, when the movie makes the transition from comedy to drama, it does so surprisingly smoothly.In conclusion, "Carbon Copy" gets my vote as the best culture clash comedy ever.
It's a great movie to watch for lots of big laughs.
Walter Whitney has a mansion in San Marino and a great job that comes with a Rolls Royce and numerous credit cards.
And her daughter Mary Ann won't accept Walter as her father, even though he adopted her when he married her mother.
Mary Ann considers herself to be engaged to her boyfriend, but apparently this isn't important enough to tell Walter.Nelson, Vivian's father and Walter's boss, has a talk with Walter because he is concerned that his daughter isn't happy.
Guess who it is!The opening credits said "Introducing Denzel Washington".
This respected and usually serious actor comes across more like Will Smith in TV's "Fresh Prince of Bel Air"--appealing, smart-alecky, intelligent though apparently not book-smart (and we know Smith progressed from that image to a career similar to Washington's, though in less serious roles).
In this movie, Vivian, Mary Ann, Nelson, and even the family doctor and pastor think blacks are inferior, and that Walter has done something unthinkable.
Dick Martin is funny as Walter's pot-smoking best friend and lawyer, and Paul Winfield does a good job as another lawyer.One of the many highlights: Roger's '59 Chevy, which makes Al Bundy's Dodge Dart look like a BMW.
The only movie car more pathetic that I can remember was one of the cop cars in "Smokey and the Bandit", but that was only after numerous wrecks.And you have to see how Walter and Vivian solved their difficulties in the bedroom!Eventually, lessons about prejudice are learned, but not by all.
In the meantime, I wrote a thesis that dealt, among other things, with integration and denial issues (compare it to Woody Allen's "Zelig", for example!), and I found more quotable poignant and funny lines in this movie than in any other.
On top of it, it has all those minor jokes that you probably won't catch the first time around and that make a comedy great.
This movie is extremely funny, well written and has great actors, who should really be proud of it.
The only thing that surprises me is that with all those big names attached the movie is so frequently overlooked and almost forgotten.
By the way: I won't claim I saw Denzel's potential back then, but when I look back at this movie now, in hindsight, you can detect an Oscar winner in the making.
This was the first time I had seen Denzel Washington and our family really enjoyed the movie.
We are a Black family, so the White dad buying into the stereotypes about Black people struck us as quite amusing and he deserved his comeuppance for his sorry thinking.
The movie was funny and also touching.
True, there was a lack of depth in some of the acting, but not all movies that are made contain a great amount of depth.
For the most part, if you want to watch a movie that won't assault your eyes or ears, yet entertain you with some true and humorous depiction of slices of life, this is a good one to check out.
I've been a Denzel fan ever since I saw "Carbon Copy" and it is a part of my "favorites" collection..
Denzel Washington's first film role.
Even in this small role, he was great.My personal connection to this film aside, it really hit home the problem in this country.
George Segal really did a good job in displaying the angst of the two worlds that divide us.Most of the credit has to go to Oscar-winner Stanley Shapiro, for writing and producing this film.
I liked this movie and found it to be very funny.
I first found the VHS tape in Savons and later the DVD in Circuit City.The movie demonstrated that even though society supposedly changed their view on Blacks, there were still racial undertones.
The film tells the story of a predominately wealthy White man who rose to wealth because he married into it.
He was supposedly very much in love with the mother of his son but didn't want to marry her because she was black and it would be bad for business.
The film showed how he had to adjust to the lack of support from family, friend and viewed things from the other side of the tracks.
It was funny that through out most of the movie he was being a wimp and suffered for it.
Then towards the end learns some things about himself.Denzel Washington's character was funny because of his quick witty responses and view point of the real world even before the father realized things.
Also, towards the end his character had more depth than at first realized.The movie was very informative about the 1980s racial and social environment.
The comedy presented things in a funny manner in which to explain the stereotypes and their effects on the characters.
I can't give it a ten because they could have gotten someone better than Susan St. James but I enjoyed this film when I saw it in theaters many moons ago.
The surface story of an absentee father finally owing up to his son is quite good and rings true.
This movie wasn't very well liked when it came out I believe because it didn't pull punches in that regard.
It took time and work for the father and son to come to an understanding.
I've always kinda wished Denzel and George would work together again.
White corporation man George Segal gets a rude awakening when he finds out that he has an illegitimate son who happens to be black (our first real theatrical look at Hollywood icon Denzel Washington).
Naturally Segal's Beverly Hills life turns topsy-turvy with wife Susan Saint James and father-in-law Jack Warden complicating the situation by forcing Segal into a life of degradation and poverty with usually hilarious results.
After seeing the trailer, I was very excited about this film as it looked like a comedy about a white man suddenly finding out about his teenage black son.
The film did start that way but it changes into something else and to something else from there.
Denzel Washington do well but not enough to save the movie.
One part "Fire Sale" ( White family adopting Black child ), one part "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner?" ( the culture clash surprise ), one part "Life Stinks" ( the reality of life on the streets ), and you pretty much have "Carbon Copy".
The movie can stand on it's own however, because George Segal and Denzel Washington compliment each other nicely as mismatched Father and Son. There are a number of laugh out loud moments, and some social lessons too.
I think George Segal is very underrated as a comedy actor.
That this movie makes it its central issue isn't the bad thing.
What's bad is that no one cared to think about what was being said."Carbon Copy" is aptly named; it's the same story that was used in a million other movies about fathers finding out they had sons that were a different race/impoverished/radicals/whatever was the hot topic issue of the day.
Segal, Warden, Washington and Winfield should have known this was a doomed project from the start.
But since it was directed by Schultz (not known for his subtlety) I guess no one should really be surprised.No great strides in the bridging of the races were made with "Carbon Copy", I'd guess since no one took it seriously.
It's Good To See That Denzel Washington's Film Career Has Survived This Rather Lackluster Debut.
This little known 1981 Avco Embassy release was the film debut for the ever talented Denzel Washington but I certainly wouldn't blame him if he ever wished to forget about its existence.
They have to start somewhere after all and Washington started here in this comedy about a middle aged executive (George Segal) who is happily married and has a successful career.
Then, suddenly, a long forgotten illegitimate son (Washington) from a previous relationship tracks him down and wants to bond with the father he never knew.
It would take another three years before Washington would make another film but his great supporting role in "A Soldier's Story" was a sure sign of an excellent film career to come.
View this one only as a curiosity piece as to how Washington started out in his film career before he hit it big and long before he got those two well deserved Academy Awards..
Great movie to have fun.
I really to don't why some movies (like this one for example) have such a low rating!
I watched the movie and had fun!
Nice actors, parts you will laugh and a great feeling that only 80s movies have.
I had never heard of this one before, but I figured with Denzel Washington how could I go wrong?
But if you concentrate on the relationship between the Denzel Washington and George Segal characters, you're in for a real treat.
They are truly wonderful together and Denzel, especially considering this is one of his earliest roles, has all the charisma, polish, and depth we have come to expect from him.
He is almost 30 years old in this movie.
I watched the opening credits and saw "and Introducing Denzel Washington".
I love Denzel Washington, but he must have been truly desperate to do this movie.
I kept waiting for something funny to happen, but it just kept getting meaner and stupider, with what's-his-name treating this supposed son like dirt.
Mr Pitt oozed 'star' in "Thelma and Louise" and so did Mr Washington in "Carbon Copy." First saw this film in Westwood in the company of my 5.9, 126 lb, 46 inch leg(s), 'corn-fed' flight attendant (Pan Am, Virgin Atlantic, British Airways) Northern California born and raised 'filthy rich' blonde bombshell of a wife.
George Segal plays Walter Whitney, a man who has changed his name from Wisenthal to Whitney to fit in with his new life in California.
He is married to Vivian (played by Susan Saint James) and works for his father-in-law Nelson (played by Jack Warden).
For starters, Walter learns that his ex-girlfriend Lorraine Porter had a son, Roger (played by Denzel Washington in one of his first roles).
After all, Walter is shocked to learn that she and him have a son, Roger, a 17 year old African American.
He and Roger move into a motel and they get reaction regarding their relationship as father-son.
Still if you are truly a Denzel Washington fan, you will get through it.
There is some negative humor though that it might be considered highly offensive but this film is nearly 30 years old.
Walter and Roger take turns in each other's worlds and you wonder if they can ever fit in or find out who they really are.
After all, Walter changed his name, his religion and ethnicity, and married Vivian instead of his true love, Lorraine in the 1960s..
Funny but not so good.
I think is a good because it came out when black people were very discriminated against.
The movie makes fun of the white population and of their opinion of colored people.
The relationship that develops between George Segal and Denzel Washington is wonderful!
Susan St James is great as his bigotted wife!
As a young kid I went to the theater on a Sunday afternoon expecting to watch a good movie.
This movie had a brilliant cast and was listed as a comedy.
Denzel Washington was a stand out in the movie.
A white corporate executive is surprised to discover that he has a black teenage son The son was born as a result of a relationship the exec had many years ago, and now his new found son can't wait to be adopted into the, almost-exclusively-white community of, San Marino, California......Oh Denzel, if you have any skeletons in your closet,this has to be the icing on the cake.It's one of the most offensive films I have ever had the displeasure to have seen, it should have been called Racism: A Kooky Comedy...The writers think that things like sexual abuse, oppression, casual racism, and typecasting is the height of hilarity.Segal spends the majority of the film double taking every five minutes, with a look on his face more or less saying 'My son is B-b-b-b-b-black???' and looking embarrassed.Jack Warden appears as the one who has the big office, and he has a face of disgust throughout the whole shambles.It's disgusting.
There are jokes about chicken, Washington spends the film as the subliminal innocent party, but if you look a little deeper into the film, he is depicted as nothing more than a metaphorical slave, living in a garage, and then showing the rich white man, how the other half live.It's in my top ten worse films I have ever had the displeasure of seeing, only just pipped to the post by The Sweetest Thing.Should have been called Birth Of A Nation 2: Nothing's Changed folks!!!Vomit inducing..
It's a film about a white man "discovering" himself.
Walter Whitney, a White executive, got the news that he has a Black son.
His wife and father-in-law said no, and fired him, took away his rolls, his credit cards, and even black-listed him so he can't get any job.
The film is the story of his development from a person desperate to fit into White society, to a "free" person.
Although he was in love with his Black son's mother, he dropped her like a bad habit so he could fit into the top society.
George Segal is a great underrated actor, the more so here as he managed to walk that tightrope between funny and insulting in this movie, where no stereotype is left exploited.
In his first major movie role, there's a glimmer of stardom already peeping through Denzel Washington's performance.
Perhaps it's just a sign of the movie's time, or perhaps the filmmaker wanted to accentuate the issue of racism, the White characters are so easy and so generous in their racism.
From Walter himself; immediately assuming that his Black son would be a great basketball player; to his wife, father-in-law, to his minister, even.
A good movie to see on a lazy Sunday afternoon..
Denzel Washington..
While he had appeared on TV, this was Denzel Washington's first movie role.
Already 26, here he plays Roger Porter, a teenager, whose single mother had just died, and he was in town to look up his father.
His father just happens to be Walter Whitney (George Segal), a well-off business man working for his stepfather.
Jack Warden is the stepfather.Walter of course is very surprised when this young black man shows up, but when he mentions his mother's name, Walter knows it is true, because he had had a relationship with her, loved her, but social conventions prevented him for marrying her.
So, the whole movie is about how Walter and Roger deal with the situations this puts them into.It is not a particularly good movie.
Significant only for the first movie role of Washington.
Because of the way Walter's assets are set up, when his wife kicks him out for having a black son he is essentially broke, and he loses his job.
But the big in-joke of the movie is that Walter thinks Roger is a school drop-out, because of their first conversation when Roger says he is 17, and doesn't need high school.
Walter went with him, the movie ends with them driving East in the battered convertible. |
tt0118525 | ...Aur Pyaar Ho Gaya | Aur Pyaar Ho Gaya revolves around a progression of love between the two protagonists, Bobby Oberoi (Bobby Deol) and Ashi (Aishwarya Rai). Ashi is a free-spirited woman, in her early twenties, who has no plans to get married soon. Her father, Kailashnath (Anupam Kher), is traditional and believes important things in life, such as marriage, should adhere to the family's customs. He expresses his desire of marriage for Ashi and tells her he has a guy picked out for her, Rohit Malhotra. Ashi gets enraged at first, and then agrees to the marriage on the condition that she be allowed to meet him anonymously and observe his character and personality. Ashi's father obliges and Ashi is soon off to Europe to meet Rohit Malhotra. Ashi pursues her search of Rohit in Switzerland.
While she is there, she meets a man who continuously teases her and happens to be staying in the room next to her. This man is Bobby Oberoi. He dotes on and flirts with her, but she doesn't reciprocate. She becomes frustrated in her failed attempts to find Rohit and Bobby over hears that she is searching for a man named Rohit Malhotra. To win Ashi's heart, Bobby lies and tells her he is Rohit.
Gradually, they fall in love and she finds out his real identity. Upon their return to India, the families meet and agree for the marriage. Bobby's mother (Beena Banerjee) is the manager of the bank where Kailashnath deposits money. The police visit the bank to investigate a recent business scandal. It turns out that Kailashnath is part of the scandal and Bobby's mother has no option but to cooperate with the police, even though it might strain relationships with her soon to be family-in-law. Subsequently, Kailashnath is arrested. For him, that was a humiliating event. He furiously cancels Ashi's marriage to Bobby. Furthermore, he arranges Ashi's marriage to Rohit. After a whole other twist to the film, it ends with Ashi marrying her soulmate. | romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0368688 | Direct Action | With fifteen years on the force, Sergeant Frank Gannon (Dolph Lundgren) has spent the last three years on the Direct Action Unit (DAU) task force, fighting gang crime and corruption.
The DAU, led by Captain Stone (Conrad Dunn), is a special unit of the Metropolitan Police Department focusing on gang violence, drugs, and prostitution. It's made up of highly trained officers with at least 10 years on the force. They have been untouchable in every way.
With the highest arrest record in the department, two Medals of Valor, the youngest officer ever to make detective, and the son of a cop himself, Gannon does everything with integrity. His father was the late Captain Michael J. Gannon.
Although the Direct Action Unit appears to have been the saving force in city over the past few years—fighting against theft, larceny, conspiracy, extortion, and murder—evidence is coming to light that some members of the DAU were up to much more than keeping the city streets safe.
The Direct Action Unit task force has been under intense federal investigation for 8 months on suspicions of stealing drugs and money, the jailing of innocent people, and possibly murder. And the investigation is being overseen by Assistant Attorney General LoPresti (Daniel Kash).
At the end of his shift on this day, Gannon is to testify at a federal grand jury about the DAU, which is making Gannon's bosses extremely nervous.
That morning, Gannon is suddenly partnered with detective trainee Billie Ross (Polly Shannon), and is asked to show her the ropes. With little experience on the streets, Ross is thrilled to start her two-week detective training period with the legendary Gannon.
This not good news for Gannon, as Ross is hardly the experienced backup he needs on the toughest day of his career as Captain Stone keeps sending men to kill him. And Stone has been working with a drug ring led by Khalid Manseur (Anthony J. Mifsud). Even LoPresti has been working with Stone.
Stone frames Gannon and Ross for murder in the self-defense killings of three corrupt cops, and to prove their innocence, Gannon and Ross will have to take down Stone and everyone he's working with. | cult, murder, violence | train | wikipedia | Pure Dolph action!
Earlier in the year saw the release of Dolph's latest movie, Detention.
That was a disappointment to say the least but his next effort; Direct Action is far more like the good old days for any Dolph fan.
Over the last 6 years Dolph has been starring in considerably cheaper and poorer movies than he used to.
This is all very well and good but the films are trying too hard to move with the times and B-movies have a tendency to do things badly.
Hidden Agenda was a good little thriller, nothing exceptional and Dolph was good, playing someone with some intelligence and a different kind of intimidating presence.
It's been the only transition from all out action that has worked for Dolph in recent years.
The plot of Direct Action could almost be typical Seagal fodder from that period with corrupt cops and FBI officials and Dolph as the moralistic cop who'll take them down.
This brought back good memories for me of films like Nico, Out For Justice and Hard To Kill.
Simple story, plenty of action and a bad-ass cop who scowls throughout the movie (in fairness Dolph does more than that though.).
This is miles better than Detention but what I did find with Detention in any case was that Dolph had a new found enthusiasm.
Direct Action continues that trend and filmed a year after Detention, Dolph is further enthused and in even greater shape.
Dolph seems to be having a new lease of life and while these last two films aren't his best they have bigger budgets and are more old style action than he has done recently.
His next few are promising a good amount of action too and Dolph will probably be playing the tough man again, it does seem the way forward for the DTV action men, doing films they used to keep the fans happy.
Hidden Agenda was good but it didn't sell, for the simple fact that if you are trying for something with depth and intelligence then there is little hope that people are going to look for a straight to video movie, whereas these brainless fist-fests still seem to sell.
Van Damme is back to his revenge movie trademark and Seagal has left his eco warrior image behind for more conventional ideas.The plot follows Frank Gannon, a veteran police sergeant who is to testify against his co-workers in the Direct Action Unit because they are being investigated for links to drug lords, extortion and murder.
Gannon (Dolph) has seen this stuff first hand and wants to testify.
Basically the film plays out with Dolph taking on his co-workers head on with help from his partner and the young rookie Billie Ross along the way.
When they kill three cops in a bloody shootout, a failed attempt on Gannon's life Gannon is in trouble because he is wanted for the murders and now his word is going to mean little against the testimonies of the guys in the Direct Action Unit who have heroic reputations, despite the dark dealing in the background.
It's all shootouts or fist fights and while there are no really big set pieces the action is plentiful and nicely spread out.
This is perhaps the most action Dolph has had in a movie for ages.
Fistfights cost nothing but the time to make so they have put plenty in which is good.
What is good is that Dolph gets to use his martial arts here.
The action is similar to Seagal's was in Nico etc too, with plenty of throw movies and bone breaking.
It is good to see Dolph using his Karate so prominently here.
Dolph is really looking in prime action man form here and looks tough.
The film has a smaller budget than Detention did, which was 10 million while this was between 5 and 8 million dollars but this looks far more polished and there is more bang for your buck.
Everyone does their job far better it must be said, particularly veteran director Sidney Furie who shows more flair and assurance in the action while he has upped his game on the more dramatic scenes too.
I know this is low budget but they could still make it look better, Hidden Agenda had very good cinematography.
The score wasn't great but it knew the limitations of doing it cheaply and didn't try to recreate an orchestra on a computer like many DTV movies do, and badly.
Dolph holds the movie, his role is straight down the middle and simple but he does it with conviction and coolness.
Polly Shannon is okay as well as Billie, she's pretty and gives a good enough performance.
I also thought that Conrad Dunn was very good as Captain Stone, the ring leader of the corrupt cops.
Here he plays a good guy and does it well.Overall this was a pleasing movie for me.
It's the most pure and entertaining action movie Dolph has down since Peacekeeper and the best he has looked in terms of action since Silent Trigger.
Dolph is looking cool and modern these days and I eagerly await his next two movies, Defender (with, get this, Jerry Springer) and Retrograde (with Gary Daniels), which fingers crossed could appear this year.
That would be 4 new Dolph films I have seen this year and after a lengthy spell of nearly two years without one before that I'm a happy Dolphamaniac people.
I like my action films people, I like them fast, loud, and violent and the king of Swedish ass-whoopers, Dolph Lundgren is someone who I enjoy watching.
I ain't a huge fan but I have to say I really enjoyed his early work, Punisher (The newer one sucks), I come In Peace (that was freakin cool movie, with the deadly CD's and the giant Aliens.) and Red Scorpion but a lot of his recent movies didn't do it for me.
I have seen a few of his recent ones, Stormcatcher (Bad!), Jill Rips (Boring!), Sweepers (Wha?!), and Hidden Agenda (good fights, too much damn talking!).
Direct Action has a simple idea and leaves Dolph to look a bad-ass mo-fo.
Dolph is a good action man, he has presence, he's cool, and unlkie Fatboy Seagal, he has stayed in great shape.
On the evidence of this movie, if Dolph keeps this kind of thing up then he's got himself a new fan.
You have good hand to hand fights, okay shootouts and plenty of it.
Given that I had read several positive reviews on this movie and that it comes from the hands of Sidney J Furie, a veteran for over 40 years responsible for 1960's spy thrillers like The Ipcress File and The Naked Runner and has also delivered some very slick direct to video action movies such as Top Of The World, The Rage and Hollow Point as well as the largely underrated 1991 theatrical release The Taking Of Beverly Hills.
Furthermore, he also did Detention with Dolph Lundgren which was by no means great but I enjoyed it a lot more than many others did.
It isn't bad, but it could be so much better.None of this can be blamed on Lundgren or any of the cast really for that matter, as much of them deliver acceptable to good performances.
Lundgren especially deserves credit as he is in excellent shape and does very well in the action scenes.
The film has a good sense of pacing, never letting up enough for the action to stop and plot itself is fine for the type of movie.What really lets this down is the very poor production values - it looks extremely cheap.
Of course none of this really makes the movie any less watchable, but it's all those little touches that make a movie all that more enjoyable to watch.Overall, this is a decent, entertaining action picture with all the visual flair of a TV drama but it's worth a watch once and for Dolph Lundgren fans it will be a must.
I would probably have enjoyed it more with lower expectations, but the overall low quality of the movie is something I just couldn't ignore.
"Direct Action" is one of the best direct-to-video action flicks ever.Frank Gannon (Lundgren) is about to blow the whistle on a group of dirty cops from the "Direct Action Unit".
Polly Shannon is a good foil for him.
They have a nice chemistry.In the end: "Direct Action" is one of best action movies out there.
Dolph Lundgren is back with Direct Action.
Dolph plays Frank Gannon a Veteran cop who is assigned a new partner played by Polly Shannon the Two now must fight a group of corrupt cops drug lords and other scum.
Direct action is fun film that doesn't take itself to seriously.
Other reviews say that the action is boring I thought the action was Cool and stylish with well staged shoot outs and cool fight scenes And good characters Dolph's character is a hard as nails chewing gum Loving cop who is incorruptible and Conrad Dunn is a good bad guy.
To round up the review Direct action is a cool little action flick To watch on a boring rainy day 9 out of 10..
In Direct Action Dolph is an LA cop about to expose the rampant police corruption that surrounds his precinct every day.Before he can testify his fellow cops decide he is better of sleeping with the fishes,which puts Dolph into survival mode and on the run.Will he survive in the end?I think we already know that.Direct action is the 2nd pairing of Lundgren and veteran Director Sidney J.
Furie.Both quite capable here.The plot has been done countless times.The supporting cast is okay.Polly Shannon does pretty well here.But what nearly sinks Direct action is over-Ambition.The budget for this was clearly too low.The movie ends up looking way TOO cheap for its own good.The script while okay,has its fill of clichés and twists that you can see coming a mile away.On the plus side,Dolph gets to demonstrate more of his martial arts prow-less.The fights are pretty good.I think some producer should put up about 10 million or more for the next Lundgren flick.He cannot keep making them so cheap.After all the good things I had heard about DR,It came off as a major disappointment.Its still better than the latest Steven Segal trash.5/10.
Dolph Ludgren is Frank Gannon, a cop who was in the D.A.U (Direct Action Unit) a special unit of elite cops focusing on gang violence, drugs, and prostitution.
Plus he knows I like seeing movies before they're released in the states.
What I saw was a fairly standard cop action drama flick.
But a better than average as far as Dolph Lungren is concerned.
Not a surprise that it went straight to video in the least, as it adds nothing new to the genre at all and the whole film is strictly routine.My Grade: C-.
You know an action movie is going to be horrible if the soundtrack mainly consists of rap.
While watching the opening credits, along with the rap soundtrack, you get treated to all the fighting scenes in the movie so before the movie even starts you've seen pretty much all of the action which is what's supposed to draw you into this movie.
It's too bad Dolph had done this movie, he wants to keep a low profile in the movie industry but this is the absolute wrong way to do it..
It doesn't change the fact that this is another brainless action movie about corruption in police.
The plot has been done countless times before with better results.
The script is full of clichés and twists that you can see coming a mile away."Direct action" looks extremely cheap.
Funny thing - The opening credits feature all the fight sequences and action stunts that you will later see again in the movie.
Also at the beginning of the movie, a thug that Lundgren beats up can be seen wearing a Punisher t-shirt emblazoned with the famous skull design.
Dolph Lundgren played the title role in "The Punisher".All in all it's a typical cheap direct-to-video-action movie.
Dolph Lundgren is one of my favorite B movie actors, so when I got a chance to see his movie "Direct Action", you can be sure that I took it.
In this movie, Lundgren is in fine form, giving a likable and relaxed performance, and giving it his all in the action sequences.
The script has a number of plot holes (if Lundgren's character wants to testify, why doesn't the prosecution give him some protection?), and has a number of twists and turns that will be very familiar to those well versed in B movies.
And while Lundgren gives it his all in the action sequences, the action is directed and edited in a way that never rises above routine.
Dolph Lungren plays an honest cop who is going to testify about police corruption on the force.
Will they spend the rest of the day running from the corrupt cops wanting him dead?
Sure it is predictable (is it a coincidence that one of the dirty cops looks like Al Pacino in Serpico) but it is fun to watch.
You are not going to watch Oscar winning stuff, but it is worth your time to rent this movie out..
Not a very good one but far better than expected.
I was looking forward to Dolph's latest effort especially after waiting over a year since his last release, the completely underwhelming DETENTION.
This one seems to be a return to the films made in the mid-to-late 90s by say Dolph's compatriots like Steven Seagal, Sly Stallone, and Jean-Claude Van Damme.
The story here is basic, a cop confronting corruption in his unit, out to stop them and to stop them from either killing him or discrediting him and clearing his name after the bad guys set him up.
And here Dolph resorts several times to using the karate and related martial arts that he has not used much if at all say in his last picture.
The guys don't say fight for five minutes straight, for example, although I wouldn't mind seeing such fights even though they are never all that real but they are helpful in moving the plots of these flicks along.The action is better here than in the usual Dolph flicks and seems more realistic than say in DETENTION, with both sides getting into the action, Dolph getting hit at one point; and all are better staged and edited, and they look like they fit with the story instead of simply existing.The time factor also helps move it along with Dolph having only one!
day to train his new partner, find out who is behind the corruption and to foil the perpetrators.It is good to see Dolph back and I look forward to the next one..
Despite a low budget-A good action movie.
At the beginning it was a little bit boring, but later on the action started and as I think the story became interesting.
You see bullets flying around but no car is damaged-O.K. this is bad, but what else can you expect from a low budget movie.
At least I must say, that Dolph is making the best out of the fighting scenes.
I have watched many action B movies and I think direct action is one of the good ones.
Sweden Dolph brings the best out of it and he doesn't look like he is now forty-nine.
The title "Direct Action" is good chosen-you will be surprised.
pure action, Dolph kicks ass in this.
direct action is the best Dolph lundgren vehicle since hidden agenda, and although it isn't as good or smart as that movie, direct action delivers just pure fighting and gun battles that lets Dolph do what Dolph does best, kicks ass, there is some kind of plot about police corruption but i wont go into it, but as an action film this delivers the goods, sure it isn't a masterpiece and the low budget shows at times, the amount of quality action on show here, more than makes up for it.
all in all a solid Dolph lundgren movie that delivers what wev'e all come to expect from the action star and he does disappoint here.
Direct (to video) Action.
I suspect, much like other has-been action-heroes such as Seagal and Norris, that he is intending to carry on with these pale and low budget imitations of other, more successful movies, until he goes toes-up.Not that Direct Action is awful in the way that the last few Seagal films have been.
Why do they not accept that their time has gone and either go do something else, or if they must stay in film, at least try something more suitable?
Anyway, Direct Action is standard cop action fare.
It is let down somewhat embarrassingly by the opening credits, which feature all the fight sequences and action stunts that you will later see again in the movie.
Perhaps they thought that, by showing you the good bits first, it might encourage you to stay and sit through the whole film?
Anyway, what you see during the opening credits is what you get later on, so if you are on a tight schedule (or just plain can't stand to watch anymore) then you can leave at any time safe in the knowledge that you've seen all the fun parts.Inexplicably, the worst acting of the film probably has to go to the chick who played Dolph's cop partner's wife.
I could be kind and suggest that these scenes were filmed first and that she hadn't read the script properly, thus not knowing her husband was supposed to have just died, but that would probably be giving the script way too much credit.Anyway, the movie isn't great. |
tt0260494 | Veerana | The movie opens with a young boy tied up inside a cage in a large cave. Some priests and goons are surrounding him. He pleads with them to leave him and asks what they want from him. The priest says that his blood and flesh will give life to Nakita. Just then the witch comes as a lovely young woman and enters the cage. She removes the bat locket from her neck and transforms into a ferocious form, kills the guy. Thakur Mahender Pratap Singh (Kulbhushan Kharbanda) finds out that a witch Nakita (Kamal Roy) is creating havoc in an adjoining forest. One night, his little daughter comes to him and says that villagers have got a dead body outside. He goes and sees the body of an unknown guy, the villagers are surrounding him. When asked they say that a woman roaming in the lonely lanes of the forest has done this. They call her a witch. Sameer Thakur says that witches and devils are just superstitions. But one man says that some years ago when he came to the village from a nearby city, he lost his way and wandered off into the jungle where he saw a young girl. She later turned into a bat and attacked him on the face.
Mahendra Pratap decides to investigate for himself. His younger brother Sameer Pratap (Vijayendra Ghatge) decides to go on a witch hunt. His wife Preeti denies by saying that he should think of his daughter and niece. Just then they go downstairs and Mahendra Pratap says that he trusts his brother and their ancestors have always helped needy people to get justice. He gifts an "OM" to his brother and wishes him good luck while giving his blessings. As Sameer is passing through the forest, while driving his car he meets a beautiful young woman, just as one villager had described. The woman gets a lift in Sameer's car. They arrive at the old mansion which is located behind the lake in the forest. Sameer uses his clever seductive tactics and gets the lady to bathe with him in the bathtub. Then diverting her attention by pretending to be physically intimate with her he snatches the bat locket from her neck. The lady transforms into the hideous witch Nakita that she really is. Sameer renders her weak and helpless by holding a holy Om in front of her. The witch is taken to the outskirts of the village and the locals along with orders of the Thakur hang her to death. A tantric, Baba, manages to steal back her body along with all his followers in the dead of the night, and takes it to the shrine, where he keeps it in a sarcophagus and promises to provide her a new body. The body would be of Thakur Mahendra Pratap's daughter.
Some days pass off happily and peacefully, with the brothers sharing merry hours together and both the children Jasmin and Sahila being lovingly nurtured by Preeti, who is the mother of Sahila and wife of Sameer and loves the brother-in-law's daughter equally. Then, one fine day during the wee morning hours, Chotte Thakur Sahaab is being shown going to Mussoorie to drop his niece, Jasmin, at her boarding school. When they're crossing the lonely stretch of the forest (Veerana), the car overheats and stops. The uncle asks his little girl to wait in the car for him and leaves to fetch some water for the radiator. However, Baba suddenly creeps out from behind a bush, hypnotises the girl, and by cutting a piece of her frock and few strands of her hair makes a doll from it. He then places the glass bottle holding this doll in the witch's sarcophagus. Jasmin gets out of the car in the hypnotised state of mind and walks over to the shrine. Meanwhile, the uncle comes back with the water tin and is shocked not to find the child in the car. He follows her trail and is astonished to find himself going off deep inside the forbidden bush path. On the other side, the girl walks inside the devil's lair and comes to a standstill in front of the witch's tomb. In a shocking moment, the witch reaches out and pulls the kid over inside with her. The uncle tries to save his child but is late in opening the sarcophagus. By that time, the witch's evil spirit already manages to enter the girl's body. Thus, the uncle is rendered helpless as being badly outnumbered by Baba's men and is unable to save his little niece. He is shown to be captured and killed.
Baba then brings Jasmin back to her dad Thakur's mansion. The tantric informs Mahendra's family about the death of his brother due to a violent storm in the forest and informs that Sameer's dead body drifted away in the river and could not be recovered. After taking the child back to her room and putting her to sleep, Bade Thakur Saab leaves 2–3 servants in charge of the child and goes downstairs to meet the Baba. Baba asks for the Thakur's permission to leave but Thakur requests that he stay back as the caretaker of his daughter, since he has saved his child's life. However, the Chotte Thakur's wife, (Rama Vij), gradually notices something different in Jasmin's behaviour. The changed behaviour of the child entices the aunt to talk to her brother-in-law regarding the weird changes in their girl and tries to convince him to get some witch-doctor to treat Jasmin. However, the witch, who's possessed the child, overhears this and kills her aunt Preeti by hanging her in Jasmin's bedroom by the ceiling fan that very night. Thakur, horrified by this incident, then decides to send his little niece Sahila, the newly orphaned child, to Mumbai to stay with her grandmother so that she can be safe and stay protected from the ominous situations.
After 12 years, the Thakur receives a letter from his niece Sahila. He's very happy on the fact that she ranked first in her inter-mediate examinations. During the time that has passed, Jasmine grows up into a stunningly beautiful young girl who spends most of her time alone locked away inside her bedroom or occasionally wandering into wilderness. She tends to be moody and lost in her own world, making her father worry all the time. Thakur saab informs Baba that his niece has topped her exams and he's planning to call her to Chandan Nagar to spend her summer vacation at the haveli. Baba directs one of his faithful servants Zimbaru who is as huge as a giant to kidnap the niece, Sahila so that she would not reach her ancestral home. On the other side, a man attacks Sahila's car and chases after her. Her second cousin Satish, (Satish Shah) shouts for help. Here the hero marks his entry and Hemant, played by (Hemant Birje), turns up to rescue the damsel in distress. He manages to send the monster packing and saves Sahila. Back at the village, Jasmin meets a new young man, role played by Vijay Arora, at the city petrol station who is a mechanics professional and repairs her car faults expertly. She is impressed by him and asks him to come over at the old mansion located behind the bank of the lake that night for a picnic. When the man reaches over there, she welcomes him and they both drink and dine together. Due to over-intoxication, this man forces himself on Jasmin and they both have a hasty one-night stand.Jasmin was shoot nude from behind exposing her buttocks and later film was awarded A Certificate.After some time around midnight, the man gains consciousness and wakes up. He is scared to see Jasmin's eyes all grey and the girl not moving her eyelids at all. He tries to run away but again falls on the bed. Then the girl wakes up, the witch taking control of her, takes a silver dagger and stabs the man to death. Then Jasmin hastily returns home in the darkness. His body is found by the police next morning but as no one recognises him, the investigations stop over there. Hemant and Sahila get close to each other during the journey and they both reach the Haveli together. Thakur Saab is very happy to see Sahila and when he hears the story of how she was helped out of the tight spot by Hemant, gets impressed by the handsome and burly young boy and readily gives him a big job in the timber factory. He also accepts Hemant as his son and family member.
However, murders continue. One evening, Jasmin takes a lift in a drunk man's car and then, after crossing some distance, the witch's spirit kills the man by tearing through his neck. One night, Sahila decides to sleep with Jasmin in their old bedroom and she suddenly notices something very strange and frightening in her elder sister and informs her uncle and Hemant. Thakur decides to send his daughter Jasmin, for a psychiatric evaluation to his old friend who is a noted psychiatrist. Under hypnosis, Jasmin recounts the incident in her past and she transforms into a completely different person. Her voice changes and she threateningly vows to kill everybody from Thakur's family. Thakur firstly refuses to believe the doctor, but when he hears the recording recorded by the doctor, he believes him when he informs about his daughter being possessed. However, due to their old family relation and bosom friendship, the doctor promises to stay and treat the young girl. The doctor also asks Sahila's friend Hemant to pretend to be close to Jasmin so that the truth comes to light but they both fail in their attempts. However, one night, on seeing weird shadows and smoke coming out of Jasmin's bedroom, the doctor walks inside and sees the witch's grossly frightening face. He tries to warn the Thakur but he refuses to believe the him. The doctor runs away from the house to save his life but is mocked at by the servant man, Raghu while departing from the mansion. In a huff, the doctor shuns Raghu and leaves from the Haveli as Jasmin looks at him with a strange victorious smile on her face standing in the balcony.
While the doctor is driving his car at a breakneck speed through the old village lanes, he takes a wrong turn in confusion, bangs on a tree and stops right in middle of the lonely forest. The witch, who is lying in wait for him, suddenly comes out from the dark shadows and while the doctor is barely conscious to look at her with wide shocked eyes, pierces his body and brutally kills him.
The servant Raghu (Gulshan Grover), is the next to die. He is killed when out of the witch's fear he decides to sleep in the factory at night instead of going to the haveli. Then Hemant and Sahila while discussing the killings with Satish, take out the topic of Baba. Hemant decides to follow the Baba along with Sahila on a hunch. They both chase him to the Veerana. But they get captured and Sahila discovers that her father Sameer Pratap is alive. Satish Shah, in a twist of events, reaches the Veerana and rescues all of them. Now, Sameer goes straight home to his brother with the children. Thakur Saab is thrilled to see his dear brother hale and hearty. Then Sahila and Hemant relate the story of Baba's plots and Sameer informs his brother of the plan that helped the Baba make the witch's evil spirit possess Jasmin and turn her into a living nightmare.
In the meantime, Baba plans to kill Jasmin on amavasya so that the witch can be reborn and attain immortality. He takes her from the haveli to the devil's lair and prepares her for the sacrificial ritual. But the family manages to reach the scene. Jasmin is saved by making the witch leave her body by destroying the bottle containing her voodoo doll. But, by sheer ill luck, Bade Thakur Saab loses his life to grant his daughter happiness and a long survival. The family briefly grieves and somehow, as now the witch has got her spirit back in her own foul body, succeeds in locking the witch inside sarcophagus with the help of the holy Om.
Then the Thakur family and all the villagers take the sarcophagus to the temple of Lord Shiva. The sarcophagus is carried inside the temple and Chhote Thakur unlocks it with Hemant's help. Both daughters are sent out of the temple. The witch comes out of the sarcophagus and to her horror finds herself in front of the holy Lord. She writhes in pain, tries to run away, but loses all her power and falls to the ground. Within some moments, she burns away and gets destroyed by the pure impulse of the Almighty forever. Then the surviving Thakurs and Hemant begin their life anew and live happily ever after. | revenge | train | wikipedia | Bava-flavored, Hammeresque fun.
"VEERANA" is one of the best of the Indian horror films I've managed to find, to date.
Like the other Ramsay Brothers productions I've watched, this one has the same Bava-like use of colored gels mixed with atmospheric sets.
There's an over-the-top evil Tantric Priest who might have stepped directly out of an Indian horror comic-book, a wonderful Femme Fatale monster who preys upon the predictable weaknesses of men, plenty of fight scenes--of varying qualities, and some genuine demon-possession/monster chills.
The song and dance numbers are relatively easy to take, compared to other films in the genre.
Overall, this has been my favorite film to show to friends as an introduction to the Indian horror genre since I bought it..
Bollywood does not make a lot of great Horror films.
In the 70s there was one Hit Jaani Dushman.
If you see it now you'll see how outrageous it is.
In the 80s there were the Ramsay Family, who have produced a few Horror films.
Some include Purani mandir, Thakana and Dak Bangla.
Veerana is no doubt their best work.
After 90s there have been a few more Hit Horror Movies like Bhoot, Raaz, Raat, Vastu Shastra and Darna Mana Hai. In my opinion Veerana is better out of them all.
Many people say Raaz was Great, but it was copy of Hollywood Movie what lies beneith.
Veerana has its own storyline added with Indian culture.
Black Magic and Witches.
The witch in this movie looks a bit like a Vampire.
For a 80s Bollywood film, this has some great Art added in.
The way the monster is picturised is Impressive.
The acting by all the Stars in this movie are Novice.
The Key Girl in this movie named Jasmine who plays the daughter of the Thakur, is very Sexy and seducing.
I would love to get naughty with her and who knows what happened to her after this film.
It is very difficult to find this movie.
I managed to Tape it when it came on Zee a decade ago.
If you want to see a entertaining Horror Movie, this is the one..
depends.
Honestly, I still think this movie has good horror potential you know why?
Because of its low a$$ budget!!!
High budget horror movies are not as scary.
There's something about low budget horror movies (Halloween part one) that just dominates all other high budget horror movies.
I'm the kind of individual that can fall asleep in a haunted house after having just watched exorcist but I still think I can analyze horror movies since I watched them ever since I was a child..
Copy of 'The Mausoleum' but good Bollywood Horror Film of it's time..
This is one of the best Bollywood 80's horror film.
This is one of the best Bollywood 80's horror film.
Charming actress Jasmin plays the lead role as possessed girl and she does very well.
The film is copy of Hollywood 1983 film 'The Mausoleum' if anyone seen this film will know that besides the story how exactly some of the scenes were copied from 'The Mausoleum' in Veerana.
Even the though it was a copy of Hollywood film the Director still manages to make this film a fun ride & entertaining film.
Worth a watch!.
Hokey Hindi horror..
Hindi horror Veerana opens with the hanging of an evil witch, Nakita (Roy Kamal), executed by Noble Thakur Mahendra Pratap (Kulbhushan Kharbanda) for feeding on the blood of locals.
Soon after, Nakita's body is taken by her loyal followers, led by evil magician Baba (Rajesh Vivek), who performs a ritual that allows the witch's spirit to possess the body of Jasmine (Baby Swati), Thakur's ten year old daughter.Years later, Jasmine (now played by the comely Jasmin) is still controlled by Nakita, and proceeds to exact her revenge on her unsuspecting father, and his family and friends, including his pretty niece Sahila (Sahila Chaddha), her hunky new pal Hemant (Hemant Birje), wannabe horror film director Hitcock (comedy relief Satish Shah), and servant Raghu (Gulshan Grover).Clocking in at 135 minutes, I reckon that Veerana could have done with being at least 40 minutes shorter (although a running time of over two hours seems to be standard for this type of film); however, I still have no hesitation in recommending it to fans of the weird and wacky, the film delivering a huge helping of bonkers Bollywood excess, with, of course, a few song and dance routines along the way.In addition to its genuinely unsettling witch, who boasts bulging red eyes and an evil grimace, Veerana delivers a little titillation (both Jasmin and Sahila showing as much skin as is permitted in such films), some really cheesy fight action, lots of hokey sets filled with tacky dime store Halloween props, strange rock-headed beings (whose stony noggins explode in the finale), impalement by golden 'Om' symbol, and a couple of truly inexplicable 'WTF?' moments (including a child playing a middle-aged man smoking a pipe, and a dead cat pulling Hitcock into the ground).
Special effects are generally cheap and unconvincing, with the two best shots lifted from a couple of Western horror movies (the dog with a human head from the 1978 version of Invasion of the Bodysnatchers, and the erupting eyeballs from David Cronenberg's Scanners), but the lack of technical prowess only adds to the fun..
Medusa,Ate,Litai or Jasmin you pick.
After watching this movie you will confess jasmin is indeed superior than those Greek mythological bunch of evil goddesses,Am i the only one who says this movie is better than mahal?Then yes youheard it,This is far better and one of the best movies of Ramsaybrothers,Kudos..It has sex,gore,romance and don't forget action as well as comedy,A complete masala with a twist of classic Italian pace type movie.
When jasmin is near by,you won't leave your seat until whom she targets with her absolute disgusting cruel intentions,There is no boredom in this movie and everything just looks perfect,I don't know why Filmfare didn't award them.So guys,Please check out this movie or buy it online,Warning do not watch it alone at night or else Jasmin is gonna get you.This movie will haunt you like never before certainly not the type of vikram bhatt or ektha kapoor kind of super natural movies,We are in business and Jasmin means business..
nothing new.
i've seen this movie and it is taking the indian line of being a long movie ( more than 2 hours) nothing new in it and it can be classified as very light horror suitable for children because no animation or masks or even screenplay that can attract your attention to finish that movie..
Truly an antique from Ramsays House of Horrors!.
'Veerana' aka 'Wilderness' as the name suggests is a phenomenal horror film.
This sensational flick was released in 1988 and soon received a strong positive verdict from the viewers.
The story itself is very impressive and builds tension from beginning till end.
I rented this movie long back and remembered it for superb performances and vengeful Nikita.Thakur Mahendra Pratap (Kulbhusan Kharbanda) is the landlord of Chandan Nagar and lives happily with his daughter Jasmin (Baby Swati), younger brother Sameer (Vijayendra Ghatge), Sameer's wife Preeti (Rama Vij) and their daughter Sahila.
Mahendra Pratap is a very rich man and owns a big saw mill.
It so happens that the Thakurs hear a story of a local witch who wanders in the wilderness and kills people.
So Sameer heads to the wilderness to find her.
Unfortunately he stumbles upon seductive Nikita (the witch itself), who invites him to her palatial mansion.
Sameer discovers that Nikita is a witch and forces her to take her true non-human form.
Nikita is captured and is lynched by the mob.
Moments later some 666 cult members take the corpse to a safe place.Few days later Sameer is driving his niece Jasmin to her hostel when their car zonks out in the wilderness as the engine goes hot.
Sameer leaves Jasmin there and goes to find water.
During this time an evil cult leader Baba (Rajesh Vivek) comes to Jasmin, hypnotizes her and cuts some of her hairs and a piece of cloth from her frock, wraps them around a voodoo doll and goes away.
After few minutes we see Jasmin following the Baba.
Sameer returns but Jasmin is nowhere to be found.
Discovering some trails Sameer comes to an old building where he finds Jasmin lying with Nikita's corpse.
Baba's henchmen subdue Sameer and it appears that they kill him.Baba takes Jasmin to her house and wins Mahendra Pratap's trust.
He tells that he could only save this little girl while the man who was with her (Sameer) died in a terrible storm.
Mahendra Pratap requests Baba to live with them and look after Jasmin.
Soon Jasmin's aunt Preeti witnesses Jasmin's vengeful intentions.
In an iconic scene Preeti is killed by evil Jasmin.
Mahendra Pratap doesn't want Sahila to live along with them and sends her to her maternal grandmother.Years pass by and now Jasmin (Jasmin) is grown up.
She spends most of her time in her room, doesn't behave normally and often strolls in the wilderness.
Mahendra Pratap tries hard to make her understand that she is a normal girl and should behave like others but everything goes in vain.
Sahila (Sahila Chaddha) is also grown up and is planning to return to Chandan Nagar.
She writes a letter regarding this to her uncle Mahendra Pratap.
Baba comes to know of Sahila's arrival and sends a gigantic man Zimbaru (Gorilla) to kill her on the way.
However, she is saved by Hemant (Hemant Birje) and Hemant takes her safely to Chandan Nagar.Sahila comes to know that Jasmin is not a normal girl as she behaves like someone who is possessed.
Now the death count around the village is shooting up.
Jasmin lures the young men to the palatial mansion (that once belonged to Nikita) and kills them after making love.
Mahendra Pratap asks Jasmin about this but she responds in a voice that's not hers but Nikita's.
Mahendra Pratap takes the help of a Psychiatrist (Narendra Nath), who also witnesses Jasmin's transformation to a witch with unkempt hairs, long fangs, burnt face and over-the-top evil eyes.
The doctor also gets killed in one such encounter.
Soon Jasmin kills the housekeeper Raghu (Gulshan Grover) by slicing him open with an industrial wood saw at the saw mill.After hard trials Hemant and Sahila are able to find out the reason behind Jasmin's erratic and vehement behavior.
The question is will they succeed?
The movie is not just a tale of horror, but has several spicy moments that one would surely expect from a Bollywood horror movie.
The budget is out of question as most of the Ramsay movies hail from low budget but do a decent business.
I think this is the last best Bollywood horror movie of the last century.
Ramsays' efforts is well visible because most of the foreboding moments are fairly spooky.
Satish Shah has tortured the viewers to his best and so has Rajindernath.
The good thing is that Rajindernath doesn't have much time to irritate the viewers.It's a must buy movie.
I consider it a video nasty and also an ideal midnight movie.
Best Horror Film Created by the Ramsay's.
Shyam Ramsay and his family are the masters of Indian horror flicks.
There movies have a variety of horror types, from witches to vampires to ghost horror types.
There movies are usually superb and thrilling except a few like Purana Mandir which was crap.
There movies do have violence but never use violence as a horror tool like most crappy English horror flicks like Amusment.
Coming to this movie, it is very well directed and the horror is timed very well.
The actors are very good except Hemant Birje, he overacts regularly.
Jasmin was the best, her horror look was a million times better than any horror looks in other horror movies.
Heck, it even beat Revathi in Raat which was also damn scary.
The rest were also good, no one did bad or mediocre.
There were some disturbing scenes(gory or violent scenes) but the movie is still U.
The editing and final touches were well made but the climax could have been better.
But, this is not much of a big affection for the movie.
This movie is the best work of Shyam Ramsay with no doubts.
It beats violent horror flicks like Friday the 13th, Elm Street.
Overall, another great classic horror flick from the late 80's. |
tt1500842 | Nuit blanche | The film starts when Kim Si-hoo, a pawnbroker, is found dead in a remote town in a derelict building, the police are divided whether it was a murder or a suicide.
Fourteen years previous to that a man's body is found on an abandoned ship. The prime suspect, a woman suspected of being his lover, is also found dead soon afterwards. The woman's daughter Lee Ji-ah later changes her name to Yoo Mi-ho when she moves in with her aunt, where she grows a flower garden.
Fourteen years later, detective Jo Min-woo accidentally discovers the link between the two cases. Talking to the pawnbroker's widow and her son, Kim Yo-han, gives no clue. Then Jo Min-woo requests assistance from Han Dong-soo, who was investigating this case fourteen years ago. Han Dong-soo remembers every fact as this unsolved case ruined his career and killed his son. Dong-soo decides to re-investigate along with Min-woo and Lee Si-yeong, an employee of Mi-ho's rich fiance.
Yo-han has matured into a murderer and eliminates those who get in Mi-ho's way. He exists as Mi-ho's shadow, requiring nothing in return. Secretly they are still as close as ever while they are living out separate lives. Mi-ho knows of Yo-han's crimes but looks away from them and encourages them. It is later revealed that Yo-han killed his father after he found him molesting Ji-ah, and Ji-ah killed her mother who was pimping her out to throw suspicion off Yo-han. In the end, Yo-han kills himself to protect Ji-ah. | magical realism | train | wikipedia | Touching & Breathtakingly Beautiful. I watched Nuit Blanche because it was linked to from Wired.com. I only watched it because I'd worked on a project relating to car safety, and it was introduced as a film with a slow motion car crash.Little did I expect, however, to watch one of the most beautiful, romantic, transcendent and enchanting short films I've ever seen.Nuit Blanche is stunningly beautiful.Visually, it's spectacular. The music, literally, soothes my soul... If you've only seen this on a laptop with bad speakers, try watching it on a PC with high quality sound.I can't remember the last time I watched a short film that touched me as deeply, or that I watched another 20 times since.Bravo to the producer! Thank you for making my day.. Four of the most beautiful minutes of film ever!. Stunning. If you get a chance, see the Making Of Nuit Blanche as well, at http://vimeo.com/9076775.Although this black and white homage to all that is Paris and all that is love was CGI-generated and -enhanced, it reminds me a bit of Luc Besson's beautiful "Angel-A," which was not. Worth a look if you like this.Extra line 1 forced by IMDb's dumb 10-line rule. Extra line 2 forced by IMDb's dumb 10-line rule. Extra line 3 forced by IMDb's dumb 10-line rule. Extra line 4 forced by IMDb's dumb 10-line rule. Extra line 5 forced by IMDb's dumb 10-line rule.. More pretentious than beautiful in my opinion.. "Nuit blanche" is a Canadian movie from 2009, so two more years only until this one has its 10th anniversary. The title "White Night" is already a good indicator of this being a black-and-white film. Of course, the title has to be about the style because the story here is hardly worth saying something about. A woman sits in a restaurant, a man is outside and apparently the two share a moment that is as intimate as fictitious and unites them before we find out eventually that nothing about it was real. Or was it? Anyway, looking at the film's popularity and the number of votes, you can see that many people have actually seen it. It is by far the most known work for the core trio here and that includes director Manoukian, who has been the opposite of prolific since 2009, lead actress Lindley, whose only other credit is apparently as an assistant on "Deal or No Deal", and actor Coughlan who is the most experienced of the three, but also not famous at all. Their work here runs for under five minutes and there is no spoken dialogue included, so no matter where you are from you can watch it without subtitles. But why would you? It is really nothing special or memorable and that comes from somebody who enjoys modern b&w films a lot usually. |
tt1093824 | Encounters at the End of the World | Herzog and cinematographer Peter Zeitlinger go to Antarctica to meet people who live and work there and to capture footage of the continent's unique locations. Herzog's voiceover narration explains that his film will not be a typical Antarctica film about "fluffy penguins" but will explore the dreams of the people and the landscape. They begin at McMurdo Station and interview some maintenance and support workers as well as iceberg geologist Douglas MacAyeal. They travel next to a nearby seal camp supervised by zoologist Olav Oftedal. Next they join the film's composer/producer, research diver Henry Kaiser, at his diving camp and interview cell biologist Samuel Bowser and zoologist Jan Pawlowski. Kaiser and Bowser stage a rooftop guitar concert.
Herzog and Zeitlinger return to McMurdo for some more interviews and visit the preserved original base of Ernest Shackleton. After some brief footage at the South Pole, Herzog interviews penguin scientist David Ainley. This footage includes a shot of a penguin marching in the wrong direction, walking to a certain death in the barren interior of the continent.
Herzog and Zeitlinger next visit Mount Erebus and interview volcanologists. A strange sequence follows which was shot in tunnels deep below South Pole station carved from snow and ice. Various trinkets and mementos, including a can of Russian caviar and a whole frozen sturgeon, are placed in carved-out shelves in the ice walls and preserved by the extremely cold and dry air. On the slope of the volcano, Herzog and Zeitlinger explore ice caves formed by fumaroles.
The film next visits the launch of a giant helium balloon used in a neutrino detection project (ANITA) and features an interview with physicist Peter Gorham. It concludes with some philosophical words from a maintenance worker and more footage from the fumarole ice caves and Kaiser's dives. | philosophical | train | wikipedia | From this he was compelled to visit the continent and shoot some footage of his own, which became Encounters at the End of the World.The film perfectly balances both gorgeous footage of the continent as well as fascinating interviews and anecdotes of the many researchers and workers of the McMurdo research station.
It is a study of both Nature and Man: by turns breathtaking in its landscape (especially the underwater photography), at other times funny and serious, as Herzog interviews the motley crew of individuals who call Antarctica home for the greater part of the year.
Werner Herzog has gone there to make a film, catching the opportunity to capture some of it's beauty in a way rarely seen on film, and also to share some of his thoughts about nature and humanity.
In and around the large McMurdo Research Station he circulates the various people working there, joins them on their fieldwork and interviews them, all resulting in a blend of beautiful images, personal micro-stories, funny sidetracks, well paced informative moments and an often fascinating look at nature's inexplicable mystery, humanity's as well as Mother Earth's.This is a large canvas, perhaps slightly difficult to put in proper words.
The form of the film gradually evolves, first small steps with the reality of the small, modern society that has been developed, the paradox of a restaurant with a beloved ice-cream machine (needless to point out further, and despised by Herzog), and with a scene of people having an unusual way of training, in case they would get lost in a blizzard.
It may be penguins, but it's hauntingly beautiful nonetheless.Throughout the movie, Herzog keeps expanding his view on nature and humanity until we reach the end, and the topic we've all been waiting for.
No, it seems like Herzog quietly accepts that mankind might be headed for doom - it's as natural as the deranged penguins leaving it's flock to never return - and instead asks what alien lifeforms might think of our remains if they would land to explore in thousands of years.
'Encounters at the End of the World' is an engrossing, fascinating exploration of what it takes to exist in one of the world's most unforgiving landscapes.Almost a companion piece to Herzog's earlier poem-like Fata Morgana, the film brings us into a world hidden to almost all but a very chosen few.There are incredible exchanges between Herzog and his human subjects, who are all researchers studying various aspects of the Antarctic eco-sphere.
It's pointed out by one of Werner Herzog's dreamers - a philosopher and part time forklift driver - that he found on his encounters at the end of the world.Herzog begins his new documentary warning us that this will not be another film about fluffy penguins; his questions about nature are far different.
Herzog, always fascinated with the oddity and great beauty of the natural world, fills his documentary with stunning images and sequences.
Encounters is an almost straight forward account of Werner Herzog going to Antarctica.Invited to go by one of the scientific organizations he agreed to go because he was fascinated by life under the sea ice (see his Wild Blue Yonder which used footage from under the ice to represent an alien world) and wanted to have a chance to film life there.
Encounters at the End of the World is a quirky and interesting film, definitely a departure from your average dry science documentary or eye-candy nature film, though it has elements of both.It focuses predominantly on the odd collection of people drawn to live in an Antarctic research station, and to a slightly lesser degree on the oddness of the region itself, and the bizarre bits of scientific trivia that can be found there.
The other was that in some cases he seemed to be going out of his way to depict the people he interviewed in embarrassing ways, with things like leaving the camera lingering on them after the interview appeared to be finished, as they stood nervously, apparently trying to figure out if it was over or not.But on the whole I would recommend it -- the flaws are offset by some impressive visuals (especially the underwater footage), dry humour, interesting ideas to ponder, and a really great soundtrack by Henry Kaiser and David Lindley, which work very well with the oddness of the content..
Werner Herzog makes Anartica, strange, magical, hypnotic, and relevant, mostly without the use of penguins(who are apparently at turns insane and suicidal prostitutes and swingers).Some of the images were very familiar to his earlier "Wild Blue Yonder", but the narrative, holds together much stronger here.Eccentric scientists, and travelers from all over the world, discussing the foundations of evolution, the invisible energies that permeate the cosmos, the constant shift of water and energy just beneath the surface of the ice, they also play guitar and wander around with boxes on their heads.It's not so much a documentary about "Antartica", the geographical location, but about Antartica as an idea, an image, the people who go there, and why, a little of everything or anything that's is interesting.
Though Herzog in voice over gives us a few pet peeves, and doesn't mind talking about not liking a person or place, just as much as finding one interesting, it can get a bit distracting, even annoying...but mostly it's kinda funny, and can break up some of the slower moments.My favorite Herzog quote is "Documentaries are as close to truth as glaciers are to farting", here, staged as it may or may not be, you can still smell the ice, and it's stinks brilliantly..
I thought that "Encounters at the End of the World" was a very good look at several different people's lives who live in Antarctica.
This film is mainly about the story of people who live in Antartica, a documentary about their own personal experience of leaving their home and human civilization behind, and sought the new life of adventure and traveling.
Werner Herzog's 2008 documentary finds him in Antarctica where he meets the people who call the frozen continent their home.
Herzog also tires to get inside the mind of a suicidal penguin in a very funny but odd moving encounter.Towards the end of the film, Herzog focuses on the future of Antarctica and the future of us as a species; hypothesizing that when we are gone a race of alien archeologists will study our ruined cities and try to understand why we were in the Antarctic.
"Encounters at the End of the World" is the latest in a long line of outstanding documentaries by German director Werner Herzog, a filmmaker who knows how to take the raw material of nature and turn it into art.
The prosaic also finds voice in the daily routines of the men and women who live and work there, as they spend their off-hours eating in cafeterias, going to bars, playing guitar, watching old science fiction movies on T.V. In fact, Herzog seems almost more interested in trying to figure out what makes these particular individuals "tick" than in recording the wonders of the world around him.
Finally, we listen to the otherworldly sound of seals and seal lions as they swim and go about their lives under the ice.And over all this lies Herzog's narration, which at times borders on the portentous, as he sternly reminds us that our reign as a species on this planet may soon be coming to an end.Although there are countless moments of awe-inspiring wonder in the film, it is the constant juxtaposition between the ethereal and the mundane that gives "Encounters at the End of the World" its own distinctive raison d'etre..
We meet so many fascinating people that this story will burn indelibly in our mind as a masterpiece.Herzog mixes history, stunning visuals, incredible music, science, natural phenomena at -2 Celsius, people, and humor to make a film that will be hard to beat as the best of the year.It is a world that may reveal the secrets of our origins, and will likely reveal our eventual demise.And, despite Herzog's claim that he did not want to make another film about penguins, he managed to devote some time to them and give us more than we have seen before.Brilliance is too small a word for this film..
Encounters at the End of the World (2007) **** (out of 4) Herzog's latest documentary takes us to Antarctica where we get to see and experience what the scientist and researchers there are like.
By: Savannah Bristow 06.02.2016 Film Review of Encounters at the End of the World, 2007, 99 min 5 StarsThe duality and mystery of the great white desert known as Antarctica is of interest to many, but Werner Herzog took his curiosity to the next level.
These questions are all addressed in Herzog's film, Encounters at the End of the World." The film begins with Herzog's journey to McMurdo Station, home to the National Science Foundation and some 1000 researchers and other inhabitants.
Werner Herzog presents his documentary, Encounters at the End of the World, as a complex and intricate study of the mysterious continent known as Antarctica.
With ENCOUNTERS AT THE END OF THE WORLD, Werner Herzog has once again delivered a compelling nature documentary, this one exploring life and death in Antarctica.
As Herzog says at the very beginning of the film, "Encounters at the end of the world" is not another movie about penguins.
Rather, it is a visually stunning story about weird and wonderful people living at the end of the world (i.e. at the Antarctica's McMurdo station), as well as about humankind's relationship to the nature.
My husband and I immediately got sucked into the life of the biggest permanent US settlement on the South Pole, the peculiarities of its inhabitants, and the magic of the Antarctic ice, its breathtaking landscapes and soundscapes.The best thing about the movie is Herzog's apparent affection towards people who dedicated their lives to adventure, dreams, and pursuit of knowledge regardless of personal comfort.
Herzog represented people from McMurdo with warmth and generosity, skillfully illuminating their hidden depths and lovable weirdness in just a few minutes.Another great thing is that the muddy streets of McMurdo, caterpillars, and lonesome outposts create the impression of how life in the Wild West could have looked like – as well as how a future human settlement on Moon may be organized.Additionally, Herzog's voice, in English with a distinct German accent, is pure joy to listen to.After seeing the film, you will probably want to visit the Antarctica (perhaps the only place on Earth where philosophers ride forklifts with pleasure), or at least to go and watch the film again..
At this point it's really just amusing that either Herzog's fictional feature or documentaries haven't been awarded with an Oscar since in my opinion all of his documentaries are Oscar worthy.Encounters at the End of the World is the only Herzog documentary to even be nominated.The movie is essentially a look into Antarctica stringed together with a bunch of interviews of the various people Herzog meets on his journey.
All of them have something truly interesting to say and Herzog himself provides once again his narration for the documentary.Encounters at the End of the World has a scene which is perhaps the most powerful image I've ever seen on film.
Werner Herzog directs and narrates this fascinating look at Antarctica, taking a camera to places that few people have ever seen.
Herzog has managed to make an intelligent--yes that is the right word survey of the human endeavor in Antarctica.It is foremost a movie about people most of them are interesting especially the low key ones like the philosopher.
Unfortunately places like Antarctica attract and bring out that crowd of people--ones seeking some kind of identity through the "zaniness" of their experiences including of course being in Antarctica.Herzog subtly cuts them off at the knees when deserved such as saying we were glad to get out of McMurdo after an interview with someone claiming how important an ice cream machine was.Watch it you will like it..
Instead we have a film that is as interested in the people who have chosen to live in this place, as much as the beauties of its natural landscape.
We see underwater sequences of life below the ice, a large volcano in the middle of the continent and a penguin wandering insanely in the direction of the distant mountains to its doom, like a crazed hero in a Herzog movie such as Aguirre.
And only an eccentric such as Herzog would ever ask a penguin expert if there were instances of the birds going insane or practising homosexuality.The film is divided in its view of man's existence in Antarctica and exploration in general.
Veteran (IMDB credits him as director on 56 movies) filmmaker Werner Herzog travels to Antarctica where he finds weird wildlife and even weirder human life eking out an existence in the planet's least inviting environment.
An interview with a linguist on a continent with no language, a penguin walking in the opposite direction of the ocean to most likely die—there's something extraordinary about this film.Many people criticize Herzog for his cynical views on human civilization.
Herzog is exploring the only continent on which there are no permanent human residents, and his alternative way of looking at things allows the audience to experience Antarctic nature from a different perspective.
So many people don't know anything about this seemingly different world (except for that's where penguins live), and Herzog does a great job of exploring the highlights of what Antarctica has to offer..
It took me some time to realise that I couldn't understand either.In Encounters
, which makes Herzog the most accomplished director in the history of cinema geographically (he has filmed at least one film in each of the seven continents), he travels to Antarctica to meet men and women from various walks of life who try to make sense of the steadily melting ice-land.He disclaims at the outset any desire to film penguins.
And so, famed filmmaker Werner Herzog shares his visit to Antarctica, a fascinating world of natural beauty and scientific efforts.The main human outpost is McMurdo Station, where the film basically begins.
Trust Werner Herzog to come up with an engaging documentary such as this, where he was on the invite of the National Science Foundation to visit the community of scientists at McMurdo Station over at the Antarctica, and of course, couldn't pass up not documenting his exploration of the ice continent, which was showcased by The Discovery Channel.
While the scientists are there for research to make the world a better place, and to understand this last frontier on the globe, you can't help but notice the construction landscape the colony has created, as if it is ingrained in man to ravage the land he resides in, and alter Nature for the provision of some ridiculous creature comforts.I suppose one still cannot get away from not covering something about the penguins when in the Antarctica.
Herzog goes one step further to cover the different camps at the continent, for the audience to grasp the extent of scientific research and exploration, at the same time eliciting candid views about life in isolation, and listen in to sights and sounds unheard of, with every interview subject each possessing very unique and interesting stories to tell.
Werner Herzog travels to Antarctica to film a colony of scientists going about their work with seals, penguins, volcanoes and the breathtaking sea life of this lesser known part of the world.This film is not the warning about global warming that you might expect, though the topic of global warming and man's future on this planet does come up.
Herzog traveled to this unpopulated part of the world where people drift when they want to get away from civilization, but the film seems more interested in these recluses than it does the environment to which they devote their time.
Pretty different to the 'save the world' and 'save nature' campaigns you hear about more often.The narration, the underwater scenes, and two or three brilliant moments of film-making that are uniquely Herzog elevate this beyond the competent entertainment that most documentaries of this general sort are, and make it a very good film.
This is a very good documentary by the much loved German (Bavarian) director Werner Herzog.He travels to the U.S. McMurtro (?) base in the Antarctic because he wants to see the landscapes of Antarctica and also visit the wildlife of the area and see what makes the characters tick who actually choose to live there.The views are breathtakingly beautiful in many cases and these characters are interesting.Werner Herzog is a very good director and with this movie he became the first director to direct features on all seven continents..
The latest Werner Herzog documentary, dedicated to Roger Ebert, Encounters at the End of the World, is a study of man and his interaction with nature in the ice-laden rivers, mountains, and shores of Antarctica.
Like some of his other works, it is filled with gorgeous cinematography, exquisite music, and Herzog's unique commentary spoken in a somber, musical voice that has a distinct poetic quality that strives for profundity.Herzog was paid by the Discovery Channel and the National Science Foundation to travel to McMurdo Station in Antarctica to gain some insight into the mysteries of the land at the bottom of the world, promising only that he would not come up with another film about penguins.
Connected to each other, they search blindly for the trainer who is actually only fifty feet away, perhaps an inadvertent metaphor for humans trying to connect with God. Like all of Herzog's films, there is an upside and perhaps the main reason to see the movie are entrancing underwater ballet sequences of the divers who risk their life every time they plunge in to the freezing waters, shots of the beautiful caves carved in the South Pole, and satellite images of sea ice compressed into an animated montage. |
tt0039431 | Good News | The film is set in 1927 at fictional Tait College, where football is all the rage. ("Tait Song"/"Good News")
Tait's football star Tommy Marlowe (Peter Lawford) is a prime catch for the college girls. Tommy tells his friend and non-playing teammate Bobby Turner (McDonald) that the trick to attracting girls is to show no interest. ("Be a Ladies' Man")
New student Pat McClellan (Marshall) resists his advances, cutting Tommy down to size at a party. ("Lucky in Love") Pat is interested in French, so Tommy enlists part-time school librarian Connie Lane (June Allyson) to help him study the language. ("The French Lesson")
He gradually falls for Connie, who comes from a poor background, which does not bother her. ("The Best Things in Life are Free") Meanwhile, Babe Doolittle (McCracken) is seeking to leave a relationship with football player Beef (Tindall) so she can get involved with Bobby Turner.
At a local soda shop, Babe advises Pat not to lose her temper. ("Pass the Peace Pipe")
Connie grows attracted to Tommy, who she feels is not interested. ("Just Imagine") Tommy asks Connie to the prom, but reneges when Pat shows interest. He changes his mind again. In the end, Tait wins the big game, Tommy pairs off with Connie, Beef pairs off with Pat, and Babe pairs off with Bobby Turner. The college bursts out into song in a production number. ("Varsity Drag") | psychological | train | wikipedia | Great MGM color musical from 1947 that boasts terrific performances from June Allyson and Peter Lawford as the stars and Joan McCracken, Ray McDonald, Patricia Marshall, Connie Gilchrist, Donald McBride, Mel Torme, Tom Dugan, Clint Sundberg, and Jane Green in support.
It seems to have only 3 cuts in it and it's an amazing production numbers full of color and energy.Allyson and Lawford have so much fun in the "Varsity Drag" number on a huge stage that it's infectious (but watch for the female dancer in pink who falls).
Good songs throughout from the 20s stage show like the title song as well as "Lucky in Love," "The Best Things in Life Are Free," "Lady's Man," "Good News," "The French Lesson," and the sad song "Just Imagine" Allyson sings.
While leads June Allyson and Peter Lawford are no Judy Garland and Mickey Rooney (who ironically, were the original considered leads for this movie version years ago), they sing and dance entertainingly enough for one to not notice after a while.
Another underrated talent showcased here is one Joan McCracken who shines in the opening number and the later made-for-film specialty "Pass That Peace Pipe", which was eventually nominated for an Oscar for Best Original Song.
P.S. Among the extras on the DVD are two numbers from the 1930 film version of Good News, the title number and "The Varsity Drag", both performed energetically and athletically by a young woman named Dorothy McNulty, later to be known as Penny Singleton from the Blondie movies.
Aside from Peter Lawford and June Allyson, no great stars came out of this classic movie.
I waited for nearly 50 years to see it again and when I finally got the chance, I did watch that great dance sequence of "Bury that hatchet and pass that peace pipe, like the Chocktaw, Chipawah, Chatanoogah, etc.".
In 'Good News', which I saw today for the third time, I figured I would melt in tears when she & Peter Lawford did the scene of 'The French Lesson'.
Neglected MGM musical has some great things going for it.For one thing, it has an amusing Adolph & Green script, some dazzling dance numbers choreographed to perfection, and a simple plot (two gals in love with the same fellow) that never gets in the way of the well staged song-and-dance numbers.
It gives a charming look at college life in the 1920s--in non-realistic fashion, of course!June Allyson's singing voice never impressed me but she's a good dancer and here she proves it in the "Varsity Drag" number.
Peter Lawford is surprisingly good considering he's miscast as the football player (where was Van Johnson?) Joan McCracken almost steals the show with her frantic dancing amid talented chorus boys in the "Pass That Peace Pipe" number in a drugstore, a highlight among the dance routines.
Allyson and Lawford are terrific on "The French Lesson" and she is properly wistful in her rendition of "The Best Things In Life Are Free".
Some of the humor falls flat and dates the picture badly, particularly the overdone scene with Connie Gilchrist repeating words June has written for her.All in all, a fun-filled, tuneful college comedy about academics and football with an early glimpse of Mel Torme.
As the two leads, Peter Lawford and June Allyson keep their characters likable and sympathetic with solid performances.The setting is a 1940s conception of what a 1920s college campus was like, and it is thus something of a mythical world that never actually existed.
Patricia Marshall plays a rather innocent version of a campus vamp.The musical numbers fit well with the story, and while neither contains anything particularly memorable, they are entertaining.
"Good News" is a musical comedy about life at Tait College in 1927.
The songs, written by Henderson, Brown and DeSylva, are similarly uneven, but they include "The Best Things in Life Are Free", which gets the classy treatment of Mel Torme.The story centers around sorority girl Connie Lane (June Allyson) who--despite her best intuitions--develops a crush on BMOC Tommy Marlowe (Peter Lawford).
The lensman must have used all the gauze in the set's first aid kit achieving the relentless soft focus for Allyson (who was age 30).The show is stolen by Joan McCracken, who plays Babe Doolittle--the vivacious ball of energy who leads the electrifying dance sequence for "Pass That Peace Pipe".
Generally speaking, "what you are in for" is a pretty corny movie, really dated, and sub-par song and dance numbers.Allyson's old-fashioned wholesomeness is appealing, and the college atmosphere was refreshingly the same (contrast that to today where they invite dictators who want to destroy us to speak)......but that's about it.
Just kidding there, folks!) Actually, the good news about "Good News" is that this Technicolor Musical/Comedy from 1947 does, surprisingly enough, feature 3 outstanding and really swinging musical numbers, which are - Pass The Peace Pipe, Varsity Rag and the film's opening sequence.But, on the other hand, the bad news about "Good News" is that, no, these 3 high-energy musical numbers do not in any way, shape, or form, come anywhere near to compensating the viewer for having to endure the drab and clichéd triteness of the rest of the film.This picture's predictable, little story concerns the activities of a bunch of super-preppy rich kids in the late 1920s who are attending Tait University.When these "golly-gee" brats aren't singing up a storm (sometimes quite out of tune), they spend most of their time either partying and/or gossiping about who's dating who.These spoiled-rotten, whipper-snappers seem to have very little concern about their studies, their grades, or their finances.
(But, hey, to each his own, is what I always say) One of this film's biggest let-downs was that its 2 big-name stars, Peter Lawford and June Allyson, couldn't carry a tune even if their lives depended on it.
The 1940's sensibility added to the Roaring20s theme makes for some anachronistic moments, but June Allyson iswonderful in the lead, Peter Lawford is surprisingly good as the football hero.
Joan McCracken is superb in "Pass That Peacepipe," one of my all- time favorite dance numbers, with Ray McDonald also excellent.
Allyson and Lawford are fine in the "Varsity Drag" finale and Allyson does a nice job on "The Best Things in Life Are Free." Great Technicolor, costumes, etc give Good News a BIG, bright look and takes it miles from the 1930 version, which starred Bessie Love and Penny Singleton.
Honestly, I do not see why this film is so highly rated.Apart from "The Best Things in Life Are Free" and the final Varsity ensemble number, the songs are real duds.
In fact most of the big song and dance production numbers are embarrassingly sub-standard for screen musicals of the time, especially the opening number.
at one point when June Allyson is giving Lawford his first French Lesson (actually one of the clever moments in an otherwise BORING musical) she mispronounces the word "BAISER" pretty badly.
No wonder we worry for the hero who later on in the film has to pass a French Exam.Peter Lawford's character is such a DUMB CAD that any self-respecting intelligent female college student would NEVER bother with anyone so stupid..
Peter Lawford, June Allyson, Joan McCracken, Ray McDonald, and Patricia Marshall star in "Good News," a 1947 MGM musical about life at Tait University.
Allyson is Connie Lane, working her way through college and living in a sorority house when she meets the big man on campus and star football player, Tommy Marlowe (Lawford).
When she thinks Lawford has it, she turns her attentions to him, and he cancels his date with Allyson to the prom - on the night of the event.Had I been Allyson, the story would have ended right there, but this is 1947 and a movie, and it's a wonderful one - energetic and fresh, with good music and fabulous dancing from Broadway star McCracken and McDonald.
"Pass the Peace Pipe," a politically incorrect song by today's standards, is one of the best numbers.Allyson and Lawford make a great couple, and seeing Lawford so young and handsome, dancing and singing is not only a revelation but sad.
It's kinda sad that hardly anyone seems to remember her any more, or if they do, they think she was kinda corny.One of the best musical numbers in Good News is The French Lesson with Allyson and Peter Lawford.
Despite winning an Oscar for one of its songs, "Good News" appears to be a strictly second-tier sort of musical with little to distinguish it.
The plot hinges on whether the school's star quarterback (Peter Lawford) will pursue a snobbish new student (Patricia Marshall) or recognize how wonderful the assistant librarian (June Allyson) is.
Like all musicals, the film is chock full of singing as well as dance numbers.
Apart from Mel Tormé (who had a great voice), the singers are either adequate (such as Allyson) or pretty awful (Lawford--who NEVER should have been allowed to sing in a musical).
It is true that the costumes and hair-styles are more 1940s than 1920s, but they do look lovely, and numbers like "Pass that Peace Pipe" and "Varsity Drag" are filmed beautifully.
The music is wonderful, especially "Pass that Peace Pipe", "Varsity Drag", the title number, "Imagine" and the most famous song "The Best Things in Life are Free".
The choreography similarly dazzles, especially in "Pass that Peace Pipe" and "Varsity Drag", which are two of the energetic musical numbers of the 40s.Charles Walters directs excellently, hard to believe that this was his directorial debut.
Am not usually a fan of Peter Lawford, but while his singing is only adequate if even that he does give some charm to a rather caddish character and his dancing looks more comfortable than in other musicals he participated in.
With the exception of Mel Torme', who's in a supporting role here, there are no vocal powerhouses, but June Allyson and Joan McCracken put their songs over very well.
The film is full of little things the characters and director (Charles Walters) do to fill out the movie without increasing its running time.Of the great supporting cast, Joan McCracken is certainly the most valuable.
********* Good News (12/4/47) Charles Walters ~ June Allyson, Peter Lawford, Joan McCracken, Ray McDonald.
Good news is one of the all time great MGM Musicals.
Good News is one of my all time favorite MGM musicals.Great songs by wonderful performers.Ray McDonald in a part that shows his talent,Ray was one of the under exposed performers at MGM.June in one of her best performances ,its also one of her favorites.Peter miscast but does a good job.The first film directed by Charles Walters he went on to direct Easter Parade and many others.JoanMacCraken in one of the few films she made.Pat Marshall ,Mel Torme all add up to a great entertainment.When I met June Allyson I told her some scenes from the first version were shown .She wasn't aware there was an earlier one.I said Penny Singleton(the star) was no match for June Allyson.She chuckled at that.
A silly plot, which links a couple of good songs ("Lucky in Love," "The Best Things in Life are Free") with a few dull ones, ends with a rousing finale, "The Varsity Drag." That energetic production number is so lively and infectious, all the nonsense that precedes is forgiven.And there is a lot of nonsense to forgive.
Peter Lawford, egotistical football jock Tommy Marlowe, is an insensitive cad; except for his good looks, he is unworthy of a second glance from the likes of June Allyson's Connie Lane.
Instead of pursuing Connie, the shallow dim-witted Tommy is quickly smitten by gold-digging Patricia Marshall, a new coed, whose faux French includes the film's best line: "Quelle fromage." The musical numbers feature three performers who never quite made the big leagues on film, the afore-mentioned Marshall, Joan McCracken, and Mel Torme.
However, as he proved in other MGM musicals like "Easter Parade," Lawford could carry a tune and, certainly in "The Varsity Drag" number, could dance quite well.
While Allyson has only a passable voice, her innocence and sweetness get her a pass for anything she may lack musically, although she too does quite well in the big finale."Good News" is simplistic romantic fun with a few good songs and a terrific production number.
Although only 93 minutes in length, the film does drag a bit at times; "Pass that Peace Pipe" seems endless; the football game goes on and on; and McCracken's use of family millions to divert Marshall from man to man is a tiresome gag.
This great underrated musical has been criticized for the off key singing of Peter Lawford, June Allyson and Joan McCracken but it ain't grand opera, it's a musical comedy folks!
It is, however, a fifty-year-old movie that can rekindle our memories of a softer, kinder time, when no matter how grim your own life might have been, you could embrace the possibility of happiness through vicariously enjoying the silliness of such musical numbers as, "Good News," "Pass that Peace Pipe," and the all-time football song, "Buckle-down-Winsocki!Although Peter Lawford was not anyone's dream date, June Allyson, with her sweet innocence and gift for laughter, despite her frequent tears of adolescence, carries this movie with a simple grace and talent that is more mainstream than other, more gifted, entertainers embody.
All of those songs made it as well as one of the great dance numbers of the Roaring Twenties, The Varsity Drag.The musicals of that era had the lightweight nonsensical plots which also was taken from the Broadway show.
It's a struggle, but you guess who he winds up with.This film is strictly about the music and dance numbers and it offers a rare opportunity to see Joan McCracken singing and dancing which she mostly did on the Broadway stage.
She introduces a song especially written for the film Pass That Peace Pipe which was a big hit in 1947 and won for Good News its only Academy Award nomination.
Joan McCracken died way too young as oddly enough her dancing partner Ray McDonald.Good News presents an idealized version of the Roaring Twenties and is the quintessential college musical which flooded Hollywood mostly in the years before World War II.
Perhaps the lack of "star power" is one reason the film is not better known.Nonetheless, really distinguishing the musical score is that great song and profound truth about the best things in life being free.
"Good News" Is Good Fun. Dopey as can be, and entirely winning.This musical comedy stars June Allyson and Peter Lawford as a dowdy librarian and star football player, respectively, at an insanely happy college where everyone sings and dances all the time and all the students look like they're in their forties.
The most well known of those is of course "The Best Things in Life Are Free," but a wonderful and totally politically incorrect song called "Pass That Peace Pipe" received a Best Original Song Oscar nomination, while the one I remember most was the only other one written expressly for the film, a little ditty sung by Allyson and Lawford when she's teaching him how to speak French.Good fun.Grade: B+.
Of course, June Allyson is called in to tutor him, the same girl he broke a prom date with so that he could escort the new girl on campus, a snob-seeking status girl, only interested in money.I just love these so called college musicals where academics is never really the focus, but rather good old fashion fun.What makes this film a delight is the singing and dancing.
Allyson, who was 30 at the time the movie was made, looks like a college co-ed all the way.Mel Torme has his moments as a college student as well..
MGM had filmed "Good News" before, in 1930, and 95% of it remains intact, featuring hysterically funny versions of the title song and "The Varsity Drag" as sung by the future "Blondie", Penny Singleton.
Seventeen years went by before MGM dug it out to give it a color treatment with Arthur Freed producing and Charles Walter directing, and because of the birth of Liza Minnelli in 1946, top star Judy Garland wasn't available, giving the leading role to their newest girl next door, June Allyson, and the role of the spoiled rich kid who can't pass French to the elegant and handsome Peter Lawford.
The basic story is slim: Tate college football star Lawford is failing in most of his classes, so he is is tutored by June Allyson, a student who works in the library, in French.
That leads to the song "The French Lesson", a clever duet between Allyson and Lawford, with music by Ray Henderson and lyrics by Lew Brown and Buddy G.
"Good News" is certainly their best known Broadway show, having had a long tour that briefly appeared on Broadway in the mid 1970's and was highlighted as a part of Sylvia Fine Kaye's "Musical Comedy Tonight" a decade later.Allyson and Lawford are surrounded by a memorable supporting cast, most notably Broadway singer/dancer Joan McCracken who steals every number she is in, particularly the razz-a-ma-tazz dance number, "Pass That Peace Pipe", which explodes with energy when she takes over the front of the line.
A musical set on a college campus starring June Allyson and Peter Lawford.
Directed by Charles Walters with a screenplay by Betty Comden and Adolph Green that was based on a play by Lew Brown, Lawrence Schwab, Frank Mandel, Buddy DeSylva and Ray Henderson, this remake of the 1930 college Musical features the Academy Award nominated Song "Pass That Peace Pipe" and a cast that includes: June Allyson, Peter Lawford, Patricia Marshall, Joan McCracken, Ray McDonald, Mel Torme, Robert Strickland, Donald MacBride, Tom Dugan, Clinton Sundberg, Loren Tindall, and Connie Gilchrist (among others). |
tt0795363 | Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon | The film is set in the Qing Dynasty during the 43rd year (1778) of the reign of the Qianlong Emperor. Li Mu Bai (Chow Yun-fat) is an accomplished Wudang swordsman and Yu Shu Lien (Michelle Yeoh) is a female warrior and professional body guard. The death of Mu Bai's closest friend and Shu Lien's fiancé Meng Sizhao (played by Donnie Yen in the sequel), complicates these characters' feelings for one another. They are reconnected when Mu Bai, after choosing to relinquish the warrior lifestyle, asks Shu Lien to gift his sword "Green Destiny" to their friend Sir Te (Sihung Lung) in Beijing. Long ago, Mu Bai's master was murdered by Jade Fox (Cheng Pei-pei), a woman who sought to learn Wudang skills. Shu Lien meets with and stays in the compound of Sir Te where she also makes the acquaintance of Jen Yu who is the daughter of a rich and powerful Governor Yu and is about to get married.
One evening, a masked thief sneaks into Sir Te's estate and steals the sword. Mu Bai and Shu Lien trace the theft to Governor Yu's compound and learn that Jade Fox has been posing as Jen's governess for many years. Mu Bai makes the acquaintance of Inspector Tsai (Wang Deming), a police investigator from the provinces, and his daughter May (Li Li), who have come to Peking in pursuit of Fox. Fox challenges the pair and Sir Te's servant Master Bo (Gao Xi'an) to a showdown that night. Following a protracted battle, the group is on the verge of defeat when Mu Bai arrives and outmaneuvers Fox. Before Mu Bai can kill Fox, the masked thief reappears and partners with Fox to fight. Fox resumes the fight and kills Tsai before fleeing with the thief (who is revealed to be Fox's protégé, Jen). After seeing Jen fight Mu Bai, Fox realizes Jen had been secretly studying the Wudang manual and has surpassed her in combative skills.
At night, a desert bandit named Lo (Chang Chen) breaks into Jen's bedroom and asks her to leave with him. A flashback reveals that in the past, when Governor Yu and his family were traveling in the western deserts, Lo and his bandits had raided Jen's caravan and Lo had stolen her comb. She chased after him, following him to his desert cave seemingly in a quest to get her comb back. However, the pair soon fell passionately in love. Lo eventually convinced Jen to return to her family, though not before telling her a legend of a man who jumped off a cliff to make his wishes come true. Because the man's heart was pure, he did not die. Lo came to Peking to persuade Jen not to go through with her arranged marriage. However, Jen refuses to leave with him. Later, Lo interrupts Jen's wedding procession, begging her to come away with him. Nearby, Shu Lien and Mu Bai convince Lo to wait for Jen at Mount Wudang, where he will be safe from Jen's family, who are furious with him. Jen runs away from her husband on the wedding night before the marriage could be consummated. Disguised in male clothing, she is accosted at an inn by a large group of warriors; armed with the Green Destiny and her own superior combat skills, she emerges victorious.
Jen visits Shu Lien, who tells her that Lo is waiting for her at Mount Wudang. After an angry dispute, the two women engage in a duel. Shu Lien is the superior fighter, but Jen wields the Green Destiny: the sword destroys each weapon that Shu Lien wields, until Shu Lien finally manages to defeat Jen with a broken sword. When Shu Lien shows mercy and lowers the sword, Jen injures Shu Lien's arm. Mu Bai arrives and pursues Jen into a bamboo forest. Following a duel where Mu Bai regains possession of the Green Destiny, he decides to throw the sword over a waterfall. In pursuit, Jen dives into an adjoining river to retrieve the sword and is then rescued by Fox. Fox puts Jen into a drugged sleep and places her in a cavern; Mu Bai and Shu Lien discover her there. Fox suddenly reappears and attacks the others with poisoned darts. Mu Bai blocks the needles with his sword and avenges his master's death by mortally wounding Fox, only to realize that one of the darts hit him in the neck. Fox dies, confessing that her goal had been to kill Jen because she was furious that Jen had hid the secrets of Wudang's far superior fighting techniques from her.
As Jen exits to gather up an antidote for the poisoned dart, Mu Bai prepares to die. With his last breaths, he finally confesses his love for Shu Lien. He dies in her arms as Jen returns, too late to save him. The Green Destiny is returned to Sir Te. Jen later goes to Mount Wudang and spends one last night with Lo. The next morning, Lo finds Jen standing on a balcony overlooking the edge of the mountain. In an echo of the legend that they spoke about in the desert, she asks him to make a wish. He complies and wishes for them to be together again, back in the desert. Jen then lifts herself and gently falls down the side of the mountain. | violence | train | wikipedia | A good attempt to make a playable adaption of a great film... but.... First of all, around the time I wrote this comment, I had already read what kittiwake-1 had written about this game and was confused. This is a video game and not an actual movie. I mean, I myself would choose a good Deniro movie or playing a video game any day. But, dude, what are you talking about? Now that I have that out of the way, let's move on, shall we? The video game adaption of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon is, as you may have guessed, based on the movie of the same name. What's stranger is that this was released three years after the film was released. Whether that's due to a slow development time or just plain laziness, no one really knows. At least, I don't.The game allows the player to play as the four main characters of the movie: Jen, Shu Lien, Li-Mu-Bi, and Dark Cloud (Whose story is a secret bonus that is unlocked for separate gameplay.) All four of these characters have fighting styles based on how they fought in the movie. However, the real eye candy is the evasion moves that allow each character to avoid the blows of an enemy's attack in the most impossible and gravity defying ways that were first showcased in the movie.The story is obviously based on the story told in the movie. The story in the game is told using CG movies and spoken in a subtitled Mandarin language (A nice little touch, considering I preferred the foreign language track of the film over the dubbed one.) The story goes to expand on what might've happened to the other characters during the film and even (No real surprise since pretty much all video game movie adaptions have done this) alters what officially happened in the movie to make the game have more action. I never thought Jade Fox would go so far as to actually go and get hired goons.The real bonus for the story is the ability to decide how the game ends. What if Jen had all the ingredients to cure Li-Mu-Bi in her possession? What if Jen had not gotten back her comb? What if Li-Mu-Bi had not gotten the green destiny back for the second time? Your actions will decide the outcome of these scenarios and the destiny of the characters in this game. This is truly the best feature of the game.Yet, for all it's strengths, it also showcases some flaws. The enemies often tend to become a nuisance after a while and the camera angle tends to be fixed on the most unhelpful of spots. Not even the special features (Which are unlocked after beating the game) are good enough to even forgive such hardships that are forced upon the player.If you loved the movie, you may enjoy the game. However, this game is the only way you're going to be able to immerse yourself into a playable version of such a beautiful and amazing movie.Of course, you could have just picked a Deniro movie instead. |
tt0409184 | Les poupées russes | The film begins with friends from L'Auberge espagnole meeting in Saint Petersburg at the wedding of Wendy's brother, William. Xavier begins to reminisce about the events of the past several years.
Xavier and Martine have split up and Martine has since had a child and become a committed environmental activist. For financial reasons, Xavier becomes a writer for pulp romantic novels and a ghostwriter, writing the autobiographies of celebrities. Martine criticizes his pulp novel work as being unrealistic and corny. Despite agreeing with this, Xavier only replies that he earns good money. In Paris, Xavier has a brief affair with Kassia, a sales clerk from Senegal. When Xavier's grandfather asks about Xavier's fiancée, he asks his friend Isabelle, who is a lesbian, to pose as his fiancée.
In Paris, Xavier runs into Wendy, who has become an accomplished television writer. She is currently involved in an unhealthy relationship. A TV assignment later takes Xavier to London where he had requested to work with Wendy. Xavier is given the chance to ghost write an autobiography of Celia, a successful young model, whom he visits on a number of occasions. On one of these visits Xavier and Celia kiss before sleeping together while looking at the boats on the River Seine. The film shows Xavier and Wendy's attraction to each other growing before developing into a physical relationship. Xavier fights with Wendy's boyfriend which results in Xavier throwing him out.
Wendy's brother William has fallen in love with Natasha, a Russian ballerina. He spends a year learning Russian to try to win her over. He succeeds and moves to be with her in Saint Petersburg. Xavier and Wendy go to Russia to stay with William and Natasha. Natasha takes them to see the Street of Ideal Proportions, a street on which the buildings are the same height as the street's width and the street's length is ten times its width. Xavier and Wendy's relationship is going well until Celia calls Xavier and asks him to visit her as she is staying in Moscow. Xavier goes to visit Celia, telling Wendy that he has to see a publisher in Moscow. Xavier does not know that Wendy had looked at his cellphone and seen that the caller was another woman, not the publisher. Saying goodbye at the train station, Wendy tells Xavier what she has seen and explains her true feelings. Xavier is stunned and doesn't move from the train as Wendy walks away crying.
In Moscow, Celia and Xavier meet up and sleep together again but some of the attraction between them has gone. Later at a club she asks Xavier to get her a glass of milk. While he is at the bar, Celia runs into some old friends and reluctantly goes with them to another party. After failing to contact one another that night, Xavier and Celia never meet again.
Celia can be seen to represent an ideal woman, the type of unattainable fantasy that Xavier has been seeking his whole life. Xavier is aware that, like the Street of Ideal Proportions, she is ultimately uninteresting in her perfection. Xavier subsequently returns to St. Petersburg but finds that Wendy is avoiding him as she is convinced that he had an affair while in Moscow.
Towards the end of the film, the scene returns to William and Natasha marrying in front of family members and the characters introduced in L'Auberge Espagnole. Wendy's divorced parents begin to squabble during the reception. Wendy has been avoiding Xavier during the time leading up to the wedding, but she is unhappy at seeing her parents arguing and lets Xavier comfort her. He apologises for his past behaviour and the film ends with Xavier and Wendy embracing. | storytelling, flashback | train | wikipedia | He said that it was directed by the man who made "L'Auberge espagnole", which he liked a lot, but he didn't think that this movie would be a sequel to that one and I believed him.
When he finally finds a girl that he likes, he always believes that there is something better out there and not knowing when to stop looking for more, he is unable to keep them with him...I really liked this movie a lot and I guess there is a very good explanation for it.
Next to the story, this movie also offers some very fine acting by all the actors, but what else can you expect from people like Audrey Tatou, Cécile de France,...
While some will probably miss the whole mixing of nationalities, we can enjoy the fact that the characters are more developed, the story is in the continuity of the first one, and some references are made to L'auberge, but they seem natural.The girls are beautiful,(Xavier is a really lucky guy), the English girl playing Wendy is even more beautiful than in the first one and the fact that we travel so much during this film is the cherry on the cake.For a very good moment, go see this one..
Unbridled lust is not a reliable indicator of the hopelessly complex nature of 'love,' but when you watch movies like Russian Dolls, you'd think it was.
In the same way that L'Auberge Espagnole dealt with the difficulties of career, school, and growing up in general, Russian Dolls deals with love and growing older.
I think the great thing about both of these movies is that so many people can look at these characters- especially Xavier- and say, "Yes!
Humm i don't want to spoil the story, but let me tell you that when you come out the theaters, you'll understand why this movie's called " Russian dolls" ^^ Xavier's life is a mess, he is us !
Of course, the movie does not avoid "love-clichés", but they are quite rare and it deserves to have l"Auberge Espagnole" as a father.
So, here's one of the most anticipated movies of the year 2005 and the sequel to one of the biggest French hits in 2002: "l'Auberge Espagnole" which also acts as a commendable and valuable ambassador for French cinema abroad, "les Poupees Russes".Lucid, the director Cédric Klapisch didn't opt for "l'Auberge Espagnole 2".
It's up to the audience to think about them on account of Klapisch's piece of work.If Klapisch had built "l'Auberge Espagnole" from start to finish with as a source, his memories of cinema student in New York and her sister's who lived one year in Spain with other European fellows under the same roof, here one has to look in Truffaut's filmography for his credentials, more specifically the Antoine Doinel saga.
"Les Poupees Russes" looks like a sequel of a little maladjusted play lets in which Xavier tries to order a life eventually beyond his control.
Bonjour Paris!".After the bitter memory left by Klapisch's adventure in the film noir with "Ni Pour Ni Contre (Bien Au Contraire), 2003", the year 2005 saw him on clover again with a forte he had tapped in "le Péril Jeune" (1994): a right chronicle on young people of different ages and an accurate appraisal of their feelings.
Sometimes we search for love, sometimes, like for William and Natacha you just know right away.There were many great visual moments, but certainly there was one of the best "hand holding" scene's in a movie.
This is funny in that fast, off the wall way "Amelie" was funny, though here I think it gets another level of complexity that not only makes you pay attention, but rewards your attention.Leading man Romain Duris is subtle and charming (and what American girls would call "cute"), and he the thread through time in a long multi-tasking flashback with lots of editing and framing liberties.
For a scenario writing job, he goes to London to work in collaboration with Wendy.After the "Auberge Espagnole", Cédric Klapisch shows his talents again directing great actors such as Romain Duris, Audrey Tautou and Kelly Reilly.When the movie was over, I thought that it was one of the best love stories I've ever seen.
The difference between l'Auberge Espagnole and the sequel makes a good indicator for how uninteresting life becomes in the real world after school.
If "L'Auberge espagnole" was" Wilhelm Meister's Apprenticeship," "Russian Dolls" is "Wilhelm Meister's Travels." As someone who has actually suffered through those novels, which have to be among the dullest ever written, I can appreciate these modern film renditions, both of which convey the same basic points and are far better to sit through.A point worth considering, one that was hammered home with the architectural analogy, is that the ideal woman is not a woman, but art itself, something Goethe referred to as the "eternal feminine."These movies are smarter than they're given credit for.
Whereas in the original people from all over the world came together in Barcelona, this time Xavier goes to a lot of different locations (Paris, London, St. Petersburg, Moscow).
Apart from Xavier, the focus of the story lies on people who were only side characters in "L'auberge espagnole" (Wendy, Martine, Isabelle, Kevin), but there stories don't necessarily go anywhere.
That's not a bad thing, but it makes "Les poupées russes" seem disjointed, as if it didn't have one continuous plot, but is a mere sequence of individual scenes.Another thing that took me out of the movie, is the way the characters talk.
I'd love to go back and see the original version with subtitles, as "L'auberge espagnole" was also much better that way.However, what cannot be excused by translation is the movie's visual, off key humor, that really sometimes misses the mark this time around.
Wacky little fantasy moments do work here and there, but more often than not, they seem forced into the movie to match the style of the original.One thing that I always liked about Xavier, is that he can be a selfish jerk at times, but still isn't treated as the bad guy in the story.
Much the same way, Xavier is forgiven this time, quickly and without explanation the movie just rushes to its end."Les poupées russes" is not entirely successful, and because of the aforementioned lack of storyline, it does drag on a bit.
This may be the reason director Cédric Klapisch gets back to his set of characters from the 'L'Auberge Espagnole' and takes them a few years later in another set of romantic comedy adventures set in Paris, London and St. Petersburg.
I did not like too much 'L'Auberge Espagnole' either, it looked to me like some kind of American college comedy taken into Europe, but at least it had the common background of the rented apartment and a few good although stereotype comic moments.
On the whole i do think this was much more watchable than the first.However, as in the first movie (L'Auberge Espagnole), i had little sympathy for the main character, Xavier.
I think the movie has succeeded in depicting the life, the love that intertwines with it, the things that make us different, and those that transcend our cultural and personal differences.When I first saw L'auberge espagnole, I was embarking on an education journey that would span two continents in the cohort of people from all around the world.
L'auberge espagnole was a great prequel to my experience.In this sequel named "Les Poupées Russes", I find myself again firmly planted in the midst of the characters.
In his thirties, Xavier and others' confused relationships reflect a bewilderment in that age group, as some choose to settle down, and some continue to seek the ephemeral.As for national boundaries, it is interesting that the story now depicts a different set of frontiers for Europe (before the recent constitutional crisis), the UK and Russia.
Everyone is looking for a better life with love and happiness.Ultimately, what makes it all work is what William has done in the movie.
Romain Duris is still great in it, and like in The Spanish apartment, what makes this movie great is: you easily put yourself in the story.
As "L'Auberge espagnole" took place principally in Barcelona (Spain), "Les poupées russes" takes place in Paris, London and St-Petersburg.So, you have to see it: it's just great!Oh, one more thing, I forgot to tell you that in "The Russian Dolls", Kelly Reilly (who plays Wendy) is great: she acts so well and she is meant for playing Wendy: she is beautiful, clever and has a lot of charm.
I am sure she is the one who can make French liking (perhaps loving!) England.Yes it is a sequel, but it is not necessary to have seen "L'auberge espagnole" to see "The Russian dolls".
Russian DOLLS ('Les Poupées russes') is the full of love folllowup by Cédric Klapisch to his highly successful 2002 film 'L'Auberge Espagnole', the film that tossed multinational young people together in a Barcelona apartment and watched them interact and create some sense out of the havoc that was their lives.
If the film is too much in love with itself, (the self-indulgent multiple split screen viewing and back and forth pacing tends to be a bit cutesy), in the end there is so much fun and wry wisdom to spread around that many of the holes in the script can be forgiven.The story focuses on events five years after the Barcelona doings in 'L'Auberge Espagnole' and yet as the main character Xavier Rousseau (Romain Duris) narrates the current tale he finds the need for flashbacks to explain current circumstances.
William (Kevin Bishop), the bigot from before who labeled roommate Tobias (Barnaby Metschurat) as a Nazi, has smoothed out a bit and in fact has found love in a Russian girl Natacha (Evguenya Obraztsova), a Russian ballet dancer who lives in St. Petersburg and the current story is supposed to be about their wedding in St. Petersburg which will also be a reunion for all the roommates from Barcelona.
Xavier toys with a beautiful black girl Kassia (Aïssa Maïga) and is rejected, and just about the time when Xavier feels as though he will never find the right girl ('You just keep opening them like Russian nested dolls hoping that the one in the center will be your choice'), his script is picked up by BBC and he flies to London to work with Wendy (Kelly Reilly - William's attractive sister, unsuccessful in finding a decent mate) and voila!
A sequel to The Spanish Apartment, you don't really have to watch that in order to enjoy Russian Dolls, even though most of the characters come back in this one.
The protagonist is Xavier (Romain Duris), a down-and-out writer who's looking for his next big break, no matter if it's a cheesy love story that he's tasked to work with, or ghostwriting memoirs of celebrities.
Business brings Xavier and Wendy together (Kelly Reilly, in a lot of movies lately, like Mrs Henderson Presents, Pride and Prejudice), and love blossoms between the two, despite initially starting off as platonic, and Wendy still being stuck in a relationship that she doesn't have the strength to walk away from.
It might seem that the story's the usual of love, finding love, losing it, and all the clichés of a romance flick, but with an added punch.It's also interesting to note the different apartments that Xavier encounters, from his ex's home, to Isabelle's bachelor pad, from an ordinary London home in Wendy's, to the luxurious French suite of Celia's.
That movie ended on a happy and idealistic note, with a newly self-aware Xavier (Romain Duris) realizing that he'd studied economics for all the wrong reasons, and that he really wanted to be a writer.
And yet he doesn't seem to think there's anything wrong with this.In other words, "The Russian Dolls" is another story of Xavier's growing self-awareness, this time with higher stakes.
He can still act like the hooligan he was in "L'Auberge Espagnole," but his love for a Russian ballerina has made him mature, devoted, and truly romanticeverything that Xavier is not.
He makes Xavier charming enough that we want to follow his story, but doesn't apologize for the irritating and stupid things this character can do.Funny, romantic, and just deep enough, "The Russian Dolls" ought to have wide appeal.
It just might be the perfect date movie: the relationships presented in the film cover a wide range of male-female interactions, and you're likely to see yourself in at least one of the characters..
With my colleague, we choose this movie by hazard and I am finally surprised to see how close this movie spoke to me.This is a sequel of a great success in France, and even thought I still don't have seen the first one, people kept telling me that it was already my autobiography: same name,Xavier, same job in public administration, same community life abroad
Now, the character grows older (as me), lives in Paris (as me), welcomes his European friends in Paris (as me) and visits others abroad, essentially in London (as me).
This french film is a sequel of L'Auberge Espagnol, a good film about a bunch of European students sharing a small apartment in Barcelona.
I would not recommend a purchase.Romain Duris (Xavier) - 10/10 - Amazing performance once again.Kelly Reilly (Wendy) - 8/10 - Very good.Audrey Tautou (Martine) - 8/10 -Very good.Cédric Klapisch - 7/10 - Great movie, which would have benefited from not being dubbed a sequel to L'Auberge, and less funky camera editing twists..
It's just a two hour long teenage soap opera, where all the characters are looking for a 'right' person that, for some reason, they can't find.This pseudo-grown up reflexion about love ends up as a boring and uninspired cliché with no deep meaning, an insult to any person who enjoyed The Spanish Apartment and has already surpassed the confusions of his early youth..
Its multi-lingual picture of the international student life in Barcelona went down easy, and Russian Dolls is the sequel, again featuring Romain Duris, Audrey Tautou, Cécile de France, Kelly Reilly, et al.
Russian Dolls picks up Xavier (Duris) five years later, now a well-paid writer, and focuses more on Auberge's most provocative character, Wendy's volatile brother William (Kevin Bishop).
Xavier briefly dates a cute black girl, uses his lesbian ex-roommate Isabelle (Cécile de France) as a stand-in "fiancée" to meet his 98-year-old grandpa (Pierre Gérald), has a quick romance with would-be memoirist twenty-something super-model Celia (Lucy Gordon) and homes in on Wendy (Kelly Reilly).
This is strictly movie land, and it would be a mistake to take any of Russian Dolls too seriously, but Klapisch, who had five years to ponder this sequel but likes to improvise his script from day to day during shooting, knows how to keep the ball rolling.
I quoted "realises" because it's less "realises" than it is finding himself an excuses to get back to the previous chick.There are in this movie some of the most Dumbest reflections about love and relationships that I've heard in my life ( for example : you have to "try" every girl you can get your hands on to find the "one"...
While it had it's moments, it suffered from many contrived situations and accompanying dialogue, as when Romain Duris' Xavier is put in the uncomfortable situation of his ex girlfriend - Audrey Tatou's character of Martine, unexpectedly crossing paths with his current love interest, a shopgirl named Kassia played by the captivating Aïssa Maïga.
In "Les poupées russes", the main character of both films, Xavier (Duris), has coped well with his post-Erasmus nostalgia.
Xavier is nearly thirty and his life still badly needs focus.The film follows Xavier from Paris to London to Moscow to Saint-Petersburg, examining relationships with his ex-Erasmus friends (many of whom look like they got a hold on life better than himself), his ex-girlfriend Martine (Tautou) and various new lovers.
5 years having passed in the characters' lives, the approach of the movie is to show how they are after such a long time, in different situations, places and stages of personal development, instead of trying to force them into a new Erasmus experience.
In my opinion, this was a very successful idea, because while we meet all the characters from the previous film, we don't have to struggle with the unpleasant feeling that we are being told a story we already know.The actors, I think, are just perfect, personally I loved Roman Duris, Kelly Reilly, Cécile De France; and Kevin Bishop, of course, is a pleasant surprise, but the others are more than OK, too.
We only learn this near the end, when the main character, Xavier, compares life and love to Russian Dolls.
In fact, the story is mainly of Xavier's trying to make sense out of life, out of his job as a writer, and trying to figure out who he is supposed to love.The story moves around to three main locations, Paris, London, and Moscow.
Romain Duris is very good as the young writer Xavier Rousseau.
Audrey Tautou is also good in a minor role as Martine, one of Xavier's former loves.There actually is a Russian story also.
In the end, Xavier realizes who he really is, and what life and love are really about, and settles in with Wendy, the writer..
Continuing where L'AUBERGE ESPAGNOLE left off, Russian DOLLS fast-forwards five years into the future and presents us a Xavier we thought we wouldn't be seeing: the professional who has a sordid job writing bad soap opera, far from the successful novelist he had originally planned to be, his life mired in confusion and hovering immaturity.
However, this is mainly Romain Durin, Kelly Reilly, and in a lesser way, Cecile de France's movie -- a fragmented soap opera that displays the continuing adventures of these young people as they move through life and try to find relative happiness in the adult world.. |
tt0051393 | The Badlanders | In 1898, two men are released from the Arizona Territorial Prison. One, mining engineer and geologist Peter Van Hoek (Ladd), the "Dutchman," tells the warden he was framed for the robbery of a gold shipment from the Lisbon Mine. The other, John McBain (Borgnine), killed Bascomb, the man who cheated him out of his land.
The two men head separately to the town of Prescott, where neither is welcome. The marshal, whom Van Hoek accuses of framing him, orders him to leave town on the next stagecoach, at sundown the next day. At the hotel, the Dutchman meets guest Ada Winton (Claire Kelly), the lonely mistress of Cyril Lounsberry (Kent Smith).
McBain rescues a Mexican woman, Anita (Katy Jurado), when men accost her on the street. Though Leslie (Adam Williams), the deputy, saves McBain's life in the ensuing fight, he gives McBain the same deadline to leave, even though McBain's folks settled the township. A grateful Anita invites McBain to stay in her place, and the two are attracted to each other.
The Dutchman gets Sample (Robert Emhardt) to introduce him to Lounsberry. Lounsberry had married Bascomb's homely sister for her money. Van Hoek offers to sell him gold ore from an extremely rich deposit that only he knows about. It is worth at least $200,000, but Van Hoek will be satisfied with half that amount in cash. He lies when Lounsberry jokingly asks if it is from his wife's Lisbon Mine. The prospect of being a rich man in his own right and leaving for Europe with Ada makes Lounsberry agree.
Van Hoek recruits a reluctant McBain and demolition expert Vincente (Nehemiah Persoff) for his scheme. They time it so the explosion needed to extract the ore goes off as the same time as the regular blasting. They get the ore out, but when Van Hoek and McBain take it to Lounsberry, he tries to double cross them. Leslie is killed and McBain injured in the ensuing gunfight. Van Hoek takes McBain to Anita's place and digs out the bullet, then leaves in a wagon with the gold. However, Lounsberry, Sample and their men soon corner him in town during a fiesta. McBain goes to the Dutchman's aid. Then Anita has her many Mexican friends surround and disarm the villains. Van Hoek entrusts McBain and Anita with the gold, telling them he will meet them later in Durango to split it up equally. Then, keeping his word, he leaves on the stagecoach with fellow passenger Ada. | sadist | train | wikipedia | Two great stars , Ladd and Borgnine , play two ex-cons who plan a major heist on a gold mine.
A virtual Western remake of the notorious crime drama The Asphalt Jungle by John Huston that was based on the novel written by W.R. Burnett , but you'd certainly never prefer it to this classic Film Noir .Turn of the century Nevada, 1888 Arizona Federal Prision , Ladd and Borgnine are two inmates who get their freedom .
But Ladd seeks vendetta from the people of the small mining town that accused him wrongly , while Borgnine wants to go straight .
The plot is simple in the wake of Noir Films , it has two ex convicts who plan a gold robbery against Kent Smith who cheated them out of their share in a gold mine ; meanwhile , Alan Ladd and Ernest Borgnine fall for two beautiful women , Claire Kelly and Katy Jurado .
Main cast is pretty good such as the sober Alan Ladd and sensational Ernest Borgnine as the tough and honorable ex-inmate.
Delmer was a cool Hollywood filmmaker who shot all kinds of genres , as Noir : Dark passage, The red house ; Drama: Parrish , A summer place , Never let me go ,Rome adventure ; Adventure : Treasure of the golden condor , Demetrius and the gladiators ; Wartime : Destination Tokyo, Task force and specially Westerns such as The hanging tree , Drum beat , Cowboy , 3:10 to Yuma, Jubal , and his most known film Broken Arrow with James Stewart..
One of Ladd's best later films, with a fine Borgnine match.
Vividly filmed in Cinemascope in the best late-50's MGM style, this loose remake of The Asphalt Jungle in a Western setting has some good acting and takes a different road.
The relationship of Alan Ladd and Ernest Borgnine is consistently interesting and unpredictable throughout, and Katy Jurado offers a standout performance.
This is the kind of film that you want to find when you sit down on a Sunday afternoon to have some "TV time".Alad Ladd is as solid and dependable as ever with his usual "cool and unruffled" persona and is probably the least effective of all of the leads!Ernest Borgnine and Katy Jurado initially look like an unlikely pairing but as the film progresses they "gel" more and more.
For me the two are the real stand-out performers in this film.I don't want to say too much more on the other characters for fear of giving plot away but suffice to say there is not a stinker amongst them although I have to say that I felt Claire Smith as Ada Winton was a bit invisible to the point where I actually thought a the end of the film "Oh, is she back then; where did she come from?"One thing that has puzzled me however is who was the actress that played Vincente's wife?
This is one of Ladds better films, Bourgnine always adds to a film, Katy Jerado of "High Noon" fame is just great, and the rest of the cast work well.
If they ever restore this, and it is worth restoring, I would have a new soundtrack done for it.Still, this is a good film, a great western, and worth a watch.
You would not see Alan Ladd playing more complex characters, like Richard Widmark, Gary Cooper, Glenn Ford or James Stewart, which were in other Daves' westerns.
Ernest Borgnine and Katy Jurado give the best performances of the film, both play people who have had a terrible life but find hope in each other's arms.
Whilst watching The Badlanders, it struck me just how similar most of what was playing out was to one of your more typically hard boiled crime novellas; indeed, further reading reveals the film's roots are wholly embedded within the realms of crime fiction transfused with heist genre tendencies, the film effectively a remake of 1950's The Asphalt Jungle which itself was adapted from a book of the same name.
The film's structure of somewhat hardened folks let loose from jail, but with differing sets of ideas in how to live out the remainder of one's life, before going on to get involved with rather maddeningly attractive women; the grief which comes with that and the promise of the robbing of some riches which is mingling around in the area, you might say is wholly generic in the typical sense.
The transporting of the tale form whatever decrepit urbanised locale you like, indeed a proverbial jungle formed out of concrete, and back to the Wild West does nothing to cease the pleasures garnered out of such generic conventions; The Badlanders eventually formulating into an absorbing piece balancing these crooks clashing in their post-incarceration existences, with their plannings of heists born out of devilish back-stories, with the betrayals that might naturally unfold post-heist.The Hellish truths which loomed over most of James Mangold's 2007 3:10 to Yuma remake, and most probably the majority of both Delmer Daves' original and the initial novel, is here, in this film, thrust upon us without much in the way of pleasantries.
Delmer Daves is back, his 1958 film The Badlanders plunging us into those realities of Yuma jail by plunging its two principal characters into the deep end of grief and strife as a result of being on the inside.
We're at the back end of the nineteenth century; the searing sun in this, the dusty; grotty locale of Arizona searing down onto that of both its chief players: Ernest Borgnine's John McBain and Alan Ladd's Peter Van Hoek, nicknamed "Dutch".Both men are released on account of their sentences running out at once, Dutch after a stretch that saw a corrupt marshal plant evidence onto his person that saw him put away and McBain because of his amoral lifestyle which saw him put away, but during which his Yuma stretch has reformed him.
Plans formulate, McBain appears to come back on board when he cannot find work and the tension is cranked up when the crew Dutch eventually enlists through a corrupt local official named Lounsberry (Smith) are given a mere few days to execute the heist following an interaction with a lawman giving them a strict ultimatum to get out of town.At stake is the overbearing threat of returning to Yuma, those jibes riddled with hostilities and unpleasantness that the guards uttered upon the men's release still ringing in the ear as the reality of life on the inside in those opening sequence resonates.
The love stories and promise of happier times born out of the obtaining of the gold act well as items utilised in creating a greater sense of urgency, McBain's Mexican partner effectively forced into going back to the life fraught with what came with it if everything does not succeed, whereas the film playfully toys as to whether Lounsberry is to be trusted as the job itself undergoes numerous hold ups and problematic situations which threaten to scupper the plans of a group of people we have come to be rather fond of.
It was my first acquaintance with both Alan Ladd and Ernest Borgnine.
Delmar Daves is a pretty good director of westerns and action is what they got here.Mind you The Badlanders is a good film for the Saturday afternoon trade, but it was done so much better before.Alan Ladd is Peter Van Hoek, mining engineer who has a heist in mind of his former employers.
He's looking for confederates and he enlists a former cell-mate from Yuma prison who is played by Ernest Borgnine.
The Badlanders is a perfect example of the kind of films he was doing after Shane, routine action flicks which could easily have been done as the plot of any number of television westerns that were sprouting all over the place at that time.Ernest Borgnine was still on the crest of his career from his Oscar winning performance in Marty three years before.
He even got his then wife Katy Jurado in this film as his love interest.Nice cast that's familiar to western lovers round out the film.
While it retains much of the strengths of Burnett's script (the crisp dialogue, the class structure of the underworld) it benefits from the Western setting; the gold heist is engaging, the women are better integrated into the tale, the threat is more present.) Alan Ladd, while a bit puffy at this stage in his life, is still charming and clever enough for the lead.
The Badlanders is directed by Delmer Daves (Broken Arrow/3:10 to Yuma) and it stars Alan Ladd, Ernest Borgnine, Claire Kelly & Katy Jurado.
It's based on W.R. Burnett's novel The Asphalt Jungle, only with a Western variation as opposed to John Huston's film noir movie of the same name from 1950.
The plot follows Peter Van Hoek, known as the Dutchman (Ladd), and John McBain (Borgnine), as they get released from Arizona Territorial Prison in Yuma in 1898.
An intricate plan involving stealing gold from the Lisbon Mine is hatched, it's a chance to get rich, get revenge or maybe get killed?It's really just a solid piece of film, Ladd & Borgnine play it right, and with Daves adding his customary flecks of humour, it's never less than entertaining.
Except for a good old punch up as Borgnine tackles three rebel rouser's types, and the inevitable double cross based finale, the film is more concerned with forming bonds and educating in the way of getting gold out the mine.
Alan Ladd plays the role of the Dutchman who was framed for stealing gold and is a very educated man with lots of experience in mining for gold.
Ernest Borgnine, (John McBain) is in prison for killing a man and they are both released from prison together.
There are plenty of men in town watching what John McBain and Dutchman are up to and they run into some very difficult situations which will keep you guessing just how this film will eventually end.
Recently released from prison, Alan Ladd and Ernest Borgnine head to the town where each was done wrong years before.
Delmer Daves directs this enjoyable western remake of The Asphalt Jungle.
Alan Ladd is good in what is probably my favorite film of his post-Shane.
Ernest Borgnine and Katy Jurado steal the movie playing very sympathetic likable characters.
"The Badlanders" stars Alan Ladd and Ernest Borgnine and the film is about two ex-cons who are out to pull off a gold robbery.
However, I think Borgnine steals more than the gold, as his performance easily outshines Ladd--making this supporting role the main focus for the audience.
With Borgnine, however, he has a romance in the film (with future wife, Katy Jurardo) and he is very good in these scenes.When the story begins, the Dutchman (Ladd) and Mac (Borgnine) are getting out of prison.
Most heist films are good and it's an excellent genre, but this one particular excels due to the location (the old west) and Borgnine's terrific acting.
Just about any scene involving Ernest Borgnine and Katy Jurado, for example.
Some of the twists in the plot are also quite predictable.This said, the movie moves along at a good pace, the action scenes are good, and the ending wraps up the story nicely.Good performance by Alan Ladd in the lead role.
Good support from Ernest Borgnine, Katy Jurado and Claire Kelly.
Two ex-cons plan a gold heist from a mine that was stolen from one of them.The movie's uneven, with several compelling parts (the gang assault on Anita {Jurado}, the overhead shots of the mobs coming together).
At this stage of his career, Ladd was apparently drinking heavily and unfortunately it shows.Director Daves was responsible for a number of superior westerns during this period, including 3:10 to Yuma (1957), and Jubal (1956), among others.
It's Delmer Daves' next to last western and it shows ;even if Ladd and Borgnine make a good pairing,we begin to feel in "badlanders " what will come next;the scenes between Borgnine and the always reliable Katy Jurado (the hooker with a big heart) are full of finer feelings and Daves seems more interested in filming them than the -suspenseful,however-sequences in the mine ;after "the hanging tree" ,an ultimate western which also contains elements of melodrama ,all his career will consist of pure melodramatic stuff ("Parish" and "Susan Slade " are good examples,and quite entertaining and they were heralded by "kings go forth" )"badlanders "holds his movie balanced ,particularly in the scene when the Mexicans intervene in favor of the two heroes ;it seems that Ladd's love affair was botched intentionally or else the western buffs would have been disappointed;you can prefer,nevertheless, works such as "broken arrow" "3:10 to Yuma" or "the last wagon"..
As a western remake of "The Asphalt Jungle," THE BADLANDERS falls far short of the mark.
Instead, director Delmer Daves manages to keep the tale fairly taut amid western locales with the usual assortment of good and bad motives for his leading players.Ladd gives his usual self-assured portrayal as a man unjustly serving time in prison, but it's Ernest Borgnine who has the strongest role and makes the most of it.
Furthermore, his teaming with Katy Jurado (his then wife in real life) makes for some of the story's best scenes.Filmed in CinemaScope and Technicolor, with good use of all the location photography, it's really little more than a standard western with some good action scenes and a capable cast, including Kent Smith as a silky smooth villain and Anthony Caruso in another one of his tough guy roles.
It's neat how Alan Ladd pulls a slug out of Ernest Borgnine.
*** The Badlanders (1958) Delmer Daves ~ Alan Ladd, Ernest Borgnine, Katy Jurado.
Ernest Borgnine and Alan Ladd made a great combo and their friendship, which began in Yuma Teritoral Prison, proved beneficial to both as the story develops.
Katy Jurado does a good job with her part and the relationship between her and Borgnine is well-written and played.
Here we have Alan Ladd as "The Dutchman", educated criminal who wants to steal a pile of gold.
Overall, the film is pretty satisfying with a couple of good looking women to keep our heros busy and one who helps save them in the end..
Opening in Yuma prison this western gets off to a gritty start as we see a prisoner being flogged; he isn't one of our protagonists though; they are Peter 'The Dutchman' Van Hoek, a mining engineer framed for a robbery at the mine he worked in and John 'Mac' McBain, the conned out of the land the mine was built on.
Alan Ladd and the recently deceased Ernest Borgnine do fine jobs as The Dutchman and Mac respectively.
As with most westerns there is some female interest for the protagonists; Katy Jurado plays a Mexican woman who is rescued by Mac when set upon by thugs; this helps establish that his character is a good man at heart.
Alan Ladd is one of the greatest western film stars ( which is why he was elected to the Western Performers Hall Of Fame in 2017), and 'The Badlanders' offers perhaps his lightest performance ever ( I have never seen Ladd smile so much in a movie and his dialogue with Ernest Borgnine is lighthearted and v ery well done).
I know this is a remake of 'The Asphalt Jungle' ( a very different setting and outcome then here), but if you like Ladd ( one of my favorites), westerns, or "Buddy Films" ( which this certainly is) you will like it.
3: Anita ( Katy Jurado), a Mexican prostitute in Arizona ( it was filmed in Tucson) who.has a huge heart towards others.
Spoilers Ahead: The story involves stealing gold from a mine by "The Dutchman" and McBain and how ( with the help of Anita) overcome a double cross by Cyrul.Lounsberry ( Kent Smith), the husband of the owner of the mine).
At the end they get the gold and keep it ( unlike 'The Asphalt Jungle') and because Anita saved both 'The Dutchman' and McBain, she got a full share, and she and McBain will get married, while 'The Dutchman' gets Ada. Again a must for Ladd fans.
SYNOPSIS: Alan Ladd plays a Dutchman (!) who wants to rob a mine in Prescott, Arizona.
But Ernest falls in love with an attractive Mexican girl, Katy Jurado.COMMENT: Well below what you would expect of a Daves western, especially as it was made so close to "Three Ten to Yuma" and "The Last Wagon".
Of course, Alan Ladd also exerted some influence on the movie, insisting on the hiring of the noted film noir cameraman, John Seitz, who has certainly contrived some striking effects.
It stars Alan Ladd, late in his career and looking it, and Ernest Borgnine as ex-convicts who, at least initially, don't want anything to do with one another but end up working together.The film opens in a Yuma prison camp where Ladd has 10 months left on his sentence, but Borgnine has only one more day to serve.
After Borgnine leaves, the warden asks Ladd why he never acted like a prisoner when he was inside.
Both of these men work for Lounsberry and Ladd wants Sample to arrange a meeting for him with the big man.
While Ladd is meeting with Sample, Borgnine comes in.
Meanwhile, Ladd gets his meeting with Lounsberry and shows him the gold ore sample.
You really have to sit down and think things through before you can screw up a film noir classic like John Huston's "The Asphalt Jungle" (1949).
Ernest Borgnine and Katy Jurado aren't bad.
(Boom, and a cloud of dust, masking who's who.) And during this supposedly tense scene, the music pounds, and it sounds like it's from a horror film, not a Western drama, as if that vampire had dragged it along behind him.It's not a lousy movie.
It looks like a perfunctory Western movie.It begins with punishment being dished out in Yuma Territorial Prison in Arizona. |
tt0085101 | The Thorn Birds | The epic begins with Meghann "Meggie" Cleary, a four-year-old girl living in New Zealand in the early twentieth century, the only daughter of Paddy, an Irish farm labourer, and Fee, his harassed but aristocratic wife. Although Meggie is a beautiful child with curly red-gold hair, she receives little coddling and must struggle to hold her own against her numerous older brothers. Of these brothers, her favourite is the eldest, Frank, a rebellious young man who is unwillingly preparing himself for the blacksmith's trade. He is much shorter than his brothers, but very strong; also, unlike the other Clearys, he has black hair and eyes.
Paddy is poor, but has a wealthy sister, Mary Carson, who lives in Australia on an enormous sheep station called Drogheda. One day, Paddy receives a letter from Mary offering him a job on her estate, Drogheda.
In Drogheda, Meggie meets Ralph de Bricassart, a young, capable, and ambitious priest who, as punishment for insulting a bishop, has been relegated to a remote parish in the town of Gillanbone, near Drogheda. Ralph has befriended Mary, hoping a hefty enough bequest from her to the Catholic Church might liberate him from his exile. Ralph is strikingly handsome, "a beautiful man"; Mary, who does not bother to conceal her desire for him, often goes to great lengths to see if he can be induced to break his vows. Ralph blandly shrugs off these attentions and continues his visits. Meanwhile, he cares for all the Clearys and soon learns to cherish beautiful but forlorn little Meggie. Meggie, in return, makes Ralph the centre of her life.
Frank's relationship with his father, Paddy, has never been peaceful. The two vie for Fee's attention, and Frank resents the many pregnancies Paddy makes her endure. One day, after Fee, now in her forties, reveals she is again pregnant, the two men quarrel violently and Paddy blurts out the truth about Frank: he is not Paddy's biological son. Long ago, Fee had been the adored only daughter of a prominent citizen. Then she had an affair with a married politician, and the result, Frank, was already eighteen months old when her mortified father married her off to Paddy. Because he resembles her lost love, Fee has always loved Frank more than her other children. To the sorrow of Meggie and Fee, when Frank learns that Paddy is only his stepfather, he runs away to become a prizefighter. Fee later gives birth to twin boys, James and Patrick (Jims and Patsy), but shows little interest in them. Shortly afterward, Meggie's beloved little brother, Hal, dies.
With Frank gone and Hal dead, Meggie clings to Ralph more than ever. This goes largely unnoticed because Ralph has now been her mentor for several years; however, as she ripens into womanhood, some begin to question their close relationship, including Ralph and Meggie themselves. Mary Carson has also noticed their changing relationship, and from motives of jealousy mingled with Machiavellian cruelty, she devises a plan to separate Ralph from Meggie by tempting him with his heart's desire: a high place in the Church hierarchy. Although her will of record leaves the bulk of her estate to Paddy, she quietly writes a new one, making the Roman Catholic Church the main beneficiary and Ralph the executor.
In the new will, the true magnitude of Mary's wealth is finally revealed. Drogheda is not the centre of her fortune as Ralph and Paddy have long believed but is merely a hobby, a diversion from her true financial interests. Mary's wealth is derived from a vast multi-national financial empire worth over thirteen million pounds (about A$200 million in modern terms). The sheer size of Mary's bequest will virtually guarantee Ralph's rapid rise in the church. She also makes sure that after she dies only Ralph, at first, will know of the new will – forcing him to choose between Meggie and his own ambition. She also provides for her disinherited brother, promising him and all his grandchildren a home on Drogheda as long as any of them live.
At Mary's seventy-fifth birthday party, Ralph goes to great lengths to avoid Meggie, now seventeen and dressed in a beautiful rose-pink evening gown; later, he explains that others might not see his attention as innocent. Mary dies in the night. Ralph duly learns of the new will. He sees at once the subtle genius of Mary's plan and, although he weeps and calls her "a disgusting old spider" he takes the new will to her lawyer without delay. The lawyer, scandalised, urges Ralph to destroy the will, but to no avail. The bequest of thirteen million pounds works its expected magic, and Ralph soon leaves to begin his rapid advance in the Church.
Before he leaves, Meggie confesses her love for him; after the birthday party, Ralph finds her crying in the family cemetery and they share a passionate kiss, but Ralph refuses her because of his duties as a priest and begs Meggie to find a suitable partner. The Clearys learn that Frank has been convicted of murder after killing someone in a fight. He spends three decades in prison.
Paddy and his son Stuart are killed; Paddy dies in a lightning fire, and Stu is killed by a wild boar shortly after finding his father's body. Meanwhile, Ralph, unaware of Paddy and Stu's deaths, is on his way to Drogheda and suffers minor injuries when his plane bogs in the mud. As Meggie tends his wounds, she tries to seduce him and is rebuffed. Ralph remains at Drogheda only long enough to conduct the funerals.
Three years later, a new ranch worker named Luke O'Neill begins to court Meggie. Although his motives are more mercenary than romantic, she marries him because he looks a little bit like Ralph, but mainly because he is not Catholic and wants little to do with religion-her own way of getting back at Ralph. She soon realises her mistake. After a brief honeymoon, Luke, a skinflint who regards women as sex objects and prefers the company of men, finds Meggie a live-in job with a kindly couple, the Muellers, and leaves to join a gang of itinerant sugarcane cutters in North Queensland. Before he leaves, he appropriates all Meggie's savings and arranges to have her wages paid directly to him. He tells her he is saving money to buy a homestead; however, he quickly becomes obsessed with the competitive toil of cane-cutting and has no real intention of giving it up. Hoping to change Luke's ambition and settle him down, Meggie deliberately thwarts his usual contraception and bears Luke a red-haired daughter, Justine. The new baby, however, makes little impression on Luke.
Father Ralph visits Meggie during her difficult labour; he has come to say goodbye, as he is leaving Australia for Rome. He sees Meggie's unhappiness for himself, and pities her. Justine proves to be a fractious baby, so the Muellers send Meggie to an isolated island resort for a rest. Father Ralph returns to Australia, learns of Meggie's whereabouts from Anne Mueller, and joins her for several days. There, at last, the lovers consummate their passion, and Ralph realises that despite his ambition to be the perfect priest, his desire for Meggie makes him a man like other men. Father Ralph returns to the Church, and Meggie, pregnant with Ralph's child, decides to separate from Luke. She sleeps one last time with Luke to ensure that her child's paternity would not be questionned, then tells Luke what she really thinks of him and returns to Drogheda, leaving him to his cane-cutting.
Back home, she gives birth to a beautiful boy whom she names Dane. Fee, who has had experience in such matters, notices Dane's resemblance to Ralph as soon as he is born. The relationship between Meggie and Fee takes a turn for the better. Justine grows into an independent, keenly intelligent girl who loves her brother dearly; however, she has little use for anyone else, and calmly rebuffs Meggie's overtures of motherly affection. None of Meggie's other surviving brothers ever marry, and Drogheda gradually becomes a place filled with old people.
Ralph visits Drogheda after a long absence and meets Dane for the first time; and although he finds himself strangely drawn to the boy, he fails to recognize that they are father and son. Dane grows up and decides, to Meggie's dismay, to become a priest. Fee tells Meggie that what she stole from God, she must now give back. Justine, meanwhile, decides to become an actress and leaves Australia to seek her dream in England. Ralph, now a Cardinal, becomes a mentor to Dane, but still blinds himself to the fact that the young man is his own son. Dane is also unaware of their true relationship. Ralph takes great care of him, and because of their resemblance people mistake them for uncle and nephew. Ralph and Dane encourage the rumour. Justine and her brother remain close, although he is often shocked at her sexual adventures and free-wheeling lifestyle. She befriends Rainer Hartheim, a German politician who is a great friend of both Dane and Ralph – unbeknown to her, he falls deeply in love with her. Their friendship becomes the most important in her life, and is on the verge of becoming something more when tragedy strikes.
Dane, who has just become a priest, is vacationing in Greece. While there, he goes swimming one day and dies while rescuing two women from a dangerous current. Meggie reveals before Dane's funeral that Dane is Ralph's son. Ralph dies in Meggie's arms after the funeral.
Justine breaks off all communications with Rainer and falls into a depressed, hum-drum existence. Eventually, they renew their acquaintance on strictly platonic terms, until Rainer visits Drogheda alone in order to urge Meggie to help him pursue Justine's hand in marriage. Justine, now the sole surviving grandchild of Fee and Paddy Cleary, finally accepts her true feelings for Rainer. They marry, but have no plans to live on Drogheda. | melodrama | train | wikipedia | The casting was perfect in every way to bring the story of the Australian Cleary family to life so vividly (Jean Simmons as the mother "Fee" won the Emmy Award that year; unfortunately Henry Mancini didn't for his gorgeous musical score, and he deserved to win!).
While the main thrust of this story and film appears on the surface to be the love of a Roman Catholic priest for a young girl whom he sees grow into adulthood, the underlying, truly poignant aspect of this story is about the long-term effects of what happens to children when mothers love one child more than another.
It is this basic lack of love that each child feels from his or her mother that determines the choices they make in life (i.e. Meggie choses to love someone who cannot commit to her, Justine choses to avoid love altogether and throw herself into acting to escape reality, Frank goes off and kills a man because he cannot deal with loving his mother too much, Ralph reveals his mother abandoned him early so he too inclines towards a non-committal type of love with Meggie and escapes through the church, etc.) The pattern develops early and continues throughout the lives of the Clearys.
That is why, to me, the most profoundly moving scenes in this entire series are right near the end: 1) when the old Fee has to tell Meggie that her son Dane has died, and she caresses Meggie's face for the first time in both their lives, and 2) the scene in the stable barn, between Meggie and Justine, as they confront the truth: that Meggie does love Justine, but Dane WAS the favorite child, for reasons beyond Justine's control.
In hugging Fee and crying in grief, and in resolving her differences with Justine, Meggie finally finds the peace she needs in life; she is then able to let go of Ralph when the inevitable takes him from her for good..
Richard Chamberlain became an even bigger heartthrob with the advent of this epic mini-series, Rachel Ward became a star, and Barbara Stanwyk made a major comeback and stole the show in only three hours of on-screen time.
"The Thorn Birds", based on Colleen McCullough's best-selling epic novel takes place in the Australia of the 1920's and stretches across three generations to the 1960's and tells the story of a life-long romance between an ambitious priest (Chamberlain) and the woman who only wanted his love.
Rachel Ward is a beautiful rose as Meggie, Richard Chamberlain is an ideal Ralph de Bricassart and Barbara Stanwyk is at her best as Mary Carson, Meggie's aunt, the richest yet loneliest woman in Australia.
Definitely among the best mini-series ever; worth watching, if only to catch outstanding performances by Barbara Stanwyck and Christopher Plummer..
Richard Chamberlain and Rachel Ward are okay as the tortured lovers, but the acting kudos go to Barbara Stanwyck and Christopher Plummer.
It's a great reminder to not put off showing love to those close to us, but to be like Meggie and give it whether it is given or not.If it's been a while see it again, because your perspective has changed and it will mean something different to you today.If you have never seen it before, I think it is well worth the time you'll invest in seeing it.
especially the last 30 minutes of the movie.Very great movie with a wonderful music, the best movie I have ever seen in my life, I always have recommended it for all my friends and the people who believe in existence of a true love.
I am going to buy the DVD version of this movie for myself, although I have VHS version of it.I always adore the acting of both Richard (Ralph) and Rachel (Maggie).
Both of them have done best in this movie and I have become to love Rachel Ward since I saw this movie.I hope the people who read my comment have seen the movie.
It is an emotionally charged drama of forbidden love, scandal and tragedy that teaches a very powerful lesson...that we, as a human race, are all doomed to destruction, each generation repeating the mistake of the one before (remember Rev. Jim Jones himself said "those who cannot remember history are doomed to repeat it").This miniseries was the Australian outback's answer to "Gone With The Wind".
Only this time it's Cardinal DeBricissart (Richard Chamberlin) that's the Scarlett O'Hara and Meggie Cleary (Rachel Ward) that's the Rhett Butler.
And yes, not all love stories have happy endings.And there are some sequences that do not depend on a music score, such as the touching climactic scene with Meggie and Justine in the barn.But that's just what makes a miniseries a classic.
I even showed it to my boyfriend and he actually liked it.I wouldn't change anything from the miniseries and I believe that everyone in it were excellent, especially Richard Chamberlain, Rachel Ward, and Christopher Plummer.
This was one of the most beloved love stories, right up there with Gone With the Wind, Somewhere in Time, and The Way we Were...I remember there was talk once on making a sequel to The Way we Were, and I thought please don't.
The Australian Outback, Greece, Rome and London are the backdrops of this tragic, passionate, fantastic film.Rachel Ward and Richard Chamberlain deliver the best performances of their careers as lovestruck, tragic Meggie Clearly and confused, ambitious Father Ralph deBricassart.
Other notable actors include Jean Simmons as Fiona Cleary, Meggie's mother, who watches her daughter make so many of the same mistakes she made in her life.
People differ in their desires.This movie shows one important fact: Without love nobody can enjoy life to the maximum of it.This is my opinion.
Richard Chaimberlian as Father Ralph could not have been better cast or Rachael Ward as Meggie Cleary for that matter, the whole cast is suburb, the story mesmerizing, the whole series had me in awe, have never seen such a wonderful piece of art anywhere in any forum before or since.
This movie will touch your heart,a few years back on Easter Sunday, I put the Thorn Birds in my VHS around noon time and the whole family watched it for the rest of the day, no one wanted to finish eating....lol now thats a really good flick!I Love Richard Chamberlian since the Dr, Kildare days* Go rent or buy The Thorn Birds, even my hubby loved it!!!!!!!!!!!
In this movie I like the way of telling and expressing of a love and individuals from beginning to an end.
I remember, even at such a young age, the story grabbed me from just the first few moments.This is the story of a young priest, Father de Bricassart, who takes on the paternal role of a young girl, Meggie Cleary (she being the youngest, and therefore useless, in a family of boys).
(Meggie's marriage to rough and tumble, Luke O'Neill, her children and their personal struggles, Father de Bricassart's ascension into Catholic hierarchy, etc...)A terrific story with an all-star cast and beautiful cinematography, make this a must in any romance afficionado's collection..
Barbara Stanwyck at her best; as with Richard Chamberlain Rachel Ward shows much promise as an actress in the future.
I loved the book (and other books by McCullough as well) but when you think of what the story is about, a grown man, a priest no less, falling in love with a little girl and then pretty much ruining her life, it is kind of creepy.
The powerful story of a man of god and the girl he couldn't have.The performances in this were all excellent, especially Barbra Stanwyck as Mary Carson, the poor little rich woman.
First time I have seen it.I would surmise that these great old mini-series have been replaced by shows on HBO, Showtime, and the like.
I have waited for the thorn birds to come out for a long time now.I love watching it as miniseries i was 12 when it first came out in 1983.Wonderfully directed with gorgeous music.I love it.I highly recommend to buy it.
Richard chamberlain is my one of the best actors i have seen and his my favorite actor and Rachel ward is one of the best actress i have seen.I love the scene on the beach.I love this miniseries..
The pain & joy in their lives were brought across in such a real way by Richard Chamberlain & Rachel Ward, & Barbara Stanwyck will always be one of the Greats!
While the main storyline of the epic miniseries is the relationship between Father Ralph and Meggie when she grows up, there's so much more to this wonderful drama than a forbidden romance.
Richard Chamberlain and Rachel Ward play the starcrossed lovers, and after watching The Thorn Birds, it'll be hard to see either of them in anything else.
With a huge cast, including Bryan Brown, Piper Laurie, Christopher Plummer, Ken Howard, Mare Winningham, and Earl Holliman, a memorable theme, and a story full of romance, heartbreaking family relationships, religious conflicts, and the drama of finding and forgiving yourself, it's no wonder it won four Golden Globes (with four additional nominations) and six Emmys (with ten additional nominations).
it's the pain of having so much to give to someone u love, while he's so much taken in the everlasting competition of men to achieve the best, ignoring the basics of life without which there's nothing to benefit from any achievement i loved this story, i loved the way every member of the cast gave the real characteristic of the character they played, i loved the way everything seemed so natural without all the technology tampering with the honesty of every single detail of the scene it's one of the best stories i've read, and one of the best movies i've watched.
I watched The Thornbirds when I was a kid and later on I couldn't remember much of it but I remembered certain details that always stayed in my mind - the rose in the bible, the name Meggie and a deep feeling that made me visualize scenes of love and romance for years upon end.
I love Richard Chamberlain since his Dr. Kildare days, and Rachel Ward is so sexy in a quite sort of way.
But the camera loved the three leads: Richard Chamberlain, Rachel Ward and Bryan Brown, while veteran actors Barbara Stanwyck and Jean Simmons added a touch of class.After the Cleary family arrive in Australia from New Zealand to work on Drogheda, the sheep station owned by Aunt Maggie Carson (Barbara Stanwyck), they meet Father Ralph de Bricassart (Richard Chamberlain).
Although presented as benign and paternal, after all the revelations about child abuse within the church since the series was made, the relationship between Father Ralph and young Meggie is a bit disturbing.
Father Ralph's rise within the church is reminiscent of Otto Preminger's "The Cardinal", especially the way his motives are challenged by a mentor played by Christopher Plummer in this case.The Cleary's fortunes ebb and flow and Meggie marries Luke O'Neill, a shearer played by Bryan Brown.
Like another girl wrote, the moment when young Meggie comes down the stairs and Father Ralph sees her finally as a woman and not a child, is so extremely breathtaking.
I feel for Meggie because she is so torn between obligation to her family (who are pretty cruel) and her love for Father Ralph, who is truly a man of God. This movie follows the book pretty closely and relates to the deepest emotions of us as human beings who crave love and intimacy, but sometimes with the people who can't love us back because they don't know how to express love or they feel like they are disobeying God if they love a person more than a friend.
I loved to hate Meggie at times, as I did in the book, and I also wanted her to finally be with Ralph.
To Rachel Ward, who brings the passionate and obsessive Meggie to life with such poise and lovliness, how I mourned with her and hated her at the same time, for the way in which her selfish and strong nature cripples Ralph.
However, though most of the actors (especially Jean Simmons as Fee Cleary) are good, Bryan Brown (who plays Luke O'Neill) is the sole Australian in the series, so you'll have a laugh when his broad accent emerges from the American dominated cast, most of whom didn't attempt an Australian accent at all.
Best describes this brilliant film.No wonder Richard Chamberlain was known as the king of mini-series.
He etched one unforgettable character after another.This time, he is Father Ralph Di Bricissart, who is loved by the town's wealthy Mary Carson.
I don't know if it was the lack of red hair, the imperfect accents, the parts of her novel left out but I hope she takes comfort in the fact that most of the world loved this series.
Rachel Ward, as Meggie, was a little limp then, but I thought that Mare Winningham was incredible as Justine, even though young and around my age at the time.
I have read the novel of "The Thorn Birds" and i love this novel a lot, just i wish to have the chance to see the movie or the series.i advise every one to read the novel.
With a stellar cast; Barbara Stanwyck is wonderful, as well as Richard Chamberlain, Rachel Ward, Jean Simmons, Richard Kiley, etc.
This film series of TELEVISION is great in my opinion, it is a history on love and doubts, woman and god that shows in the end the mistake of Ralph in not believing in the love of Meg. Great Romance.
Her son Frank spoke with an Irish brogue, though he was supposed to have been New Zealand born as well.Odd that while "Irish" Mary Carson sounded like she'd just gotten off the boat from Brooklyn, NY, her brother Paddy seemed to retain his Irish brogue...At least Meggie shed her American accent when she grew up!If they could've just sorted out the accent thing, a good mini-series could've been great..
That such an archetypal Australian story set in the outback had so little of the flavour of this amazing and rugged country!Nevertheless, Richard Chamberlain remains the ultimate Ralph de Bricassart.
And the acting was good, particularly Jean Simmons and Rachel Ward.I wonder how this series would fare today?
Oddly enough, this manages to maintain your interest throughout the entire movie.The story mostly settles on two people Ralph de Bricassart (Richard Chamberlain) and Meggie Cleary (Rachel Ward).
Oh, yeah and the crux of the story is a young girl, Meggie, and a handsome, ambitious Catholic priest, Ralph de Bricassart, falling passionately in love.
Ah the Thorn birds saga..i was 12 the year it aired on TV in 1984 in France for the first time because it had many reruns after.I love this saga and miniseries and loved Richard chamberlain the fine priest Ralph who took care of Meggie like a father when she was a child,a very lovely little girl but rejected by her mother and in need of love and affection because of Frank's departure and many deaths in her life..She was a child when she arrived at Drogheda first at Mary carson's property,a bitter and wicked old lady ,the sister of Paddy Cleary who wanted to leave in Australia to see his sister..And through the years Meggie grew up and she fell for Father ralph knowing he was a priest,this poor young red haired girl with grey eyes,in the book the character of Meggie is red and it's very different in the series but it is good though.
She madly falls in love with Ralph who at the death of Mary carson will have to choose between Drogheda or the Vatican..and he will choose both of them.He is an ambitious man actually and won't break his vows not even for Meggie..We 'll see his torments and visits at Drogheda after the fire,the kiss the reject then later the coming at the Mueller's then Matlock island where he and Meggie will live three weeks of passionate love like wife and husband but not for long..the birth of Dane who is the son of Ralph,the lies,the betrayals..in fact this saga is the story of different feelings,love ,hatred,jealousy,betrayal and the forgiveness at the end.It is also the story of a love that is IMPOSSIBLE UNATTAINABLE because Ralph is a priest and the internal conflicts in a family which are better described however in the Novel ,the family secrets especially like Fee's secrets which will have a big influence on Meggie's life..As a 46 year old woman now i still love this miniseries but i would kick Ralph if i were Meggie more than once.He is so ambitious and so self centered and full of ambiguity..How can Meggie love a man like him?
One of the best TV mini series ever made.Father Ralph(Richard Chamberlin)arrives in Australia and becomes the local priest in a small town.He meets the wealthy Mary Carson(Barbara Stanwyck)who falls in love with him,when he does not return her feelings she spends the rest of her life trying to destroy him(she only succeeds from beyond the grave).Ralph falls in love with Meggie Cleary(Rachel Ward)who he has known since she was a child.The series follows their relationship throughout the years and shows Meggie's pain as she loses Ralph to the church.
The Thorn Birds mini-series is an honest-to-goodness adaptation by Carmen Culver of a classic novel by Colleen McCullough.
It is a timeless classic that was as heartwarming then as it is now, 23 years later.This is one of the best, if not the best, love story of all time..
I loved you very much as Father Ralph de Bricassart (sp.) in "The Thorn Birds".
I am following this story, and thinking of all of you."The Thorn Birds": wonderful series.
It's a great example of how mini-series can tell stories that could never really fit into a 2 hour movie.Richard Chamberlain was...as usual...magnificent here. |
tt0122933 | Analyze This | Mob boss Paul Vitti narrates a brief history of the Mafia: in the wake of Albert Anastasia's death, the dispute over who among Vito Genovese, Carlo Gambino and Joe Bananas will ascend to mob supremacy results in the Apalachin Meeting in upstate New York. The meeting is raided by the FBI, and the Mafia does not call a summit again until the present day.
Vitti and his consigliere Dominic are discussing the upcoming meeting and the Mafia's present-day problems. However, just as Dominic warns Vitti to look out for Primo Sindone (an up-and-coming Mafia Don who wants to be capo di tutti capi), gunmen drive past and kill Dominic.
Psychiatrist Ben Sobel is dealing with his own problems: his son from his first marriage listens to his sessions, his patients are not challenging enough, and his wedding to Laura MacNamara is coming soon. Sobel unknowingly rear-ends a car belonging to Vitti and the trunk opens, revealing a man bound and gagged inside, which Sobel and his son do not notice because they are arguing. Jelly, one of Vitti's made men, takes the blame, but Sobel gives Jelly his business card in case he changes his mind about compensation.
During a meeting with his crew, Vitti suffers a panic attack and tells Jelly that he needs to see a psychiatrist, but it has to be kept a secret and Jelly recommends Sobel. Vitti visits Sobel, claiming his friend needs therapy. Sobel impresses Vitti enough to want to see him whenever necessary. Sobel goes to Miami for his wedding and Vitti, Jelly and the crew follow. Vitti explains he has been suffering from impotency and Sobel suggests the source of the problem might be stress.
The next day Vitti has another panic attack and requests to see Sobel. Vitti explains his history with his father to Sobel, who thinks this might have something to do with Vitti's problems. The wedding is interrupted when an assassin is killed by one of Vitti's thugs. Sobel confronts Vitti and argues with him until he becomes angry. Sobel suggests he resolve his anger issue by calling Primo Sindone and telling him how he feels. Vitti phones Primo and starts by telling him how he feels but ends up threatening to kill him.
Sobel and his family return to New York, where they find a fountain in their garden, a gift from Vitti. The FBI arrive and request Sobel inform on Vitti, but he refuses. He changes his mind when the FBI play an altered tape in which Vitti apparently reveals his intention to kill Sobel (Vitti had actually said he would kill anyone who harmed Sobel). Sobel wears a wire to his next meeting with Vitti, but throws it away when he learns that Vitti saw his father murdered when he was a child. Sobel thinks he can help Vitti, but Vitti, informed that Sobel was working with the FBI, takes him to a secluded place to kill him. Sobel and Vitti get into an argument, and Vitti cries when reminded of his father's murder. Just as this occurs, two hitmen sent by Sindone arrive to kill Vitti, but Jelly kills them both as Vitti is on the ground sobbing. Vitti apologizes for planning to kill Sobel, and the two reconcile.
The day of the meeting arrives, but Vitti has another meltdown. Jelly interrupts Sobel's wedding, requesting Sobel attend the meeting as Vitti's consigliere. Sobel is initially nervous, but his self-confidence grows to the point that he begins to patronize Primo until Primo finally pulls a gun on him. Vitti arrives, ordering Primo to stand down and announcing he knows a traitor in his own family killed Dominic, but will not seek revenge and instead retire from the Mafia. Once outside, a standoff ensues between Vitti's and Primo's men, during which Sobel accidentally takes a bullet intended for Vitti. The FBI intervenes, the mobsters are arrested, and Sobel is taken to the hospital.
Sobel visits Vitti in prison and Vitti thanks Sobel for his help before informing him that Primo Sindone was recently found dead. At home, Sobel dances with his new wife as Tony Bennett (as a favor from Vitti) serenades them. | entertaining, comedy, psychological, satire, murder | train | wikipedia | Robert De Niro and Billy Crystal square off in `Analyze This,' a satirical look at `family' life from director Harold Ramis.
There were only a few instances that I started to really laugh, but there were plenty of good and funny jokes, as well as some good touches of mobster-like crime.Ben Sobol (Billy Crystal) is a family psychiatrist who has a son and is engaged to the beautiful Laura MacNamara (Lisa Kudrow).
He gets into a car accident with a dim-witted man Jelly (Joe Viterelli), who happens to be the right-hand man to Paul Vitti, (Robert De Niro) the most powerful mobster in New York.
ANALYZE THIS / (1999) *** It has been a long time since I have seen a comic duo form a better shtick than Robert DeNiro and Billy Crystal in the mob comedy "Analyze This," a smart, amusing satire from director Harold Ramis ("Multiplicity," "Groundhog Day").
The first person is played by Billy Crystal, a calm, cool, and collected psychiatrist named Ben Sobol, who is divorced with a young teenage son and is engaged to soon wed a resigning TV reporter named Laura MacNamara (Lisa Kudrow).
Robert DeNiro plays the second person this movie examines, the most powerful mobster in the city of New York, Paul Vitti.
Harold Ramis's comedy obviously borrows ideas from past comparable films like "Grosse Point Blank" and "Mafia," but as this production proves, just because it was done before doesn't mean it cannot be successfully accomplished again with the right casting..
This satirical slant on the classic mobster movies is excellently played out by Crystal and De Niro, who form a formidable comedy duo, with plenty of laughs.Rated 15 'Analyze This' doesn't shy away from profanity and violence, ensuring that it fits into the mobster theme seamlessly, delivering us a highly enjoyable movie without offending fans of the mobster genre.8/10.
The movie mostly benefits from very good direction by Harold Ramis and excellent performance by the actors and not just De Niro and Crystal.
When mobster Paul Vitti(De Niro) is suffering anxiety attacks for some odd reason, he sees a shrink named Ben Sobel(Crystal) to solve his tragedys and ways to move through the mob.
When he stared into that mirror and asked whom we were talkin' to, he smiled because he was sick and liked the idea of having the control, and enjoyed picturing the end result.In "Analyze This," when he stares at Billy Crystal with his iconic "Who you talkin' to?" glare, it is not out of pleasure, but out of sheer amazement.
Normally this might be considered normal (for the most part, at least), but the problem is that Vitti is a Mob Boss in New York City, meaning that if he can't muster up enough strength to carry out his duties, word of his weaknesses will travel, and he'll soon find himself sleeping with the fishes.Ben Sobel (Crystal) is a frustrated, failing psychologist trying to raise a son on his own, and keep a relationship with his girlfriend (Lisa Kudrow) from falling apart.
It may not be labeled as such, but in its essence it is a spoof of the last century's best gangster films, borrowing its plot from "The Don's Analyst" and benefiting from a wonderfully surprising (and humorous) performance by De Niro, who stretched his funny bones with Martin Scorsese's "The King of Comedy" and Neil Jordan's "We're No Angels," but masters the feat of effective facial features here.
He should stick to making kid's films about giant actors and such things.If you want to see a really good comedy in this vein, try Grosse Pointe Blank, about a hitman going to his 10-year high school reunion.
STAR RATING:*****Unmissable****Very Good***Okay**You Could Go Out For A Meal Instead*Avoid At All CostsAnalyze This is not one of the best comedies ever,but it's certainly one of the best,inventive and most original in a long while.The script and comic timing are an ingenius success,and it's also intelligently compact,giving it little room to become ponderous and repetitive.Veteran gangster stars Chazz Palmenteri and Robert DeNiro gleefully lampoon their nasty gangster roles,to both chilling and uproarously funny effect.In the scenes where his charecter cries,DeNiro manages to stir up the emotions,but because he and his henchmen have such repulsive attitudes towards everyone,it's hard to like them,a detrimental thing in a comedy.The Italian-American's chemistry with co star Billy Crystal probably was'nt the most inspired or clever ever ,and Lisa Kudrow,not an overly talented performer anyway,is unintentionally wasted here in a mostly pointless role,and,like DeNiro,her relationship with Crystal is'nt the easiest to digest.Despite these minor hiccups however,AT is a hugely superior comic success ,with moments of absolute laugh out loud hilarity,and moments to touch the heart.Very impressive.****.
I would recommend to anyone (17 or over)!!!!It was one of those movies that you just don't want to end.I'm sorry to those of you who didn't like it because of the language but it is rated R and it has Robert De Niro, what do you expect??
Here we have mob boss Paul Vitti (Robert Deniro) who has to see psychiatrist Dr. Sobel (Billy Crystal) to be treated for panic attacks, and he then becomes so dependent that he follows Sobel everywhere, even interrupting (twice) Sobel's marriage to Laura (Lisa Kudrow).
Crystal and Deniro are good (although Crystal as Dr. Sobel doesn't strike me as a particularly good psychiatrist.) In general, the movie is mildly amusing and reaches the heights of hilarious when Sobel is "drafted" to represent Vitti at a meeting of mob bosses.Overall this isn't spectacular, but I would say it's above average.6/10.
Billy Crystal and Robert De Niro star in "Analyze This," a 1999 film about a psychiatrist and his mob boss patient.
However, Ben is beginning to understand that Vitti really wants to be helped even though he's resistant.There are some great scenes and funny dialogue, including Godfather references in "Analyze This." The character of Vitti using psychiatric terms to other mobsters is a riot - he tells his rival (Chazz Palmenteri) that he needs "closure" and tells someone else that he has aggression issues.
Analyze This is not the better movie of the two but De Niro once again proves that he can hold his own against an actual comedian, Billy Crystal.
It helps if you have seen De Niro in a straight gangster role first and then you can really see what's so funny about this movie.Like many comedies it has an abundance of stereotypes, most of which are dimwitted gangsters.
Robert De Niro has alot of fun spoofing his own gangster roles, and Billy Crystal is great as always.
Mary was fantastic, and this one is equal to the task but in a more adult way.DeNiro and Crystal are both very very funny and the cast of characters includes every Italian looking mobster you have ever seen in every mob movie in history.We loved it and so did the SRO audience at the Sneak Preview.Don't miss it..
if you want to see him cry..., Billy Crystal was good (you know, to be a comedy actor) and Lisa Kudrow mmmm not bad, she could give more.
One reason why I liked this movie so much is because you have Robert DeNiro playing Billy Crystals role as the comedian and Billy Crystal is actually playing the serious role I like the jokes alot in this movie couldn't stop myself from laughing and Lisa Kudrow had some pretty funny lines as well.This movie is probably on my top 10 comedys of all time..
Both leads play it perfectly you know you are going to get laughs with billy Crystal and Deniro plays the mob boss perfectly but always having a laugh with it aswel great movie with lots of laughs.
Both Freud and The Godfather take a pounding, but the best-conceived comic sequence comes near the end, when Crystal's Sobel is placed in a situation where he has to impersonate a Mafioso, and finds that he can't even pronounce "consigliere." Instead of force-feeding audiences stale, predictable jokes about mobsters and mayhem, Director Harold Ramis is content to let the humor evolve naturally out of the situations postulated by the script and the performances of lead actors Robert De Niro and Billy Crystal..
The best thing about this picture was his uniqueness which it stand,the Mob's leader asking for help of a psychiatrist is really funny,moreover when the patient is a tough guy as De Niro,sounds great,but somehow Billy Crystal didn't provide the same level than him,an unexpected performance came from Jelly that should be nominated as suporting casting for the Oscar,really interesting character that supply an absence of some,talking by Freud and his study over Oedipus complex is another highlight,when De Niro after this was affraid to phone his mother!!!Resume:First watch: 2001/ How many: 4 / Source: TV-Cable TV-Blu-ray / Rating: 7.5.
But you didn't expect a quality story from this movie, you expected to see Robert De Niro and Billy Crystal be funny together, and they are.
Frankly, this limited theme provides some good gags along the way, but is a bit thin to go the distance.Robert DeNiro (not surprisingly) plays a mafia hit man who is going through a kind of mid-life crisis-he's becoming sensitive and compassionate and its messing up his work.
In remembrance of the late writer-director Harold Ramis, whose GROUNDHOG DAY (1993, 9/10) is one of my all-time favorite comedies, ANALYZE THIS is another hoot although actually it is the brainchild of De Niro and Crystal, a farcical pastiche of De Niro's classic mafia mien (from THE GODFATHER: PART II 1974 to GOODFELLAS 1990, 9/10 and CASINO 1995, 7/10), he plays Paul Vitti, the notorious mobster boss, survives an assassination from his rival Primo (Palminteri) lately but horrified to find out his masculinity has been chipped away by certain panic attacks, he becomes a gun-shy and over-sentimental cry-baby, what's more vexing, his bed performance is effected as well.
Crystal contrives a more natural performance and he is a genuine poker-face humorist, it is not a demanding role for him, but his jest of a shrink's equivocations is the face-saving act in an otherwise disappointing coda ("I'm very good at being vague!").Kudrow barely steps out of her Phoebe impersonation and hasn't been given too much screen time either; character actor Joe Viterelli, on the contrary, imbues his loyalty with self-aware sense of wisdom, steals many laughters from two protagonists as Jelly, Vitti's heavy.
The only problem is that his psychiatrist, Ben Sobel wants nothing to do with him.One thing that surprisingly works well in this movie is the unlikely pair-up of Robert DeNiro and Billy Crystal.
It's evident here that they had a good time and the chemistry is top-notch.Overall, Analyze This is a funny "spoof" of mafia films and it turned out better than I expected.
A comedy about a psychiatrist (Billy Crystal) whose number one-patient is an insecure mob boss (Robert DeNiro).I have to give these guys credit.
So, it is not surprising for a gangster comedy like "Analyze This" to make the most references to "The Godfather" and to have De Niro as the main protagonist, playing Paul Vitti, a mob leader with deep emotional problem, a Don who is slipping, as would say Virgil 'The Turk' Sollozo (May he rest In Peace).
Harold Ramis had the richer source of inspiration and the best actor to carry it, and I guess the reason it worked so well is because, as I said, there's a lot of natural comedy in gangster movies without the need of exaggeration (Brian de Palma's "Scarface" is another brilliant example as a drama full of unintentional comedy) and De Niro doesn't need to force himself to become funny.
Now, let's get to the second thing that serves the comedy: the presence of a 'straight man', it's the role of Billy Crystal's character, Dr. Sobol, as the psychiatrist who's asked to take care of Vitti, the kind of offer he couldn't, for his greatest displeasure, refuse.
When he's encountered by Jelly, Vitti's henchman in an aquatic park and refuses to meet Vitti, you find him in a shark aquarium, sometimes, the film allows itself a sort of over-the-top humor, but it's always funny.But if the film works thanks to the Crystal and De Niro pairing, the Auguste and the white- faced clown, the scene-staler is definitely the late mug-faced Joe Vitterelli as Jelly, the man who only understands one language, intimidation, killing, bribing and protecting, the Mafia ABC.
If only for De Niro, Crystal and Vitterelli, the film is worth a watch, not to diminish the merit of Lisa Kudrow, weird but efficient as Sobol's fiancé, Chazz Palminteri as Primo Sindone, Vitti's archenemy, and many faces you'd remember from Scorsese's mafia classics.Last point, the film even recreates a scene from "The Godfather", when Vito is shot in the orange stand, and when Sobol reveals to Vitti that he was playing the role of Fredo in the nightmare, Vitti's reaction said it all "I was Fredo, I don't think so?" the film remarkably interferes with the Gangster's pop-culture, denouncing its comical undertones.
Robert de Niro and Billy Crystal both deliver outstanding performances, de Niro played the type of character that he is use to playing, but with a twist, he had to do scenes like the character having a panic attack that really let the actor shine, as for Crystal, he played a very funny and believable psychiatrist who is caught up in a situation he dosen't want to be in, and he portrays this perfectly throughout.
Packed with big laughs and great character development, I would recommend Analyze This to anyone looking for a good comedy or crime film.
Criminal mastermind Paul Vitti (De Niro) struggles with his emotions after seeing his friend murdered and sees psychiatrist Ben Sobel (Crystal) to cure him.The first thing that struck me about 'Analyse This' is that it contains two fine acting leads.
Crystal hits all the right notes as Dr. Sobel, but it is De Niro who makes this film so special with his grandiose send-up of several characters he has played in the past.
But although if you've never seen Robert De Niro acting before, if i were you, pick another movie with him playing serious like "Goodfellas" or "The Godfather part 2", trust me his performance will be a lot more funnier.
Great contrast between 2 different personalities and great performance by Billy Crystal and Robert De Niro If you like crime and comedy, there is not a dull moment A very well done plot between a powerful man DeNiro and a doctor Cyrstal.
I don't remember ever seeing Robert De Niro's comedic side before and must say that it is quite good."Analyze This" is not a typical gangster shoot 'em up and kill 'em action film.
The man is funny and he had me on the floor for the majority of the film as Paul Vitti, a mob boss who has allowed the pressures of his work take such a physical and emotional toll on him that he begins therapy with Dr. Ben Sobel (Crystal)and then implants himself smack dab in the middle of Dr. Ben's life, forsaking all other patients.
The man is funny and he had me on the floor for the majority of the film as Paul Vitti, a mob boss who has allowed the pressures of his work take such a physical and emotional toll on him that he begins therapy with Dr. Ben Sobel (Crystal)and then implants himself smack dab in the middle of Dr. Ben's life, forsaking all other patients.
De Niro and Crystal get help from a strong supporting cast including Lisa Kudrow, Bill Macy, Pat Cooper, and especially the late Joe Vitrelli as Jelly, Vitti's stooge, who steals every scene he is in..
De Niro and Crystal get help from a strong supporting cast including Lisa Kudrow, Bill Macy, Pat Cooper, and especially the late Joe Vitrelli as Jelly, Vitti's stooge, who steals every scene he is in..
Good comedy with lots of action starring Robert De Niro, Billy Crystal, and Lisa Kudrow!.
ANALYZE THIS, in my opinion, is a good comedy with lots of action starring Robert De Niro, Billy Crystal, and Lisa Kudrow!
Now, in conclusion, to all Robert De Niro, Billy Crystal, or Lisa Kudrow fans that have not seen this good comedy with lots of action, I highly recommend it!.
I don't remember ever seeing Robert De Niro's comedic side before and it's quite good."Analyze This" is not a typical gangster shoot 'em up and kill 'em film.
We usually find Robert De Niro in an action film as a gangster and Billy Crystal known to be a comedic actor.
We usually find Robert De Niro in an action film as a gangster and Billy Crystal known to be a comedic actor.
We usually find Robert De Niro in an action film as a gangster and Billy Crystal known to be a comedic actor.
While De Niro plays a gangster and Billy Crystal does have some comedic scenes, they seem to switch in this film.
While De Niro plays a gangster and Billy Crystal does have some comedic scenes, they seem to switch in this film.
While De Niro plays a gangster and Billy Crystal does have some comedic scenes, they seem to switch in this film.
Billy does great as well, but like I said, Robert takes the movie.Robert plays Paul, a big time mobster who has a panic attack.
I liked the way that they parodied all the classic gangster movies and the fact that DeNiro was willing to send up some of his best roles in film.
Analyze This is a sporadically amusing mob comedy with Robert De Niro and Billy Crystal..
I like De Niro (who doesn't?), and Billy Crystal was wonderful (of course), but I think they should have given Lisa Kudrow more screen time.
Analyze This has Billy Crystal, in a movie that used him well, and Robert DeNiro, making light of his tough guy image. |
tt0219175 | Mexico City | The movie begins by showing how the Mexican president's doctor is kidnapped and finally murdered. The reason given is for his opposing political party trying to embarrass him. Mitch Cobb and her brother, Sam, are on their way to Oaxaca to do some exploring. Mitch is not happy in Mexico City; we see in a flash-back why she is with her brother. Here, Mitch confides with Sam the truth about why she is divorced and how her two children were killed in a car wreck. Mitch hates the city and just wants to go back to the Hotel Majestic, near the Zocalo, and sleep until they fly down to Oaxaca the next day. Sam leaves her at the hotel and decides to go visit some bars and drink a little before going to bed. The next morning he has not come back to the hotel. She begins a frantic search. Nobody will help her except Pedro, a taxi driver, who offers to help her look for $100 a day. They finally find the bar where Sam had gone; eventually they even meet his killer, a drug lord, who still has his orange baseball cap and camera. When the US embassy finds out about his camera with film in it, they suddenly take a personal interest in Mitch and now try to be nice to her. The reason is that the president's doctor was murdered behind the same bar where Sam met his murderers, and on the same night. They suspect that he may have photographed the murder scene. He had done just that, and the photographs were strong evidence of the truth. But now Mitch's life is in danger too, because the evil doers want her dead and the pictures. Pedro volunteers to drive her to the Texas border so she will be safe. At 10 kilometers from the border and Mexico City police car stops them. In the ugly exchange that follows Mitch shoots the officer. As she walks across the border she is arrested for that murder. She is forgiven when the photos are finally given to the Mexican president. In an epilogue scene at the end of the movie, she has taken Pedro's advice to start another family; she became a mother to Sam's orphan son; she had found happiness again. | murder | train | wikipedia | Under-rated, taut and engaging thriller with moody cinematography....
I almost didn't rent this one because the pre-visit to Blockbuster and the checks on IMdB indicated that this "new release" was only a 2 star offering.
Now...sometimes I'm in the mood for low budget, brooding atmospherics with "indie-like" cinematography and no big stars that challenge my expectations and engage my unabated interest.
Sometimes I'm in the mood for DeNiro playing Boris Badanov in Rocky & Bullwinkle (although not too often...once every year or two, maybe.) I enthusiastically recommend this sleeper.
It hit me just right
the realistic mood, the gritty shots of Mexico City's underbelly, the briskly developing plot (not too knotty for head scratching but not a formula telegram either)
and I love seeing totally unknown actors act their asses off in a promotionally sleepy but alert screenplay!
Jorge Robles [Pedro, the taxi driver with a moral compass on point throughout] was superb.
Stacy Edwards was thoroughly believable as Mitch and I cheered as she emerged from her cocoon of bereavement into an `in-your-face-Ninja-warrior' woman who just wouldn't stay down for the count.
Robert Patrick was OK but a bit wooden, as he always is in this type of G-man on a wire role, but maybe that's what G-men really act like after all.
Anyhow
kudos
and see it.
Do Not Be Deterred by the center-weighted 2 star average rating of the masses.
After all, what do soccer moms and accountants who rent weekend new releases know about la vie noir?.
Worth a Look.
Surprisingly good..
I never had heard of this movie, or any of the actors(less Robert Patrick) before.
It was a slow Sunday morning, and I just happened to have it on the channel showing this movie.
I certainly enjoyed this movie much more than I thought I would.
It was a very well acted, well-written study of the helplessness one would feel placed in the proverbial situation of a stranger in a strange land.
It definitely showed Mexico City in real light, but I thing more importantly, it showed that not everyone in Mexico is corrupt, or dispassionate about helping outsiders.
The character of Pedro was especially heroic.
I definitely felt the level of frustration the lead character (Mitch) was feeling.
Expert direction by Richard Shepard..
Gritty and graphic.
This film will never turn up as an in-flight feature on Mexicana Airlines.
It shows the gritty, often ugly reality of Mexico City.
Its tale of corruption and intrigue is nothing special.
But the film captures the essence of Mexico City --- crowds, bustle, poverty, pollution, crime, machismo, antiquity and always, "la mordida" --- with compelling cinematography and a hauntingly effective Spanish guitar musical background.
The camera angles are brilliant.
The warm tones of the colour are perfect for the subject.
There are many classic closeups of Mexican faces that alone make the film worthwhile.
You almost smell the "pollo con aroz." And the amount of Spanish dialogue without subtitles underlines the frustratiions of the film's unilingual main character as she searches for her brother in an alien, puzzling and hostile environment.
(Whatever did happen to him by the way?) The plot isn't new.
Innocent American searches for missing ( )boyfriend ( )husband ( )wife ( )son ( )daughter ( )other in corrupt foreign capital with no help from double dealing US embassy.
But this one is done superbly..
Thought-Provoking Thriller!.
Richard Shepard's fascination with the kidnapping thriller has yielded another successful twisted tale in MEXICO CITY (the other two: MERCY and OXYGEN).
Combining deft genre filmmaking chops with real insight into what it means to feel truly vulnerable, in MEXICO CITY, Shepard leads the viewer down a uniquely ravaged road of intrigue, deception, heartbreak and loss.
Cinematographer Sarah Cawley is equally at the top of her game, painting many moody tableaus.
Editor Adam Lichtenstein ably sets Cawley's rich compositions against each other, adding heft to the story's impact.
Rolfe Kent's score completes the circle by perfectly echoing Shepard's search for faith in a seemingly godless world.Let me qualify by saying that MEXICO CITY is by no means perfect, but if a thought-provoking thriller is what you're after, then see this film..
In "Mexico City", Edwards plays a woman with recent personal loss who is reluctantly vacationing in the title city with her brother when he disappears.
This very mediocre journeyman flick is all about her search for her bro and the intrigues which follow.
"Mexico City" seems to lack authenticity (made in Mexico by Americans), paints a rather dismal portrait of the city, has plotholes and foibles galore, and is watered down to a very soft R rating.
For those who can overlook these flaws, however, a tale of one woman's determination pitted against corruption and treachery in Mexico awaits.
Great View.
This movie shows great insight into what Mexico City is actually like.
Not necessarily the mugging and shooting, however the shots of the city are outstanding.
From the town square to the mix between poverty and wealth, the camera work in the film is unsurpassable.
Even down to the green volkswagen beetles, the film is precise and real.
Enjoyable movie..
Amazing cinematography!.
There are a few minor adjustments that could be done, in my opinion, and with that I would have given this film a 10 star rating.
I love this movie because it's no-nonsense.
There is an easy to follow storyline and the film is acted out almost believably.
I cannot add more to the technicality of the film but what I can say about this movie is that I love the musical score, the scenes, the way it draws me into the film here and there.It's a movie I would recommend if you are open-minded and are in need of a relaxing time.
For what it's worth, it's a movie that will be average but if you are like me it's a film that will forever stick with you..
Weak plot, excellent cinematography.
It is a shame that a movie with such a good cinematography as this one had no plot to be supported by the work of Sarah Cawley (cinematography) and Adam Lichtenstein (Film Editing), and above all, no sense of what goes on in Mexico City.
The movie tries to be a very realistic depiction of life in city, but it is unable to do it.
It is a shame, a lot of film wasted.
An American woman tries to find her brother who has been kidnaped.
The first account of the story is powerful and interesting, very realistic, but it seems that there was no effort to come with a better narrative of the ordeal, especially when it comes to the issue of the attitudes of the US embassy personnel in Mexico City, when dealing with an issue like this one.
Compare, as an example, with Frantic(1988), which deals with a similar issue.
Something similar can be said of the role of local authorities.
Compare, as an example, with Todo el Poder (1999).
The movie is worth watching if you want to get a sense of the looks of the City itself, paying little or no attention to the rather weak "plot" and the many twists that require a rather extensive suspension of disbelief.
Who is going to believe that a Mexican patrol from Mexico City is going to go all the way to catch the main characters to the Mexico-US border?
And that this policeman is going to be able to use its radio from the border to Mexico City!
Only the producers of this movie.
It is worth mentioning that unlike Frida and other movies about Mexico at least in these one Mexicans talk Spanish..
Boring, lame.
I got bored in the begining already and could not get better later.
Just more bored |
tt0072325 | Truck Turner | Mack "Truck" Turner (Isaac Hayes) is a former professional football player who becomes a Los Angeles-based bounty hunter after being hurt. Turner begins his morning watching his girlfriend Annie's cat, Frances, while she is in jail for stealing a television set. Truck and his partner Jerry Barnes catch a fugitive, then take him to jail. Truck takes the opportunity to visit Annie (Annazette Chase) in jail. Annie asks if they can "go somewhere" when she gets out. Truck and Jerry go to collect the bounty from Nate Dimwiddie, a bail bondsman, who refers them to Fogarty (Dick Miller), a bail bondsman who wants Gator, a pimp who skipped bail.
After haggling over the price because of Gator's violent past, they visit Dorinda (Nichelle Nichols), who runs Gator's stable of prostitutes. Truck tries to trick her into giving up Gator's location. Dorinda does not fall for the ruse. Truck and Jerry wait for Gator to visit, and chase him. Gator crashes and then leads them on a foot chase, but doubles back and steals Jerry's car. Truck and Jerry hijack a truck to chase him. The radiator in Jerry's stolen car gives out, so Gator runs into a bar and offers money to everyone inside to beat his pursuers. Jerry circles around to the back of the bar, but gives up the chase to help Truck win his fight in the bar.
A tip from Truck's retired pimp friend Duke (Scatman Crothers) allows Truck and Jerry to nab one of Gator's cohorts, who leads them to the house of the woman harboring Gator. They attempt to lure Gator out of the house, and a shootout ensues. Truck and Jerry kill Gator when he attempts to shoot Truck, but the topless woman stabs Jerry on his right shoulder with a pair of scissors. Truck then smacks her in the face, knocking her out cold.
Dorinda threatens Gator's former whores to keep them in line, and orders them to attend a meeting of pimps who want Gator's action. At the meeting (following Gator's funeral and burial), Dorinda offers the pimps a deal: whoever kills Truck gets to replace Gator and gets half of the proceeds while she runs the stable. A pimp named Desmond immediately objects that pimps deal in prostitutes, not violence. The only pimp interested in the violence is Harvard Blue (Yaphet Kotto).
One of Blue's assassin's, Reno, attempts to kill Truck while he is walking with Annie, but Truck shoots him. Truck escorts Annie into their apartment where Blue awaits, cuddling Frances. Blue tells Truck he needs to retire, who responds by pulling his gun and telling him to leave in the next 10 seconds. Another attempt is made on Truck's life by the next morning. Truck shoots and kills him and another gunman on a rooftop.
Blue argues with Dorinda that he wants 25% of Gator's take in exchange for killing Turner. Dorinda only relents when Blue points out that she won't be able to deal with Turner on her own. Blue and Desmond will share the cost of getting rid of Truck, and Desmond will run the stable. Blue calls in some "insurance men" to "insure" Truck's death, who force Nate to call Truck and tell him that there is a big job. Truck doesn't feel sober enough after a night of partying, so he calls Jerry and asks him to check on Nate. Jerry arrives at Nate's business and is shot dead through the door. After fleeing the scene, Blue and Desmond argue over the way their deal is proceeding. The argument ends with Blue ordering Desmond to lead Truck to him if he comes his way.
Annie and Truck visit Nate in the hospital. He warns Truck of the hit out on him. Truck and Annie return to their apartment, which has been ransacked and Annie's cat, Frances, killed. Truck tells Annie to visit her mother for safety, but she refuses. Truck offers to take her shopping, then stuffs her purse with expensive perfume while she tries on some clothes. He then alerts the security guard, who calls the police to arrest Annie.
Truck goes to Desmond's house and demands to know where Blue is. Desmond pretends to resist, but ultimately tells Truck where to find Blue. Truck again visits Nate in the hospital. Nate repeats his warning to Truck that Blue is dangerous. Truck gives Nate Jerry's gun for protection. Just then, Blue and several of his thugs barge in. Nate surprises them by shooting at them. Nate and Truck shoot all of the intruders but Blue. Blue attempts to flee, but Truck shoots him in the leg after Blue grabs a hostage, and again as he exits the hospital. Blue makes it to his getaway car, but dies a few minutes later in the driver's seat.
Truck confronts Dorinda at her house, and tells her she has to leave town. As Dorinda reaches for a gun, Truck warns her that he will shoot her. Dorinda says he won't shoot a woman, but is fatally shot as soon as she pulls the gun from her dresser.
Truck tries to make up with Annie as she gets out of jail. She refuses to get in the car at first, but relents when he professes his love and points out that all of his belongings are packed in the back seat and he is ready to keep his promise to go away with her. She gets in the car and Truck presents her with a new cat. They drive off together, leaving L.A. for good. | comedy, neo noir, murder, cult, violence, revenge, blaxploitation | train | wikipedia | He was also considered for the role of Shaft but it ended up in Richard Roundtree's hands.Truck Turner the movie is every bit the blaxploitation classic one should expect.
Filled with hot rods, jive ass broads, pimps and crooks, superb dialogues in that outdated but always funny 70's genre lingo and enough slow motion gunfights to equal Sam Peckinpah, Truck Turner is a thrill a minute and one of the best the genre has to offer.
That's just one of the good parts of the movie, as it manages to work on all levels: the action is nice in that good old fashioned way, the dialogues are not just filler, the drama works when it has to and the comedic timing is spot on.Eighteen days from the posting of this review Isaac Hayes passed away and heaven became a little funkier.
A fan of 70s Blaxploitation cinema, I've had "Truck Turner" of 1974 sitting on my DVD shelf for some time now, always eager to watch it, and the recent death of Isaac Hayes (R.I.P. big man) was reason enough to finally do so.
Isaac Hayes is probably most prominent in Blaxploitation cinema for composing and performing the theme song for the sub-genre's most famous film, Gordon Parks' "Shaft" of 1971, and he also starred as the super-tough and super-cool eponymous hero in a flick that ranges among the most entertaining of its kind - namely this, "Truck Turner".
The bald and bearded Mac 'Truck' Turner is a former football player turned bounty hunter and Hayes is supremely bad-ass in the role.
Inbetween crime-busting and drinking sessions with his colleague Jerry (Alan Weeks), Truck, who sleeps with his holster on and whose mere name makes the bad guys shake in fear, pays visits to his sexy girlfriend who tends to get jailed for her quick temper...The film basically has everything good blaxploitation cinema needs: A super-tough bad-ass of a hero as you will only see them in 70s cinema, a cool sidekick, eccentric villains, violent shootouts, funky music, delightfully vulgar slang dialogue including many unforgettable lines and, last but definitely not least, dozens of sexy and dangerous women.
None other than Star Trek's Nichelle Nichols plays the beautiful and lethal crime-madame and prostitution-mastermind Dorinda, and Yaphet Kotto (Alien) makes a perfect crime-boss in his role of Harvard Blue.
While Dorinda tries to hold her stable of girls together in a male dominated industry, she offers up a significant business share in her girls to the man who is able to kill Turner for her revenge.I have taken recently to watching some Blaxploitation films mostly because I find the genre to be agreeably trashy and in a way the weaknesses can be accepted and almost enjoyed as part of the experience that you have come for.
Weeks is funny, Chase is cute and beyond that everyone is par for the genre course, with plenty of bad hair and overacting in the men and lots of flesh in the women.Truck Turner is still a genre film of course and it needs to be met on those terms but it does stand out as a good example of the genre – tough, cool, good performances, lots of pimp etc stereotypes and plenty of silly gun action.
In Los Angeles, the tough bounty hunter Mac 'Truck' Turner (Isaac Hayes ) and his partner and friend Jerry (Alan Weeks) work for Nate Dinwiddie (Sam Laws) hunting down fugitives from the law.
When the drug dealer and pimp Richard Leroy 'Gator' Johnson (Paul Harris) is murdered by Turner, Gator´s woman Dorinda (Nichelle Nichols) hiresthe gangster Harvard Blue (Yaphet Kotto) and his professional killers to kill Turner.
The tall Isaac Hayes is funny in the role of a tough bounty hunter and former football player hard to be killed and the film is highly entertaining.
After months of searching, I finally caught up with the Isaac Hayes blaxploitation hit Truck Turner.
Now he works as a bounty hunter with his partner Jerry (Alan Weeks is great!) When he kills his most recent target, a pimp named Gator, he's in trouble with Mack Daddy Harvard Blue and his vicious hoes, as well as a one-eyed assassin and a lot of other unpleasant characters!
Nichelle Nicols of "Star Trek" gives the second-best performance in the movie as a hoe, Scatman Crothers is slick as Duke, the only pimp who backs Truck, and Annazette Chase is surprisingly good as Truck's lady!
Pre-Scientology Isaac Hayes acts plain ig'nant as bad ass bounty hunter Mack "Truck" Turner.
TRUCK TURNER is one of the finer movies from an era that's been vanished a good long time, but do check out BLACK CAESAR, SUPER FLY, and BLACK BELT JONES for the very best.
The dead pimp's girlfriend, who runs her own stable of high class girls, is none too pleased, and puts a bounty on Truck's head, employing, mob guy acquaintance (Kotto) to take him down.
The last twenty minute revenge part of the film was great, Kotto staggering back to his car, outside a hospital, after killing Weeks, and being shot in the back by Hayes, showing such determination for the black guy.
Shaft (1971) paved the way for the sub-genre with its strutting bad-ass lead who's a sex-machine to all the chicks, and Isaac Hayes' Oscar-winning score (for what he will forever be best remembered for).
Hayes himself steps into the lead role here as ex- American football star and bail bondsman Mac 'Truck' Turner, who according to Yaphet Kotto's bad-guy pimp Blue, is "like a bulldog with eyes up his ass!", and displays some surprisingly charismatic qualities that makes it quite a shame he didn't appear in more.Greasy lawyer Fogarty (the great Dick Miller) employs bounty-hunters 'Truck' Turner and his partner Jerry (Alan Weeks - with the best grin in cinema) to track down a low-down pusher and pimp named Gator (Paul Harris).
After an extended chase scene, Turner and Jerry manage to kill Gator, much to the dismay of Gator's lady Dorinda (Nichelle Nichols - Uhura!).
Wanting to settle down with his girlfriend Annie (Annazette Chase), Turner finds his life turned upside when Blue employs a gang of hired killers.Beginning almost as a buddy-comedy, the witty script and some genuine chemistry serve up some amusing early scenes, showing off Hayes' natural screen presence.
But this turns into pure police procedural blaxploitation as the main plot kicks in, with jive-talk, pimps in some of the most delightfully ludicrous dress I've ever seen, car-chases, slow-motion shoot-outs, cocaine, hookers, and of course a tragically neglected soundtrack from Hayes himself.
Isaac Hayes provides whole new dimensions to the term "Coolness" in his own and first Blaxploitation highlight "Truck Turner" (not counting the Italian Blaxploitation-Crime thriller crossover "Three Tough Guys").
Gator's main bi-atch Dorinda (Nichelle Nichols, acting like the black version of Ilsa Harem keeper of the Oil Sheiks) gathers all the city's most prominent pimps and promises the ownership of all her top-class prostitutes to whoever succeeds in killing Truck.
Although the music score (compliments of Issac Hayes) was a little funkier than Shaft (1971), there were a lot of themes common with the blaxploitation genre, like pimp hats and Cadillacs.
With Isaac Hayes providing the soundtrack himself, what you get is a simply cool action film that is not afraid to speak its mind and make the most out of a very basic plot.I'd even go so far as to call it original for its time!.
Carrying around a 44 Magnum that was probably bought at the same place Dirty Harry Callahan bought his, Isaac Hayes essays the role of Truck Turner, former pro-football player turned skip tracer.
Harris's woman and partner Nichelle Nichols wants Hayes dead and will pay anything for it and brings in a whole bunch of business competitors led by Yaphett Kotto to do the job.
I would not want her on my case.Truck Turner is a good action film with an astonishing portrayal from Nichelle Nichols.
Truck Turner is a great film vehicle for Issac Hayes and a very solid and entertaining entry for the blaxsploitation genre.
Hayes is pretty cool, his score is okay, the supporting cast is exceptional - Yaphet Kotto ('Blue Collar', 'Drum', 'Alien'), 'Black Belt Jones' Alan Weeks and Scatman Crothers, Star Trek's Nichelle Nichols, Corman legend Dick Miller,etc.
But really I could list ten blaxploitation movies I'd recommend before 'Truck Turner', and if you want Isaac Hayes at his best rent 'Escape From New York', and listen to his 'Hot Buttered Soul' and yes, 'Shaft'..
Having performed the theme song for blaxploitation classic Shaft (1971), soul singer Isaac Hayes got to be the star of his own funky black action flick, appearing as Mac 'Truck' Turner, an ex-football star turned bounty hunter who becomes the target of hired hit men after killing vicious pimp Richard Leroy 'Gator' Johnson (Paul Harris) during a shootout.Although Hayes isn't in the same league as blaxploitation legends Richard Roundtree, Fred Williamson or Jim Kelly, his acting leaving quite a lot to be desired, he acquits himself well enough in the lively action scenes, of which there are plenty.
The film also benefits from an unforgettable turn from Nichelle 'Lt. Uhura' Nichols as foul-mouthed bitch Dorinda, the woman who wants Truck dead: she couldn't be more unlike her wholesome Star Trek character if she tried.Other moments that guarantee a good time for fans of the genre include a wild-eyed topless woman attacking Truck's partner Jerry (Alan Weeks) with a knife, Gator's burial (you ain't lived until you've seen a funeral where all the guests are pimps and hos), Dorinda's hilarious sales pitch for her whores ("We call her Turnpike, cuz you gotta pay to get on and pay to get off!"), Jerry getting blasted to bits by the hired killers, a wonderfully violent gun-fight in a hospital, and the agonising death scene of pimp Harvard Blue (Yaphet Kotto), who deserves everything he gets for using a child as a human shield.7.5 out of 10, rounded up to 8 for Scatman 'Kick the Can' Crothers sporting a silky white shirt and cult actor Dick Miller wearing a salmon pink jacket.
The string of blaxploitation movies continued with Jonathan Kaplan's "Truck Turner", starring Isaac Hayes as a football player looking for a bail-jumping pimp.
Aside from Hayes (known to later generations as Chef on "South Park"), there's Nichelle Nichols (Uhura on "Star Trek"), Scatman Crothers (Dick Hallorann in "The Shining"), and character actor Dick Miller, who often plays a character named Walter Paisley, but has also appeared in every one of Joe Dante's movies.All in all, a really fun flick..
If you are an Isaac Hayes fan or would really like to view a movie from the seventies with great scenic shots, Truck Turner would be the movie for you.
But in my book neither one holds a candle to Isaac Hayes' performance in this early Jonathan Kaplan movie: like a blend of John Shaft and Jim Rockford, Hayes suggests the kind of action hero Ving Rhames could be if he had a light, self-deprecating sense of humor.
Hayes won me over mostly because of his music but also because of his recurring role on The Rockford Files, where he lovingly referred to Jim as "Rockfish." Hayes also contributed a great deal to blaxploitation cinema (and was suitably rewarded with an Academy Award for his work on Shaft), starring (his lone starring role) in one of the genres better movies: Truck Turner.
Isaac Hayes and Yaphet Kotto are agreeable, and there are many action scenes, but most of them are not very exciting.
One of the more enjoyable Blacksploitation films of the '70's has uber-legend Issac Hayes as Matt 'Truck' Turner, a skip tracer, and his partner getting a hit placed on them after one of their targets dies.
Truck Turner (1974) ** 1/2 (out of 4)Violent, mean-spirited and entertaining blaxploitation film has Isaac Hayes playing Truck Turner, a former football star turned bounty hunter who gets a hit put out on him, which ends up getting his best friend killed.
I've always loved Blaxploitation films but don't know them all, and I recently found Truck Turner by complete chance.
A bounty hunter, Mack Truck Turner(Isaac Hayes)has a contract out on him by Dorinda(Nichelle Nichols, in a role bound to shock folks who know her as Ohura on STAR TREK), the vengeance seeking broad whose pimp daddy was murdered by him in self defense.
Harvard Blue(Yaphet Kotto), a sadistic pimp with quite a reputation, offers Dorinda his services for most of her prostitution business and hires assassins to target Truck, seriously hurting his boss and killing his bounty hunter partner.
Soon Blue and his cronies themselves become the prey and Trucker the predator with a lot of dead bodies left after the dust settles.Tailor made vehicle for Isaac Hayes, getting a terrific role as a nearly unstoppable bad ass with an unglamorous career chasing down pedophiles, rapists, junkies and pimps(..along with Alan Weeks as his partner Jerry)for bond claimer Nate Dinwiddie(Sam Laws).
Rough'n'tumble bounty hunter Truck Turner (smoothly played with charisma to burn by Isaac Hayes) runs afoul of both sadistic pimp Harvard Blue (Yaphet Kotto in fine ruthless form) and vengeful whorehouse madam Dorinda (Nichelle "Lt. Uhura" Nichols, spitting fire and paint-peeling profanity with startling ferocity).Director Jonathan Kaplan, working from a tart script by Oscar Williams and William Allin, keeps the exciting and entertaining story hurtling along at a brisk pace, maintains a tough gritty tone throughout, makes excellent use of grungy urban locations, stages the rousing action set pieces with rip-roaring verve (the wild climactic shoot-out at a hospital rates as a real stupendous doozy!), delivers oodles of bloody'n'brutal violence, and further sweetens the deal with a wickedly funny sense of brash humor.
Moreover, it's acted with zest by a bang-up cast: Alan Weeks as Truck's easygoing partner Jerry, Annazette Chase as Truck's sassy klepto girlfriend Annie, Sam Laws as laid-back bail bondsman Nate Dinwiddie, Paul Harris as vicious pimp Gator, Dick Miller as sleazy lawyer Fogarty, Scatman Crothers as friendly informant Duke, and John Kramer as the slippery Desmond.
Truck Turner is directed by Jonathan Kaplan, has a screenplay by Oscar Williams and Michael Allin and stars Isaac Hayes, Nichelle Nichols and Yaphet Kotto.Truck Turner is one of the very best Blaxploitation films.
Nichelle is excellent in this role and proves what a talented actress she is, this character is about as far from Lt.Uhura as it's possible to get.Truck Turner (Isaac Hayes)is a bounty hunter who kills a pimp called Gator(Paul Harris).
Dorinda enlists the help of a vicious pimp called Blue (Yaphet Kotto)and other criminals to kill Turner.
They all underestimate Turner though to their own cost.The violence in this film looks very realistic, the cast are superb, Isaac Hayes exudes coolness, there's plenty of action and the film is very funny.
Just two years after 'Shaft', Hayes starred in 'Truck Turner', which is one of the best blaxploitation films you'll ever see.It's highly entertaining, full of action and one liners, and even served as inspiration for future films and comedy sketches throughout the years.
***SPOILERS*** Very probably the best of the many black-exploitation movies to come out of the turbulent 1970's "Truck Turner" has it all and a bit more in it's star Isaac Hayes as the rough and tumble and take no BS Mac Truck Turner.
A man you don't mess with if you intend to go on living and enjoying life in one piece.Doing the dangerous work of tracking down criminals who jumped bail skip tracers, slang for bail bondsmen, Turner and his partner Jerry, Alen Weeks, are given the unenviable job of bringing in vicious pimp Gator Johnson, Paul Harris, by bailsman Fogarty, Dick Miller.
Not being able to make any ground against Turner as he frustrates her at every turn Madam Dorinda is forced to accepted Harvard Blue's, Yaphet Kotto, offer to put him away for good if he get's the majority share of her very successful prostitution business.
Truck Turner (Issac Hayes) is a former football star turned bounty hunter.
Hayes is joined by a very solid group of co-stars including wonderful performances by Yaphet Kotto (as the mega-pimp Harvard Blue), Alan Weeks (as Turner's partner Jerry), and Annazette Chase (in the small but pivotal role of Turner's girlfriend).
"Mac 'Truck' Turner" (Isaac Hayes) and "Jerry" (Alan Weeks) are two modern-day bounty hunters who have just accepted the difficult task of bringing a dangerous pimp by the name of "Gator" (Paul Harris) back into custody.
Unfortunately, things don't exactly go as planned and Gator's business manager, "Dorinda" (Nichelle Nichols) offers her entire stable of working girls to whoever can kill Truck Turner.
It has plenty of action spiced with typical jargon and good performances by several actors to include Isaac Hayes, Yaphet Kotto and Nichelle Nichols (who is best known for her role as "Uhura" in the Star Trek series).
This is a better than average so-called "blaxploitation" film about a bounty hunter named Truck Turner (Isaac Hayes).
Isaac Hayes plays this ex football player turned bounty hunter that kicks ass and takes names with his partner Jerry(Alan Weeks-another black belt jones nod).He and his partner take on this case of catching a pimp named Gator.They kill Gator.Which makes his main Ho or Madame Dorinda(very hott mama -Nichelle Nichols )mad.So she hires a bunch of other pimps to kill Truck.Including Harvard blue played by Yaphett Kotto-A deadly ,ruthless pimp himself.Intrigued at the thought of having a percent of Gator's money and hoes.Some of the pimps agree.Will they be too much for Truck or will Truck be too much for them?This is a fast paced hip,exciting/ action/pic that's one of the best out of the blax/genre.My second fav only to Black Belt Jones.Which has a lot of actors from that movie in this one.Laughs,Bullets,Broads,and Blood.Even throws in a love story between Truck and his woman Annie(Anazette Chase)-very beautiful i might add.
if you are into films of the genre, TRUCK TURNER rates right up there with the best of them. |
tt5108476 | Befikre | Set in Paris, Befikre begins with a nasty fight between Dharam (Ranveer Singh) and Shyra (Vaani Kapoor), which leads to a sudden break-up; Shyra leaves Dharam, and goes to her parent’s house, asking them to let her in without any questions about Dharam. Dharam hails from Karol Bagh, New Delhi, and is a stand-up comedian working in his friend, Mehra’s (Aru Krishansh Verma) doomed restaurant, where he mocks people in relationships and single bachelors.
The film travels back in time when Dharam came to the French capital in search of work and adventure. To his surprise, he shares his room with a girl who is a lesbian. Mehra takes him to a party where he meets and hooks up with the fun-loving Shyra, a tourist guide, who is an Indian by origin and French by nature. He later asks Shyra out on a date when she dares him to slap a police officer. Thereafter, they keep giving crazy dares to each other.
In the present, Dharam mocks his broken relationship at the same restaurant. The two keep meeting accidentally, showing that they still haven’t gotten over each other. In another flashback, they decide to enter a live-in relationship and Dharam meets Shyra’s parents, who are chefs in their own restaurant. After many misunderstandings and fights, Shyra moves out and shifts with her family. They celebrate their breakup anniversary on the famous Love Padlock Bridge and swear never to fall in love with each other.
Now, Shyra starts dating Aney(Arrmaan Ralhan), an investment banker whereas Dharam starts dating Christine(Julie Ordon),a French girl. Aney proposes Shyra to marry him wherein Shyra accepts the proposal. So, Dharam and Shyra both remain good friends until one day, when they get into a heated discussion and become rivals. Soon, Dharam and Christine both decide to marry each other.
Knowing that both Dharam and Shyra are going to marry different people they still are emotionally attached to each other. They do a face-off dance at the ‘Sangeet' ceremony, which leads to their reconciliation as friends. Dharam secretly tells Shyra that he is not ready for marriage and also wants to stop it. During the conversation both start developing love for each other.
On the wedding day, Dharam however manages to stop the wedding and tells Shyra that he truly loves and can't be a friend of her anymore. Eventually Dharam and Shyra run away from their wedding ceremony.
The film ends with the marriage of Dharam and Shyra. | romantic, flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0453562 | 42 | The film tells the story of Jackie Robinson and, under the guidance of team executive Branch Rickey, Robinson's signing with the Brooklyn Dodgers to become the first African-American player to break the baseball color barrier. The story focuses mostly on the 1947 Brooklyn Dodgers season and somewhat on Robinson's 1946 season with the Montreal Royals, which emphasize his battles with racism.
In 1945, after sportswriter Wendell Smith suggests that Rickey consider Robinson as the black ballplayer Rickey is looking for, Robinson and his team, the Kansas City Monarchs, stop by a gas station. When the attendant refuses Robinson entry to the washroom, Robinson says they will find another station at which to fill up the team bus, and the attendant relents. As Robinson steps out, a scout for the Dodgers sent by Rickey approaches him and invites him to Brooklyn. He is offered a $600 per month contract and a $3,500 signing bonus, which Robinson accepts after being warned by Rickey that he must control his temper if he wants to play. Robinson proposes to his girlfriend, Rachel, by phone and she accepts.
During spring training, Robinson earns a roster spot with the Montreal Royals, the AAA affiliate of the Brooklyn farm system. After a great season there and spring training in Panama, he advances to the Dodgers. Most of the team soon signs a petition, stating they refuse to play with Robinson, but manager Leo Durocher insists Robinson will play with the main team. When Durocher is suspended by Happy Chandler, the Commissioner of Baseball, for actions in his personal life, leaving the Dodgers without a manager to start the regular season, Burt Shotton agrees to manage the team.
In a game against the Philadelphia Phillies, manager Ben Chapman taunts Robinson, causing him to go back to the dugout and smash his bat out of frustration. With encouragement from Rickey, Robinson then returns to the field and hits a single, steals second base and advances to third on a throwing error, and scores the winning run. When Chapman's behavior toward Robinson generates bad press for the team, the Phillies' owner requires him to pose with Robinson for newspapers and magazine photos.
Later, Robinson's teammate Pee Wee Reese comes to understand what kind of pressure Robinson is facing, and makes a public show of solidarity, standing with his arm around Robinson's shoulders before a hostile crowd at Crosley Field in Cincinnati, silencing them.
In a game against the St. Louis Cardinals, Enos Slaughter "accidentally" spikes Robinson on the back of the leg with his cleats while running the bases.
Robinson's home run against Pittsburgh Pirates pitcher Fritz Ostermueller, who had earlier hit him in the head, helps clinch the National League pennant for the Dodgers, sending them to the World Series, which they would lose to the New York Yankees. A concluding postscript describes how Rickey, Robinson, and many of his teammates went on to have distinguished careers, including inductions into the Baseball Hall of Fame, besides Chapman, who was fired and forbidden to join an MLB team forever due to his racism. (This was not, in fact, entirely true: Chapman was fired in the 1948 season due to the Phillies' losing record, but he later resurfaced as a major league coach with the Cincinnati Reds.) The notes also describe the entrance of other African Americans into the Major Leagues, beginning with the season after Robinson's debut. | historical | train | wikipedia | I absolutely wouldn't have taken the risk of playing a game while people threatened my wife and child.When Jackie finally got angry enough to smash his bat against a wall, that was the ONLY thing I could relate to - then to realize he had to go back out there because it was about MORE than just him - I was flabbergasted by his courage.This is more than a film about baseball.
The nuances like watching people in second class seating still turning out to support Robinson in full-on "Sunday church service" dress was poignant to me.This movie ain't just about Jackie.My mom is from New York, and she was 7 years old when Jackie joined the Dodgers.
Jackie Robinson.Writer/Director Brian Helgeland (s/p for L.A. Confidential and Mystic River) takes a look at what occurred in 1945-47, when Brooklyn Dodgers President and GM Branch Rickey (played by Harrison Ford) made the business decision to integrate baseball.
He settles on Jackie Robinson after their infamous 3 hour meetings where Rickey confronts Robinson with his need for a black player "with the guts NOT to fight back".Chadwick Boseman portrays Jackie Robinson as a man thoroughly in love with his wife Rachel (played by Nicole Beharie), and one who says he just wants to "be a ballplayer", while at the same time taking pride in his world-changing role.
Of course as a baseball fan, I enjoyed the all too brief antics of Brooklyn manager Leo Durocher (Christopher Meloni) whose place in the Robinson story would have been much more profound had he not succumbed to the weakness of the flesh (so to speak).Filmmaker Helgeland provides a tale of morality and social change, and provides a glimpse at the character and strength required by those involved.
He's one of the only people in the movie who actually treats Jackie like a human being from the beginning.The other actors were good too.With almost every sports movie, you can pretty much tell were the story was going.
Writer-director Brian Helgeland manages to artfully mix elements of drama, baseball action, humor and romance[!] while telling an important story about recent American history.I thought it was wise for the film to focus on just a few years of Robinson's career, so that more time could be given to important scenes both on and off the field."42" is not called the "Jackie Robinson Story" for a reason.
The film shows the roles that Brooklyn Dodgers owner Branch Rickey (Harrison Ford), Robinson's wife Rachel (Nicole Beharie), and journalist Wendell Smith (Andre Holland) played in Robinson's career and life.
You ask anyone who follows baseball they know the name, the number, what it meant to the sport, and this country.Luckily the film doesn't try to do too much by telling the life story of Jackie Robinson, instead it focuses on Robinson's days in the Negro League in 1945 to his first season with the Brooklyn Dodgers in 1947.
At a time when the society in America was still segregated based on race, Jackie Robinson became the first African-American Major League Baseball player.
Harrison Ford is unforgettable in his supporting role as Branch Rickey, the legendary General Manger who took great risks in signing Jackie Robinson.
The acting overall is wonderful, and I give credit to a great supporting cast.The film is a true inspirational story of how a baseball player helped change a sport, and how sport can change a country.
But we also see Robinson get some support from his wife, Rachel (Nicole Beharie), a fellow African-American reporting on him named Wendell Smith (Andre Holland), and especially, Brooklyn Dodgers head Branch Rickey (Harrison Ford).
With the support of journalist Wendell Smith (Andre Holland), Rachel Robinson (Nicole Beharie) and Dodger's owner Branch Rickey (Harrison Ford), Jackie proves he has what it takes to make it.I really love this film.
However, film does not actually follow the whole story of Jackie, it more tells a story of racial revolution in baseball, which escalated after one bold decision of Brooklyn Dodgers executive - Branch Rickey (Harrison Ford).
And since every of them, regardless their skin color paid money to see Robinson playing, this new transfer to the team could be successful.Brian Helgeland wrote a pretty interesting and engaging script, with really good dialogues (well, he has a great experience of it from LA Confidential and Mystic River).
The release date of April 12th coinciding with the start of the baseball season, as well as Jackie Robinson Day on April 15th (when every MLB player sports #42 in his honor), felt appropriate and was clever marketing.In case you live under a rock and/or you happened to go to one of the few elementary schools that didn't require its students to write a report on a famous black person for Black History Month, Jackie Robinson was the first African American Major League Baseball player, who played first and second base with the Brooklyn Dodgers from 1947 through 1956.
Then of course, there's the legendary Harrison Ford as Dodgers general manager Branch Rickey, the man who helped break the color barrier by deciding to sign Robinson.
Chadwick Boseman's attention to detail and firm grasp on Robinson's control as well as Harrison Ford's masterful portrayal of Rickey's unapologetic force create a dynamic energy that pushes the film forward in every single scene.
The Rocky formula was nicely dropped on the Jackie Robinson story as this legendary player had to go up against layers of racism within the sport of baseball while also dealing with his team's tough pennant race.
He was there with his wife, Rachel, and as brief as out encounter was, I came away remembering two things: I had just met a great man and I had just met a great woman who was in love with him.Now, in 2013, we can all learn about Jackie Robinson, the man who broke the color barrier in major league baseball.
McGinley played the Red Barber I remember growing up (although he had moved on to other teams by then), and look for an Oscar nomination for Harrison Ford as Dodger owner Branch Rickey.Do yourself a favor and head for a theater near you and see why this movie gets a perfect 4 out of Fordyce.Credit Check: Nothing happens after the credits..
"42" tells the story of Jackie Robinson being signed with the Brooklyn Dodgers by team executive Branch Rickey and how it was a real challenge during his rookie season as a Brooklyn Dodgers player.I felt the film was done well with good directing by Brian Helgeland who also wrote the screenplay.
Instead of a hard-hitting look at all the extremely powerful, emotional, and impactful events that surrounded Jackie Robinson, the Brooklyn Dodgers and MLB as a whole, we are given a PG "everything is roses in the end" cream puff of a movie.
The most pivotal statement in that movie takes place between Harrison Ford's character Branch Rickey and Jackie Robinson played by Boseman.
"42" about Jackie Robinson, the first African American major league baseball player, is a beautiful, inspirational, must-see movie.
Jackie Robinson was a true hero, as was Branch Rickey, the white man who decided to break the color line in baseball.
Baseball executive Branch Rickey (Harrison Ford) selects Jackie Robinson (Chadwick Boseman) to be the first African American player on a major league team.
My tale only amplified the film, a revelation to her, for not only did she not know the Jackie Robinson story, she did not understand the pervasiveness of racism that existed throughout America at the time, in so many levels of society.The bravery of Robinson, as well as Dodgers' owner Branch Rickey and others came as news, and for only the second time that I remember, she enjoyed "a baseball picture" ("Moneyball" was the first.)Harrison Ford turns in a surprisingly good performance (to my surprise), and the rest of the cast is marvelous, including, of course, Chadwick Boseman as Robinson and Nicole Beharie as his wife.
My mother told me he did something important in baseball, better than a winning home run.Thank God what he did was open the doors to talented black and other ethnic players to play baseball, it changed the game forever.This movie depicts this feat done by this man as well as the audacious Branch Rickey, general manager of the Dodgers.
All of the Dodgers portrayed were actually members of the team at the time: Ralph Branca, Eddy Stanky, Pee Wee Reese, Dixie Walker, and Kirby Higbe (Higbe was 2-0 with Brooklyn before his ill-fated trade to Pittsburgh, where he was 11-17).Ben Chapman was indeed the manager for the Phillies, and Fritz Ostermueller was a pitcher for Pittsburgh.There were also pretty realistic images of Ebbets Field and the Polo Grounds, even though those ball parks have been long ago torn down.I especially like the guy who played Leo Durocher, by the way, though I believe the real reason for his suspension from baseball for one year was due to his association with gamblers and some shady underworld characters, not for his running around with women.
It is, for much of the time, a rather sensitive portrayal of racism, how to combat racism, and - of course - of Jackie Robinson's struggle against racism as he makes his way to the major leagues.As a baseball movie, this is very well done.
Brian Helgeland wrote and directed a solid hit with a fine cast, but this is a painful film to watch on the one hand, and a celebration of one of the first cracks in the racism veneer of this country.Briefly the story can be summarized as follows: 'In 1946, Jackie Robinson (Chadwick Boseman) is a Negro League baseball player who never takes racism lying down.
This movie, though we associate the number 42 of Jackie Robinson's Dodgers' uniform with baseball, is a film about far more than baseball; in fact it has not that much to do with the game as it does with the character of the man himself, as well as another man, Branch Rickey, and the truly important mark these two men made on American history.I shudder to think what would have happen, how longer things would taken to change the course of civil rights and integration in the U.S. if someone with a lesser character and strength had been the one chosen by Rickey, or any other professional sport league owner.The movie will once again depict the ugly state of relations and of racism in the years the preceded his final acceptance by the fans.
And it was returning US Army veteran Let. Jackie Roosevelt Robinson, Chadwick Boseman, who was the person chosen by Brooklyn Dodger owner Branch "Rick-a-Dink" Rickey, Harrison Ford,to do it!
Though it is probably hard to watch for a 2013 audience who is much more experienced in a culturally diverse world, the film actually could have used some more grit and racial circumstances showing how rough this long baseball season was for Robinson, his wife (Nicole Beharie) and all the African American supporters during this time.For anyone who has never heard of Jackie Robinson or this story, 42 might be worth while for some.
While the film is mostly accurate and captures the truth of racism in baseball during the years 1945, 46, and 47, it is cliché-ridden and falls short of transferring Robinson's greatness to the screen.Played by the excellent Chadwick Boseman, Robinson signed with the Dodgers organization after a search of "suitable" black players by team President and General Manager Branch Rickey.
"If Robinson can help us win and everything I have seen says yes he can, then he is going to play on this ball club." On opening day at Ebbets field before a large crowd, half of whom were black, Robinson became the first African-American to play in the major leagues since the 1880s.One of the dramatic highlights of the film is Robinson's barely restrained stoicism in the face of the nonstop slurs delivered by Phillies Manager Ben Chapman using the word "nigger" probably more than any other time in the history of cinema (I haven't seen Django Unchained).
In spite of its shortcomings, 42 is an engaging and highly entertaining sports movie.Though it largely ignores the fact that the integration of baseball was part of a larger political movement in which progressive unions, civil rights organizations, activists, and other protest groups fought for a decade to eliminate discrimination in housing, jobs, and other sectors of society as well as baseball, the film will help to introduce Jackie Robinson to a new generation.
The full review of this can be found on slashcomment:Jackie Robinson's journey from the buses of Negro league baseball to becoming the first black player to play in the all-white Major Leagues is a story on much the same level as that of Neil Armstrong's one giant leap for mankind 22 years later.
Harrison Ford's character is more like Mickey in Rocky and the nobody who played Jackie Robinson clearly took no acting lessons.Also this movie focused too heavily on the game of baseball instead of developing Robinson's character.
"Maybe tomorrow, we'll all wear 42, so nobody could tell us apart."42 is a wonderful and inspiring sports movie based on the life of Jackie Robinson, the first colored baseball player to make it to the Major Leagues.
The Brooklyn Dodgers team executive, Branch Rickey (Harrison Ford), decides its time to shake things up a little and decides to contract Jackie Robinson (Chadwick Boseman), the first African American to sign for the Major Leagues.
It's the age of Jackie Robinson – the man who changed America's Pastime and changed American attitudes about race.Harrison Ford plays Branch Rickey, the Brooklyn Dodgers' General Manager who made the bold decision to bring an African American into the Major Leagues in 1947.
Chadwick Helgeland plays Jackie with a spare naturalness and Harrison Ford is a serviceable Branch Rickey, the Dodgers executive who handpicked Robinson for the daunting task of playing good ball while facing unbelievable racism, especially from the likes of the Philadelphia Phillies' manager at the time, Ben Chapman, depicted here very accurately, according to The New York Times.
Dealing with racism and class prejudice, a good-triumphs-over-evil element and the feel-good factor of an underdog story, 42 will satisfy most viewers and adequately fill a couple of hours without knocking your day out of kilter.42 is based on the true story of Jackie Robinson (Chadwick Boseman) who, in 1946, became the first African American to play major league baseball when he was recruited by club president and GM of the Brooklyn Dodgers, Branch Rickey (Harrison Ford), and wore, unsurprisingly, the number 42 shirt.
Last night I saw "42", the new bio-pic about the great Dodger ball player Jackie Robinson, who was the first African American to play in Major League Baseball in the modern era.Usually I don't like sports films because the actors are always not really athletes and their athletic shortcomings distract me from enjoying the film.
The heroism of Robinson is summed up by the film "42" which is also credits the man who decided to allow the first African-American baseball player to don a uniform of a team in the White Major Leagues, Branch Ricky.
To understand what Robinson endured and still be able to compete in professional baseball at the highest levels, is no less than an extraordinary achievement in the human drama of any age of history, according to Wills.The story is presented from three perspectives: mostly from Jackie Robinson's eyes, occasionally from his wife's (played by Nicole Beharie), and from the perspective of the man who made the controversial move, Branch Rickie, played by Harrison Ford in possibly the finest performance of his career.
The film covers the first year of Jackie Robinson (Chadwick Boseman) as he tries to fit into baseball, which is an all white sport and many don't want that to change.
Written and directed by Brian Helgeland, a white guy who is more known for his script writing abilities than his directorial prowess, "42" tells not so much the life story of Jackie Robinson (even though it has the ostentatious runtime of 128 minutes) but more so the story of Robinson's historic breaking of the color barrier in baseball, due to the signing by Branch Rickey, the team executive of the Brooklyn Dodgers at the time.Even though I am giving this film a recommendation, maybe the best way to describe it would be with the term "hokey entertainment".
42 tells the story of famed baseball player, Jackie Robinson, and his becoming the first major league black ballplayer for the Brooklyn Dodgers.
Chadwick Boseman does a fine job as Jackie Robinson, but the real standouts in the cast are Alan Tudyk as racist Philadelphia Phillies' manager Ben Chapman and Harrison Ford as Dodger's owner, Branch Rickey.
Though a nice film in its own right, "42" truly captures the poignancy of the story using Hollywood drama.For a basic plot summary, "42" recounts how Jackie Robinson (Chadwick Boseman), with the help of Branch Rickey (Harrison Ford), broke Major League Baseball's color barrier in 1947 with the Brooklyn Dodgers.
The film provided an outstanding setting of the time period of racial discrimination and segregation that African Americans were dealing with daily, Chadwick Boseman did an amazing job at providing the viewer a full understanding of the life of Jackie Robinson and his career, including the role of the character.
42 is the biopic of Jackie Robinson, who we all know as the first African American to play Major League Baseball.
"You want a player who doesn't have the guts to fight back?" Robinson (Chadwick Boseman) asks of Brooklyn Dodgers general manager Branch Rickey (Harrison Ford), the man who dared to put him in a Major League uniform.
Chadwick Boseman does a great job of portraying Jackie Robinson, as do the other actors playing their roles. |
tt0297884 | Far from Heaven | In 1957 suburban Connecticut, Cathy Whitaker appears to be the perfect wife, mother, and homemaker. Cathy is married to Frank, a successful executive at Magnatech, a company selling television advertising. One evening Cathy receives a phone call from the local police who are holding her husband. He says it's all a mix up but they won't let him leave alone. Frank has in fact been exploring the underground world of gay bars in Hartford, Connecticut. One day, Cathy spies an unknown black man walking through her yard. He turns out to be Raymond Deagan, the son of Cathy's late gardener.
Frank often finds himself forced to stay late at the office, swamped with work. One night when Frank is working late, Cathy decides to bring his dinner to him at the office. She walks in on him passionately kissing another man. Frank confesses having had "problems" as a young man, and agrees to sign up for conversion therapy. However, his relationship with Cathy is irreparably strained, and he turns to alcohol.
Cathy runs into Raymond at a local art show, and initiates a discussion with him about modern painting, to the consternation of a few onlookers. One night, after a party, Frank attempts to make love to Cathy. He is unable to become aroused and strikes Cathy when she tries to console him.
Cathy decides to spend a day with Raymond. They go to a bar in the black neighborhood in which she is the only white person present. Raymond toasts her with a drink saying "Here's to being the only one". They are seen together by one of Cathy's neighbors, who immediately tells everyone. The town is soon ablaze with gossip about the two of them. This becomes evident when Cathy attends a ballet performance by her young daughter and the mothers of the other girls prevent them from socializing with Cathy's daughter. Cathy's husband is also furious. Cathy goes to find Raymond to tell them that their friendship isn't "plausible."
Over the Christmas and New Year's holidays, Cathy goes on a vacation with her husband to Miami to take their minds off of things. At the hotel, Frank has another sexual encounter with a young man.
Back in Hartford, three white boys taunt and assault Raymond's daughter, Sarah. Frank tells Cathy that he has found a man who loves him and wants to be with him and seeks a divorce from Cathy. When Cathy eventually finds out that the victim of the attack was Raymond's daughter, Sarah, she goes to the Deagan home to find them packing up in preparation to move to Baltimore. At one point when he addresses her as "Mrs. Whitaker", she begs him to call her Cathy. She suggests they can be together now that she is to be single. Raymond declines, saying "I've learned my lesson about mixing the two worlds." Ultimately, Cathy goes to the train station to see Raymond off and say her silent goodbye to him, waving to him as the train moves out of the station. | romantic, neo noir, queer | train | wikipedia | Todd Haynes' Far From Heaven, a homage to the 1950s melodramas of Douglas Sirk, is an exquisitely crafted film of beauty and grace.
The world that Haynes creates is so meticulously detailed that one almost forgets that the movie isn't fifty years old.Julianne Moore deserves an Academy Award for her portrayal of Cathy Whitaker, a homemaker whose idyllic life begins to disintegrate when she learns that her husband is gay.
At the end of the film Cathy has no illusions, and realizes that the life that she thought was perfect is actually a never-ending hell.Dennis Quaid is equally stunning as Cathy's tortured husband Frank.
When Cathy confides in her black gardener the rumours begin that again threaten Cathy's all-American society queen existence.It helps when writing a review of a film like this that you can throw round all the right references and draw comparison's wit the two Sirk films from which Haynes drew inspiration from.
`Far From Heaven' is a total artistic triumph for writer/director Todd Haynes, who has, among other things, provided the most brilliant examination of the codes and values of the 1950's that I have ever seen in a film.
In true '50's fashion, Frank, when Cathy catches him in the act with another man, decides to seek `treatment' from a therapist, in the vain hope that he will be `cured' of his `problem.' These scenes are a jolting and stark reminder of just how far we've come from the days when this unenlightened viewpoint held sway in society.
When this relationship is noticed by the townspeople, the ugly realities of bigotry and prejudice come to the fore, proving that, even in a place like Connecticut, where no actual laws segregated blacks from whites, the attitudes of the common citizenry were no more enlightened than those that permeated the Deep South.In a stroke of genius, Haynes has patterned his film after actual 1950's melodramas, particularly those by director Douglas Sirk, whose movies like `Imitation of Life' and `Magnificent Obsession' provided daring (for the times) studies of social issues like racism and May/December romances within the context of what were, essentially, glossy, visually palatable soap operas.
`Far From Heaven' looks exactly like those films, from the color-splashed autumnal setting to the picture-perfect interiors of an upper-middle class home in suburban New England where familial and personal problems appear as out of place as `Leave it to Beaver' would seem if it were on network TV today.
If nothing else, `Far From Heaven' is a study of the kind of emotional and psychological damage that can be inflicted on an individual when a society encourages repression and conformity at all costs.As Cathy, Julianne Moore gives a performance that can be called nothing less than overwhelming.
Yet, his work here also has a quieter quality, particularly in the subtle piano riff, which reminds us quite a bit of his classic score for `To Kill a Mockingbird.' As a director, Haynes shows himself in total control of his medium, blending all these elements into a complete and satisfying whole.`Far From Heaven' is really unlike any movie you have ever seen, a fascinating admixture of the old and the modern.
Todd Haynes' achievement in his homage to the films of Douglas Sirk is so complete, and seems so carefree that it is easy to dismiss FAR FROM HEAVEN as a trifle.
This was in the days when homosexuality was an official diagnosed mental illness.In what could have been a familiar variation of the white/black awkward beginnings of friendship seen in Sidney Poitier movies but which in this instance has a refreshing originality, Cathy befriends gardener Raymond Deagan (Dennis Haysbert).
Fine acting.Director Todd Haynes allowed Moore and Quaid to make their roles real, involving, and anguished and funny in turn.
Cathy Whitaker (Julianne Moore) has it all, a handsome husband (Dennis Quaid), Two wonderful children (Ryan Ward & Lindsay Andretta), a loyal housekeeper (Viola Davis) and her close best friend (Patricia Clarkson).
All of Haynes' energy has gone towards recreating the details and trappings of a past era of (let's face it) relatively minor film making, and there's no energy left to imbue the characters with power, believability or any trace of interior life.
And you're left confused, embarrassed and more than little bit irritated.FAR FROM HEAVEN is a detailed recreation of a very specific type of drama from the 1950's: a high-gloss, emotion-on-the-sleeve "women's picture" wherein everything has the rich Technicolor tone of an ad for refrigerators or hair care products from out of the pages of LIFE, LOOK or the Ladies' Home Journal of that era.
And therein lies the problem with FAR FROM HEAVEN: instead of being an honest exploration of the themes of bigotry and homophobia, it only seems to trivializes it's own intentions, without even a fig leaf of satire to disguise it's failure.Julianne Moore is charming in the lead role, but you have to be willing to accept the idea that she is sophisticated enough to understand her husband's closet homosexuality on one hand, yet be so naive that she doesn't realize that running around town and socializing with a black man is a no-no, even in the relatively liberal setting of suburban Connecticut.
Nolie from South Africa said it much better in His/Her review a few days back "exquisite to look at but more than a little flat" and "stolid affected version of Pleasantville for the faux Hollywood cineast crowd, people in love with themselves as much as the film makers are in love with their product" I grew up in the fifties and their was more REAL drama going on in my neighborhood and in the lives of my family and my neighbors in a single afternoon than in the entirety of this "FILM"..
Cathy Whitaker (Julianne Moore in a radiant, profoundly sensitive performance) is the picture perfect, carefully groomed, crinolined wife of successful Frank Whitaker (Dennis Quaid), mother of two just right children, and plastic hostess for parties that include her proper friends - such as Eleanor Fine (Patricia Clarkson).
As Close to Heaven as Movies Can Get. Writer/director Todd Haynes makes a 1950s Douglas Sirk melodrama filtered through the cultural perceptions of the 21st Century.But what Haynes put on screen was far more than a film student exercise, or a simple pastiche of a recognizable genre.
Though the early scenes of the film take a jokey approach to setting up the 1950s suburban milieu, Haynes has far more on his mind than simply poking fun at the time period.
Julianne Moore's performance as a housewife who sees her world shatter when she finds her husband (Dennis Quaid) in the arms of another man brings to mind Jane Wyman's in "All That Heaven Allows," one of this film's primary inspirations, but it's no mere retread.
Quaid, while perhaps having an easier character to play, gives a fierce performance as a man whose struggles with his inner demons are so intense that they manifest themselves almost physically in his face and demeanor.A lot of criticism has been leveled at the film for its treatment of the character of Raymond (Dennis Haysbert), the black gardener with whom Moore strikes up first a friendship and then a forbidden romance.
In context, it works.On top of the terrific performances and Haynes's meticulous direction, the film is visually stunning, with cinematography and color-coordinated costumes that are used alternately to highlight the harmony and dissonance of a world that looks perfect but isn't.
At times, giggling about sex, a curse or the way Quaid sidles into a gay bar reminds you that this isn't your mother's '50s melodrama.While so much of the movie is understated, I found the treatment of racism to be overstated, at least for the north.I was born in 1957, so I can't say "I was there so I remember." Certainly, the smirky remarks at Kathy's party were heard for years beyond 1957, even in the north.
It was the public expression of racism, particularly the scene where a white man calls Raymond "boy" that seemed really out-of-place for the time and place.Haynes might have made the movie a little more interesting would have been if Kathy assumes people will shun and talk about her if she gets involved with Raymond - if most of the "melodrama" was internal.
Moore's character, Cathy, became so annoying during the course of the movie that when a physical altercation erupted between her and her husband..I was actually cheering.The writers may have wanted wanted to portray her as "innocent" of the cruel facts around her, such as her homosexual husband and the social outcry against her attraction to a man of color, which sets up a very complex plot but that's as far as it gets.
It is set in an upscale Connecticut suburb in 1957 where the wife (Julianne Moore in an Oscar-worthy (wait, that's a knock on Moore) performance as Cathy Whitaker, balancing a sweet good-natured, genuinely nice personality with her interest in fairness and equality for all which in reality is not embraced by all the suburban housewives of the city) of a company executive (Dennis Quaid as Frank Whitaker with some of the self-destructive ease which characterizes the cynicism of the deceptively progressive social values of suburbanites in the '50s) comes to differ, however minimally, with a prominent socialite, Eleanor Fine, played with suave cynicism by Patricia Clarkson.
Julianne Moore is a great actor, and I love Patty Clarkson, and Dennis Haysbert and Dennis Quaid aren't bad either, but they're all wasted in this silly movie.
And psychiatrist James Rebhorn assures him that great strides have been made in treating homosexuals.Quaid can stay in the closet as 98% of gays did at the time, but this little revelation sends Moore looking for the understanding company of Dennis Haysbert who is a widower raising a small daughter.
Of course, this is a deliberate choice, portraying life as if it was taken straight out of those old movies with smiling wives getting dinner ready just in time for dad whose coming from work, greeted by their two lovely children.The problem is, since everything is so artificial and "fake" it's impossible to feel for Moore's desperate housewife.
The acting was awful, the plot was recycled cliche and the dialogue was predictable and embarrassing.The only good thing this movie had was the cinematography (at times) and the use of colors (which, while it was lush and gorgeous it certainly was void of meaning, as opposed to Paul Thomas Anderson's usage in Punch Drunk Love).Moore is fake, Quaid is nonexistent and Haysbert is simplistic.
Haynes follows that formula but inserts themes that Sirk couldn't have gotten away with (mainly homosexuality).In 1957 housewife Cathy Whitaker (Julianne Moore) comes to realize her husband (Dennis Quaid) is gay.
Since his efforts aren't these kind of "comment outside of the drama" Brechtian productions (save GOLDMINE a bit, with its well-documented CITIZEN KANE-like structure) I take his pieces for the emotional melodramas they are.I wanted to cry for Julianne Moore's character in FAR FROM HEAVEN but I just couldn't do it...
I experienced her story from a safe distance because the rococo dialogue and the stakes of social alienation her character and the Haysbert's character faced didn't engage me (no matter that some of those stakes still exist in the world today, truth be told.)Every effort seemed devoted to making the whole production "just like it was back then" much like the Sirk film, ALL THAT HEAVEN ALLOWS.
In 1957, the Whitaker are the classic American family: Frank Whitaker (Dennis Quaid) is the beloved successful provider husband and Cathy Whitaker (Julianne Moore) is the perfect mother and housewife.
The remarkable performance of the always magnificent Julianne Moore, very well supported by the excellent Dennis Quaid and Dennis Haysbert, and having a sharp direction and a wonderful photography in a marvelous reconstitution of a period make this movie outstandingly good.
There is detail in the work of Moore, Quaid, and Haysbert (look closely at the almost imperceptible change in Raymond's eyes as Kathy bids him farewell outside the movie theatre) - but there is just as much drama in the film's stunning cinematography, and in its bold use of lighting and colour, including the beautiful costumes.
FAR FROM HEAVEN is just like any classic Douglas Sirk film from the '50s (see LEAVE HER TO HEAVEN), but better, because the viewer is not asked to feel emotional connection with characters who, we all know, just never existed.
For someone who is fond of Douglas Sirk's melodramas,"far from Heaven " is cause for celebration.Todd Haynes does not recreate an era (the late fifties) he recreates an era as those brilliant tear jerkers used to show it.Not only Julianne Moore's hairdo,the names in the cast and credits in pastel colors,or the very first picture (which is also the last one)...but also the story.For Douglas Sirk's lover will have a wonderful time : hints about "all that Heaven allows" and "Imitation of life" abound.Patricia Clarkson's character (Eleanor) is the good woman who never lets her friends down like Agnes Moorehead's in "All that..".
The exhibition where Raymond is not the welcome is the equivalent of the party where the gardener (Rock Hudson) ,Cary Scott(Jane Wyman)'s new friend is despised by all the guests.The scene when the boys throw stones on Raymond's daughter makes me think of that scene in "imitation of life (1959)" where a fair-haired boy (Troy Donahue) beats Sarah Jane (Susan Kohner) (the first names are almost the same)because he has discovered she is a black girl who wants to pass for a white one.Beyond Douglas Sirk: when you compare Douglas Sirk's version of "imitation of life" with John Stahl's (and Fannie Hurst's book) ,you realize how much Sirk was actually reactionary,in spite of his huge talent: Hurst 's Delilah and Peola were given "white " names :Annie and Sarah Jane .Whereas Delilah was some kind of partner for Bea (Claudette Colbert),Annie becomes Lora's (Lana Turner) servant whose only ambition is to have a luxury funeral.Todd Haynes ,while paying a tribute to Sirk ,transcends his paternalistic side :his Raymond has nothing to do with Annie :he's educated,he has a dream,like Luther King,and he will soon turn into an activist .And -even if their relationship remains platonic- he loves a white woman (it's a long way to Kramer's "Guess who's coming to dine" where a white bubble head girl wanted to marry a black future Nobel prize)All that concerns Dennis Quaid and his gay relationships are given a very discreet treatment.In the late fifties ,homosexuality was still a taboo subject ("Suddenly last summer" (1959) "the children's hour" (1961)) and the Hayes code would not have allowed the (very brief) nudities Haynes films.Quaid is extraordinary in the scene when he cries in Moore's arms.But the whole cast is to praise.If you do not know Douglas Sirk and if you like this film,I would never recommend enough (despite the reservations expressed above)"all that heaven allows" " imitation of life" "magnificent obsession" and "written on the wind".
Even supposedly dear and close friends, such as the delicious Patricia Clarkson, back away from a woman who has dared to break a taboo and enjoy friendship that crosses the color bar.The film's performances are faultless; the art direction is dead on from the furniture to the cars to the company logo in Quaid's office; the direction and writing are first class; the ravishing cinematography and lush score are achingly evocative of Lana Turner movies of the period; even the titles echo melodramas by Douglas Sirk.
Julianne Moore (blonde rather than red-haired here) gives an outstanding performance as the liberal-minded but socially naive Cathy Whitaker, while Dennis Quaid is excellent as her sexually troubled husband Frank.This is a movie which is close to heaven as far as talent and skill are concerned, even if the issues examined are at times somewhat hellish..
One of the midday movies I most remember from being home at times sick with asthma, was the Douglas Sirk film All That Heaven Allows (made in my birth year 1955).
I can tell you all this because, although Far From Heaven (written and directed by Todd Haynes) pays homage to the Sirk film, the plots are only scantly related.
The great similarity is in the intensity of the characterdevelopment, the emotive strength of the screenplay and the visual stark clarity (even though I only ever saw All That Heaven Allows in black and white).In `Far From Heaven' the main character Cathy Whitaker (Julianne Moore) is a text book housewife - not finding life perfect, but doing everything she's been taught in support of her husband and in caring for her kids.
I strongly resist weeping at cinemas, but in one scene I was amazed to find several tears stream from the outside corner of my right eye - and less than a second later tears trickled from the corresponding eye of Cathy Whitaker.Far From Heaven is memorable for doing what I believe good cinema should achieve - taking the viewer effortlessly to the time and place of the characters, giving them life and substance and, in an entertaining manner, allowing a window to experiences and emotions..
Although nowhere near as bad as Mulholland Drive which every intellectual praised simply because it was different and confusing, Far From Heaven is painfully slow in developing, every major plot point is clearly evident 20 minutes before it happens, and the ending leaves you wanting back the 1 hour and 40 minutes you just wasted on the film.Yes, great performance by Julianne Moore, wonderful set direction and cinematography...but that does not a great movie make.
The central figure, Cathy Whitaker (Julianne Moore) finds her picture-perfect life as a society-pages housewife gradually unravel as her husband struggles with his homosexual feelings and she innocently steps over the color line in her interactions with her black gardener, Raymond Deagan (Dennis Haysbert). |
tt0825239 | Contre-enquête | When the young daughter of police captain Richard Malinowski is raped and murdered, his colleagues hastily find a suspect called Daniel Eckman. Despite there being no witnesses and no forensic evidence, he is sentenced to 30 years. From jail he starts writing to the policeman, expressing his deep regret for the death of the daughter and proclaiming his innocence. Doubts begin to surface in the mind of the policeman, who begins his own private enquiry. He finds that Salinas, a known serial killer of children, was in the area at the time of the killing.
As well as letters to the father, the prisoner has also been writing to Christine, a female sympathiser. He has a letter smuggled out to her, asking her to give false evidence on his behalf. A retrial is held and Eckman is freed, with compensation. Meeting Christine, he asks her to come away with him to a new life together, but she begins to have doubts about his honesty. He then rings Malinowski to ask if he can call round to thank him personally. Malinowski agrees, and gives him a whiskey full of sedative. When he comes to, he is bound in duct tape beside an open grave at the spot where the girl's body was found. After a brief explanation, Malinowski buries him alive. | revenge | train | wikipedia | Very-well made and good suspense, one to watch....
Through persistent correspondence over the course of three years and new elements in his possession, police captain Malinowski starts to doubt the man convicted for his 10 year old daughter's rape and murder is actually guilty and starts a counter-investigation on his own.Written and directed by ex-cop Franck Mancuso (also co-writer of the great 36 Quai Des Orfèvres), Contre-Enquête is a very good, well-made film, certainly the best French crime film of 2007 out of those I've seen so far (which include Le Deuxième Soufflé, Chrysalis and ex-top spot holder Pars Vite Et Reviens Tard).
So-hot-right-now Jean Dujardin is very good in his first truly serious role I've seen, and the rest of the cast do a good job as well, especially Laurent Lucas as Daniel Eckmann, the convict.
The script, based on a short story by Lawrence Block (screenwriter of Wong Kar-Wai's English-language effort My Blueberry Nights) is greatly written and keeps the suspense going and the viewer wondering until the very end.
Good crime thriller, check it out if you have the chance..
Wrong Bloch but right movie.
First "writers_reign" the script is not an adaptation of a novel written by Robert Bloch but by Lawrence Block, also author of "Eight million ways to die" adapted by Hal Ashby.
Having said this the movie itself offers a good and unusual performance by Jean Dujardin and a new great one by Laurent Lucas.
Franck Mancuso being an ex cop is certainly in a better place that anyone to know about police procedures and does a good job for his first directorial task.
It's also great to see a cameo by the late Jean-Pierre Cassel.
So, in the end it's a tight (the movie is approx 75mn long) crime drama that don't relies on car chases or gunfights.
French thrillers still can be made these days..
Sharp crime flick.
First of all, during the last years France is proving to be one of the most interesting 'creators' of front-line quality crime and thriller films.
We had successful movies such as 'De battre mon coeur s'est arrêté', '36 Quai des Orfèvres' or most recently 'L'ennemi public nº1' and how can we forget 'Ne le dis à personne'.
The question is, what happened to this one?
It has to be one of the most interesting french movies that I have ever seen and how come I've never heard of it in foreign lands (except France of course)?
Not only you have here a genius and meticulous plot, with a final twist that simply blows one away, but also solid performances (Jean Dujardin is excellent as the tough Richard Malinowski) and good directing (Franck Mancuso is a pleasant surprise).
It's a short, sharp and accurate crime flick with entertainment guaranteed.
It hasn't car chases, gun shooting or explosions, but just mind tricks that fit in perfectly.This is one of those cases that if it had a different production, it would have make it BIG TIME.
And that's a real shame because this little piece of french tape is a lesson of good film-making and the fact that it didn't get much of recognition and visibility left it forgotten.However, you, the reader, don't forget it and if you have the chance, just watch it because it is 75 minutes of sharp crime flick - 8/10..
Frame-up.
Having watched for years Jean Dujardin in his hilarious sitcom "Un Gars Une Fille" ,I was wondering how he would manage in a dramatic story.He is quite convincing ,as is Laurent Lucas in a shady role.The story is ,except for the debatable ending,close to the famous Boileau-Narcejac frame-ups with a dash of Patricia Highsmith thrown in for good measure ,but the characters lack in-depth psychology.The movie is too short and the part of Daniel is underwritten.The scene when Dujardin arrives on the scene of the crime shows the influence of Clint Eastwood's "Mystic river" .All in all,this is a rather good thriller,which could have been really great.The short nightmare scene ("I can't ,dad,I'm dead") is effective..
Flawed, but overall satisfying!.
Contre-Enquete is the prime example of a movie that is not really well directed, but that is carried on by his actors.
If you like your direction tight and extensive, this is not a movie for you.You seldom feel rushed into the action, the scenes are too short and everything happens in the same time, which makes it difficult to get attached to the characters.
In its first twenty minutes, the movie out pours a lot of emotional scenes that comes out as being cheesy because...well the movie is just starting!
Nobody really cares about the characters yet.But there is all the bad I have to say.
The odyssey of a broken down father to find the true murderer of his daughter is a gripping tale that has Jean Dujardin and Laurent Lucas as their shining stars.
Their play is subtle, tight and leaves the viewer in a total state of confusion towards the potential ending of the movie.It could have been a landslide due to its predictability and its sloppiness, but Dujardin and Lucas made this an overall rather enjoying experience..
Surprised ....
by a few things.
Like how good the movie was, how bad it is rated here and how convincing the main actor was in this (given the movie I saw him before was a spoof, OSS 117).
Although I heard he's a big star over in France.No wonder I say.
His performance holds this movie together, which may be a little predictable and might run a bit too long, but it still is a good movie.
With a very difficult topic that is.
And a relationship between two characters, that is disturbing to say the least.
And that's not only counting for the wife of the main character (it's his movie though, which is apparent too), but also with the other main person of the movie.
It moves slowly, but if you adapt to that, than you will like it (and the twists will be a nice addition, too)..
Great thriller, cautionary tale and cop movie!.
Jean Dujardin plays "Richard Malinowski", a model cop and family man in this film loaded with famous actors like J.
P. Cassel, Aurélien Recoing and J.
F. Garreaud.
Beautiful Caroline Santini plays the unknowing victim of a psychopath so well you can't forget her case easily.
Visually beautiful, great music, a rather classic/ conventional plot in the beginning, but the movie doesn't deliver if you know how to wait.Claire M., the long-suffering wife of our main character, could've been better developed, following instead the well trodden lines of the "wife that doesn't understand the hero, leaves him at the worst moment, is cold and always complaining".
I'd expect a better leading female character, at least in a film made in 2007.What I most liked is the cop culture of fellowship, even when they know what their "brothers in arms" are up to.
They protect each other.
For good or for bad :).Enjoy!PS: To the fellow IMDb reviewer "kosmasp": Yes, Dujardin is very well known in France, he's always at Cannes, having just won the best actor prize there with the beautiful film "L'Artiste" with Bérénice Bejo, for instance..
Investigate This!.
I love 10 movies.
It's well made, directed, decent story and has all the range of emotions one would expect when being entertained.
It wont take long for the viewer to be captured and then immersed into the storyline all the while not knowing what to expect.
It has a sense of something is coming but what to it and finally, that "what" appears giving one of the best closures to the human psyche one could have.
I am in support of how well the story was acted out to the point where you accept and even support it come what may.
I also like the hearing the French language with the subtitles too.
Somehow the fact that it is in a different tongue causes me to pay more attention upping the emotional quota considerably.
Definite must watch for a good evenings entertainment.
Snacking a must with a tasty drink too.
No interruptions or you lose the bonding aspect.
Stay still and it pays-off nicely...enjoy.
A nasty little film.
This film is a useful corrective for those who think that French cinema is inescapably urbane, intelligent and stylish.
Counter-investigation is a shallow, nasty, derivative, clunking little film.
Though its authenticity is widely trailed, the film's basic premise - that a police officer whose daughter has been raped and killed would subsequently be allowed to investigate the same crime as a miscarriage of justice - defies disbelief.
Character development is jettisoned in favour of a nuts and bolts plot which delivers few pleasures.
Men suffer, you know, when their children die; but they can get through it by squaring their jaws and drinking liquor.
Paedophiles, well, they're clever, cold, and calculating.
And evil, pretty much.
The police, they'd do a fine job, if it weren't for bureaucrats.
And liberals, especially.
The film's ultimate message - that the only justice is old testament justice in a neatly defined world of good and evil - is as absurd as it is juvenile.
One to miss..
One to miss..
Child's Play.
One thing you can be sure of with Frank Mancuso is authenticity.
An ex-cop himself, he co-wrote 36 Quai des Orfevres with another ex-cop, Olivier Marchal (who also directed) and based it on incidents in his own time on the force.
This time around he has adapted an American novel by Robert Bloch but his movie is no worse for that.
It's arguably more psychological thriller than pure policier but manages to retain its grip throughout.
In a nutshell a cop's young daughter is killed and a suspect arrested, tried and imprisoned and this, as they say, is where the story really starts; with the prisoner - Monty Clift lookalike Laurent Lucas - initiating a correspondence from his cell with the father of the murdered girl, a correspondence he chooses to keep secret from his wife.
Justice, albeit rough justice, prevails in the end but as always in life nobody really wins.
Definitely worth seeing..
Would be a better movie if it wasn't for the Dils case.
The plot is somewhat simple - a policeman whose daughter was raped and murdered helps the man who is in jail for her murder to have his conviction overturned.
(graeme-hayes, he is not "allowed to investigate",he's doing it on his own without his colleagues's approval)The movie itself was really good.
It was nice to see Dujardin finally getting a role worthy of his talents.
However, what really irked me were the similarities between this movie and the Patrick Dils case.For those who don't know, Patrick Dils was convicted of killing 2 boys when he was 16 years old, then his conviction was overturned 15 years later - and the fact that serial killer Francis Heaulmes was proved to have been in the area at the time and described the murder of the boys to the police several years before had a huge impact during his trial.
Heaulmes,however,was never charged.There is no question that the movie, especially the part about the serial killer, was inspired by the Dils case.
Same disease, same relationship with his mother...
so it makes me wonder what was REALLY the point for the film makers ?
Are they implying that Dils is in fact guilty and should still be in jail ?
I happen to believe in Dils's innocence and that really left a bad taste in my mouth after watching this movie.
Apart from that, it's possibly the best French movie of this genre that I've watched in the past few years.
Certainly the best since Six Pack..
Guilty.
Richard Malinowsky, a police officer, is a man that is always there for his friends.
Because of being so accommodating, he has to leave his young daughter waiting as he is called by one of those people in need.
The girl, Emilie, decides to go out on her bicycle.
As the father returns to go out with her, he finds she has been viciously killed in an isolated part of a park.The police investigation, which Richard is part of, finds a man, Daniel Eckman, that fits the description of the killer.
Although the evidence is circumstantial, the jury that tries him decides to send him to jail.
Eckman, like many prisoners serving time, attract a following of admirers.
Daniel begins corresponding with Christine Carlier, who will be willing to get him free.At the same time, Daniel Eckman starts writing to Malinowsky.
In his letters he tries to redeem himself to the point that the detective himself, grieving for his dead daughter appears to have doubts of having sent an innocent man to pay for a crime he did not commit.
When his physician's wife, Claire, discovers what Richard has been doing, behind her back, it proves too much for her to endure.
She walks out on him.As a new trial is ordered based on Malinowsky's and Christine's good faith, Daniel Eckman is able to walk out of prison after only serving three years of his long sentence.
What is more, he will received money for having been wrongly accused.
Daniel plans to go away with Christine, but there is something when they finally meet, that makes her a bit uncomfortable.
During his own private investigation, Richard Malinowsky gets some key information that will help him solve the puzzle and he is able to avenge Emilie's death.A fine film directed by Franck Mancuso who adapted a short story by Lawrence Block.
The result is a credible 'policier' that never cease to get the viewer's attention.
Add to that the excellent appearance by Jean Dujardin, an actor that is getting praise for his role in "The Artist", and you get a winning combination.
The story moves at a good pace as Mr. Mancuso moves from one incident to the next.
There are some heavy hitters in the large supporting cast.
Jean-Pierre Cassel, Laurent Lucas who makes an impression with his Eckman, Aurelie Recoing, Agnes Blanchot, and Caroline Santini contribute to the enjoyment of the film..
Excellent acting.
I was very impressed with the acting in 2007's Counter Investigation," a French film directed by Franck Mancuso, who also co-wrote the script.Jean Dujardin gives a moving and strong performance as Richard Malinowski, a police detective whose young daughter is raped and murdered.
A man, Daniel Eckmann (Laurent Lucas) is arrested but begins to write to Richard, claiming to be innocent.
Upon investigation, Richard discovers that a serial killer of young children was in the vicinity at the time his child was killed.The story is good but I had it figured out right away, which sort of spoiled it for me.
And my big problem was Malinowski leaving his daughter home alone.
It's perhaps because I live in the U.S. and have seen too many true crime shows, but I was surprised when he did it.Laurent Lucas is handsome and underplayed his role as the imprisoned man.
He does a wonderful job.
He and Dujardin had the largest roles, but everyone was convincing.
Agnes Blanchot, Jacques Frantz, Jean- François Garreaud, and Jean-Pierre Cassel rounded out a forceful cast.What was so right-on about the main characters is that one never knew what either one was thinking or was going to do next.Recommended. |
tt0100152 | Mindwarp | As with the other serials from Season 23, Mindwarp's present is the trial of the Doctor by the Valeyard, accusing him of meddling in other species' affairs, in a way unbecoming of a Time Lord. The Valeyard provides evidence to the Inquisitor and presiding through a screen linked to the Matrix, showing the details of the Doctor's actions on the planet Thoros Beta. The bulk of the episode centres on recorded narrative.
As shown by the video, the Doctor and Peri arrive on Thoros Beta, the Doctor's curiosity piqued on the availability of advanced weaponry by the Warlords of Thordon. As they explore a cave system, the Doctor discovers Sil, an arms dealer for the Mentors that are supplying the weapons. Exploring further, they find that the scientist Crozier in Sil's employ is attempting to perfect the ability to transplant the brilliant mind of Kiv, Sil's superior, into another body to overcome Kiv's pending death. When discovered, the two make their escape with the warlord King Yrcanos, one of Crozier's test subjects.
The Doctor, Peri, Yrcanos and his men plan an attack on Sil, but the Doctor betrays by abandoning them at the last minute and warns the Mentors, causing Peri and Yrcanos to flee in different directions. Peri happens across one of the Mentors' servant woman, and with her help, disguises herself to get close to the Doctor. The Doctor reveals Peri to the Mentors and requests he be allowed to interrogate her alone, a request Sil allows. Away from the others, the Doctor tells Peri his betrayal was all a ploy to learn more of Sil's plan, and has discovered that they will transplant Kiv's mind into his body if he does not cooperate.
Crozier interrupts the interrogation, believing he can extract more information from Peri, but then Yrcanos arrives, ready to kill the Doctor. Peri stops Yrcanos, and together they escape, regrouping with Yrcanos' men. As Kiv's body is dying, Crozier is forced to transplant his brain with the Doctor's help into the body of one of the Mentors' servants, keeping the mind alive but affected by the simple thoughts of the former consciousness. Yrcanos, Peri, and his men launch another attack, this time on a weapons stash, but are stunned and captured. Sil and Crozier decide to use Peri as a more suitable body for Kiv's brain, despite the Doctor's objections. As the operation is being prepared, the Doctor sneaks away and frees Yrcanos, urging him on for Peri's safety.
Peri is strapped down and gagged as the operation is prepared and Crozier gives the order for her head to be shaven. The Doctor attempts to return to save her but is suddenly drawn hypnotically into the TARDIS, which appears in the hallway; it is later revealed that he travelled directly to this trial from that point. Despite the Doctor claiming that the Time Lords' interference has put Peri's life in danger, the Valeyard rebuffs this, stating that the Doctor shouldn't have become involved in the first place, and Peri's life is the cost of his involvement. Events on Thoros Beta continue after the Doctor's removal, as it is shown that Ycranos was placed in a time bubble by the Time Lords to hold his arrival back at the lab until after Kiv's mind was successfully transplanted into Peri; when Ycranos is freed of the bubble, he is distraught at the results of the operation, and fires wildly, killing Peri. The Valeyard insists that the interference of the Time Lords was to prevent a greater disaster befalling the universe due to the mistakes in the Doctor's actions. The Doctor insists that the present trial appears to be serving a greater cause, and resolves to determine what it is as the trial continues.
=== Continuity ===
Sil appeared in the previous season in the serial Vengeance on Varos. Before the Trial season was conceived, Sil was set to return in story called Mission to Magnus. Over 20 years later, Nabil Shaban returned to help resurrect this story for Big Finish Productions' Mission to Magnus audio adaptation.
The Doctor meets Peri again in two spin off stories. She features in the Virgin New Adventures novel Bad Therapy by Matt Jones. A post-Mindwarp hallucination of Peri appears in the Big Finish Productions play Her Final Flight. The relationship of spin off media to the television series is open to interpretation by the individual. | violence, cult, horror, murder, plot twist | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0433463 | Tak 2: The Staff of Dreams | Following the events of the first game, Tak has now been stuck in a dream for 16 days. Jibolba, and Lok ponder how they can wake him up. In reality, Tak is stuck in the Dream World, and is sent by the Dream Juju to fight the Dream Guardian, take The Staff of Dreams, and save the princess. After Tak refuses, he is told that if he does not do this, he will be stuck in the dream forever. As he fights through the Dream World, he escapes through a Rift. When going through the rift, Tak wakes up, and Jibolba and Tak go find Jibolba's brother, JB. Lok wants to go, but Jibolba tells Lok to go fetch his magic sandals. Jibolba turns into a Flea for easy hauling, and they set off. When Tak and Jibolba reach a dead end, they summon the Belly Juju to get a raft. Belly Juju uses a barrel that Tak got for him, and throws Tak in it, and throws the barrel down river. Lok is once again left behind, and when Belly Juju chokes, Lok has to save him. As Tak and Jibolba go down the fast current, they fall down a huge waterfall, and Tak is knocked out. He wakes up in the Dream World, once again being led by the Dream Juju. Once he makes it to the end, he again enters the real world through a rift. Once in the real world, Tak and Jibolba set off, again. When they reach a bridge, they have to wait for Woodies to pass, but when they do, Lok blows up the bridge, and the Woodies attack. When Tak saves Lok, he summons Mind-Reader Juju. He tells Tak that with three magic stones, he can make Bolas to get across the gap. When Tak does this, he is knocked out by Woodies, again entering the Dream World.
Tak then uses the Bolas to get through the Dream World. For the third time, he gets back to his world using a rift. When he awakes, he is in the holding area in the Gloomleaf Arena, where Woodies train, with Caged Juju. After an argument, Caged Juju finds Lok, and uses a lift key to get up. When up, Lok is hauled off by Woodies, and Tak fights through waves of Woodies. After four rounds, he uses a Woodie Catapult to escape, flying into the Gloomleaf Swamp. When half-way through the swamp, he sees Dead Juju being harassed by Woodies, who steal his Tiki. Tak follows the Woodies to the rafters of the Arena, where Tak steals the Tiki from the Woodie King. He is then chased down river by Woodies, and when he falls down a waterfall, he grabs to a ledge with Dead Juju. When he returns the Tiki, Lok suddenly falls down the waterfall, and the four head off together.
When outside Skyrock Crater, they can see JB's Planetarium. They all stop to smell the flowers, which make them all fall asleep. Tak uses a Woodie Catapult to cause destruction in the Dream World, finally making it to the Tower where the Dream Guardian is at. But, he goes through a rift, and is told that his next sleep will put him in the tower. He and Jibolba wake up, leaving Lok and Dead Juju. Tak and Jibolba go through the Crater, and make it to the Planetarium. But inside, the area is overrun by Power Parasites, and after a long fight, JB is saved. JB tells them that he has never heard of a Dream Juju. So, JB sends Tak into sleep. Tak then enters the tower, and has a long battle with the Dream Guardian. After the battle, Tak gets The Staff of Dreams. The princess appears, and is revealed to be Pins and Needles, and the Dream Juju reveals to be Tlaloc, still in Sheep form. Pins, Needles, and Tak all struggle for the Staff, and Needles gets one half, The Staff of Nightmares, and Tak gets the other, the Dream Shaker. This power causes all to enter the real world, and Pins, Needles, and Tlaloc escape. Tak then begins a chase of them, not watching where he is going, and gets knocked out.
When he wakes up, Tak is in the Moon Juju Interlude, and the Moon Juju was before him. She tells him to choose one of four Spirit Animals. Before she tells Tak the best one, she disappears. Tak chooses, which wakes him up, with new powers.
Tak meets the Giant Misunderstanding and needed help with the rift. The Giant thought he wanted to talk to Rick. Tak repeated the Rick question to the juju to unlock the rift. When he said goodbye, the Giant sang a song.
During the chase, Flora and Fauna granted Tak the ability to become 4 animals.
Tak was tired when he came to the Dream Fortress. He battled Pins and Needles and got the other half of the staff. Lok mistakenly gave the half to Tlaloc. Tak battles Tlaloc's army of sheep. After defeating all of the sheep, Tak attacks Tlaloc, knocking him over a ledge and killing him. Jibolba, Dead Juju, and Lok congratulate Tak on his victory and remind him they need to return the staff. Lok questions the appearance of an arm behind Tak which pulls him through a rift and back into the Dream Realm. The arm turns out to belong to Tlaloc who, after being killed in the real world, is now a nightmare creature and has his old body again. He uses the Staff of Nightmare to turn into a monster resembling the Dream Guardian. Tak does the same with his staff to fight Tlaloc. After the battle, the Dream Guardian appears asking for the staff back. Tak apologized to the Dream Guardian who opens a rift to return Tak to the real world. Back in the real world, Jibolba, Lok, and Dead Juju congratulate Tak again before Tlaloc appears again realizing he can never defeat Tak. He decides to instead kill his friends to eliminate Tak's will to fight. Tak manages to save his friends and defeat Tlaloc a third time. Tak is then waken up by Jibolba and Lok telling him the whole thing was a dream. The three walk off while being spied on by a sheep from Tlaloc's army. | plot twist | train | wikipedia | One of the best games I've ever played!. Very fun action plat-former. This game really makes you feel as if your'e in a dream; it's very surreal. Has some hilarious moments, the environments are cool, and it's super atmospheric. Not to mention it has probably the best video game soundtrack I've ever heard! -Slight story spoiler - Following the events of the first game, Tak has now been stuck in a dream for 16 days. Jibolba, and Lok ponder how they can wake him up. In reality, Tak is stuck in the Dream World, and is sent by the Dream Juju to fight the Dream Guardian, take The Staff of Dreams, and save the princess. After Tak refuses, he is told that if he does not do this, he will be stuck in the dream forever. As he fights through the Dream World, he escapes through a Rift. When going through the rift, Tak wakes up, and Jibolba and Tak go find Jibolba's brother, JB.. Horrible!. I played this game since 5 or 6 years old and it's just a waste of time. No point in the storyline or the controls it's just plain bad!! Please avoid this and whoever likes this are big babies. This game is no point in like anything. There are some levels that were a little bit of fun but just no learning to it. The game is terrible to me.Nothing to say about the grades but I think the overall is nearly E+ bad.I can't say any more thing about this game because it's too horrible with mini-games and about anything so there. Now go home and enjoy desert!()()()()) ()()()()( ()()()()() ()(()()() |
tt0054292 | Sergeant Rutledge | The film revolves around the court-martial of 1st Sgt. Braxton Rutledge (Strode), a "Buffalo Soldier" of the 9th U.S. Cavalry. His defense is handled by Lt. Tom Cantrell (Hunter), Rutledge's troop officer. The story is told through a series of flashbacks, expanding the testimony of witnesses as they describe the events following the murder of Rutledge's Commanding Officer, Major Dabney, and the rape and murder of Dabney's daughter, for which Rutledge is the accused.
Circumstantial evidence suggests that the first sergeant raped and murdered the girl and then killed his commanding officer. Worse still, Rutledge deserts after the killings. Ultimately, he is tracked down and arrested by Lt. Cantrell. At one point, Rutledge escapes from captivity during an Indian raid, but later, he voluntarily returns to warn his fellow cavalrymen that they are about to face an ambush, thus saving the troop. He is then brought back in to face the charges and the prejudices of an all-white military court.
Eventually he is found not guilty of the rape and murder of the girl when a local white man breaks down under questioning and admits that he raped the girl. | murder | train | wikipedia | REMAKE A JOHN FORD CLASSIC like Sergeant Rutledge?????
As another reviewer said,it is NOT a typical John Ford film,but it has to be one of his best.
Woody Strode,one of the most under rated black actors of his generation is superb as in the title role.
Jeffrey Hunter as defense attorney Tom Cantrell also turns in an excellent performance,caught between the proverbial rock and hard place when he is 'forced' to defend Rutledge.
As I said in a previous review, if it ain't broke,don't fix it.....Bearing in mind that Ford, Hunter and Strode are all gone, it just wouldnt be right..
John Ford, ever the director of the under dog creates another masterpiece of forgotten American history.Ford, who called himself a social democrat creates another film of nobility and personal convictions, both his and his characters.
What we do have is Fords beautiful colour camera in Monument Valley, ala "The Searchers ( 1956 )", broad humour, defined characterizations and attention to detail both individual and historical.Jeffrey Hunter, always an underrated actor, is fine as the lead, but it is Woody Strode as the title character that is a stand out.
It was also incredibly brave to show how the protagonist, Sergeant Rutledge, (beautifully played by Woody Strode) was helped by a white woman; again very rare at that time.
Judging by his performance when under oath, Woody Strode is up there with the best of the marvellous Black actors that have changed the face of social America.
I first caught the tail end of this John Ford masterpiece on AMC during Black History month, and couldn't wait for it to pop up on the schedule again so I could see the whole thing.
This is a marvelous Western starring Jeffery Hunter and Woodie Strode--thanks in large part to the always wonderful direction of John Ford and the fact that this film dared to take a big risk.
The film attacks racism without being preachy or ridiculous (something that makes me hate GENTLEMEN'S AGREEMENT due to its very heavy-handed way of dealing with antisemitism).Woody Strode, as usual, plays a very dignified and wonderful role as a soldier on trial for rape and murder.
Excellent and landmark Western with a complex structure by means of flashback , being one of the best Ford films .
It deals with a respected black cavalry Sergeant Brax Rutledge (Woody Strode) who saves a damsel in distress (Constance Towers) who is besieged by Indians .
Later on , he stands court-martial for raping and killing a white woman and murdering her father , his superior commanding officer .
As Rutledge on trial for rape and murder , as a tribunal presided by a good judge (Willis Bouchey) , there he is defended by a lieutenant lawyer (Jeffrey Hunter as defense attorney) and accused by a stiff prosecutor (Carleton Young) .
The tale of a court-martial told in flash-back , about a black cavalry officer on trail , well handled by master filmmaker Ford .
Support cast is frankly awesome , such as : Juano Hernandez , Willis Bouchey , Carleton Young , Rafer Johnson , final film of Billie Burke and Mae Marsh ; many of them are Ford's ordinaries .
Ford puts on the highest pedestal of human honor to an African-American , which by that time when the film was made , it resulted to be a heroism .
John Ford openly displays his poetry in this magnificent film "Sergeant Rutledge".
Maybe the great director and artist was annoyed that many did not get the anti-racist messages that permeate all his works (starting with "The Searchers": ever noted it?) and decided to make a definite, open statement.To be as clear as possible, Ford willingly shows his art, poetry and trade-mark techniques in the most evident way.
We see Woody Strode (Sergeant Rutledge) constrained in a small chair, his never-ending shoulders covering half of the screen.
And then we see Woody Strode standing out, the Monument Valley on the background, like John Wayne in many other Ford's movies.
Woody Strode makes an outstanding, deeply touching job as the black cavalry sergeant.
His acting is sober, poised but intense, with no melodramatic sides, and he physically dominates the screen (by the way: what an amazing athlete Strode was, at age forty-six!).Rutledge is the Hero, the Legend of the movie.
Maybe some day, but not yet!John Ford's Sergeant Rutledge tells the story of a black man, 1st Sgt. Braxton Rutledge, a Buffalo Soldier of the 9th U.S. Cavalry who was up before a court-martial for the rape and murder of a white girl, Major Dabney's daughter, Lucy.Taking place in the court room the story is told in flashback as Rutledge's (Woody Strode) troop officer, and defence council, Lt. Tom Cantrell (Jeffrey Hunter) attempts to piece together the evidence.
From the outset Ford is on biting form as the case is being tried in a biased and corruptible court, we as the viewers are left in no doubt that Rutledge could be at the mercy of obnoxious white racists.
This was after all two years before the critically acclaimed To Kill A Mockingbird, thus making it one of the flag bearers for early acknowledgement of race relations in America.As the sharp narrative moves forward, cloaked in visual excellence with Bert Glennon this time being Ford's cinematographer of choice, the film always keeps us guessing as to the outcome.
We really can never be sure, such is the stench of racism that hangs heavy, a stench that is counter pointed by Woody Strode's wonderful and powerful performance as the on trial man.
Hunter is handsome and strong in vocal delivery as the council in the middle of a real tricky trial, and Constance Towers as Mary Beecher is the glue binding them, and the story, all together.It's a first rate picture from Ford, one that is largely (and wrongly) forgotten when talk of his oeuvre comes around.
Sergeant Rutledge is one of John Ford's more underrated films.
The title character is played by Woody Strode who is African-American and as such is on trial for the actions involving a dead white girl and her father.
And two more players worth mentioning are Billie Burke-in her last film role-as Bouchey's wife who provides some comic relief and Juano Hernandez-perhaps best known as the lead in Intruder in the Dust-as another ranking officer.
Otherwise, he gets fine atmospheric drama and action and brings a good social message without heavy-handing it making Sergeant Rutledge one of his more underrated works.
Former decathlete athlete and football star Woody Strode plays Sergeant Rutledge accused of raping and murdering a young girl.
Woody who plays a black Sergeant in the U.S. infantry, sits strong and proud of his military career and although there are many doubters in the courtroom as to his innocence of the crimes of rape and murder, the film's illustrious director, John Ford, provides Woody Strode with a terrific movie vehicle to shine in.
And shine Woody Strode does.I wouldn't dare to compare Sergeant Rutledge to the better known classic 1962 three time Academy award winner "To Kill A Mockingbird" starring Gregory Peck as the defense lawyer of the accused black man of rape played by Brock Peters.
I do feel though that Sergeant Rutledge stands up well some 58 years later as a decent court room western, which utilizes flashbacks by the various court witnesses to explain why Sergeant Rutledge is either guilty or innocent.We the audience can play judge and jury in this decent western, and I judge Woody Strode's and actress Constance Towers who plays Mary Beecher the love interest of Lt. Tom Cantrell (played by Jeffrey Hunter) performances as more than passing the smell test.
I enjoyed Sergeant Rutledge as a full drama and action filled western.I give the film a 6 out of 10 rating.
I wonder which movie the other reviewers saw because the "Seargeant Rutledge" I watched was so bad it was good.
"Sergeant Rutledge" places the now-familiar trial of the noble Black man accused of raping a White woman in Mr. Ford's western setting.
The timely story has some problems, but should be appreciated for its effort.First of all, the title presumes the picture to be about "Sergeant Rutledge" (Woody Strode), who couldn't have been familiar to the vast majority of filmgoers - so, the more symbolically representative "Captain Buffalo" would have been a preferable title.
And, it often seems like the title character is more like a prop, with romantic defenders Jeffrey Hunter (as Tom Cantrell) and Constance Towers (as Mary Beecher) taking center stage.
Watch for fluttering Billie Burke (as Cordelia) in her last featured role.Also, Ford "extra" Mae Marsh (as Nellie) gets a relatively good amount of screen time playing (obviously) a fluttery friend of Billie Burke.
So, to have Marsh bracketing two great directors' attempts to redress past racist images is grand ironic counterpoint.****** Sergeant Rutledge (5/18/60) John Ford ~ Woody Strode, Jeffrey Hunter, Constance Towers, Billie Burke.
Unlike most of Director John Ford's Westerns that feature much action, "Sergeant Rutledge" is mainly a courtroom drama told mainly in flashback.
The gist of the story is a black Ninth US Cavalry sergeant accused in the rape and murder of a teen-aged white girl Lucy Dabney (Toby Michaels) and also the murder of her father.
Woody Strode ably plays the role of the sergeant, Braxton Rutledge.
Rutledge's capable courtroom defender is Lt. Tom Cantrell (Jeffrey Hunter), whose job is to piece together the facts, despite constant badgering by the prosecutor, Captain Shattuck.
Sgt. Skidmore (Juano Hernandez) has a funny line, "Trouble come double, sir." Rutledge has the best line in the movie when he tells Mary Beecher: "Lady, you don't know how hard I'm trying to stay alive."Billie Burke (Glenda the good witch, 1939) was at 76 years, as usual too old for her part as Cornelia, the wife of Col. Otis Wingate (53 year-old Willis Bouchey).
The idea of a troop of black soldiers fighting as well as white ones would no doubt have been satisfying to many well-intentioned people, as would Woody Strode's portrayal of a noble warrior with a strong sense of integrity.
It was a far cry from the demeaning stereotypes of black people that one found in the movies only a few years earlier--including Ford's own "The Sun Shines Bright." Today it's a different story.
We see Woody Strode in several poses designed to portray him as an almost mythic character.The movie alternates between courtroom scenes that are not very exciting and outdoor sequences that, in true John Ford fashion, are beautiful.
Rutledge in a Rut. Woody Strode is the title character but the film stars Jeff Hunter and Constance Towers.
Strode was in a couple of the aging directors last films Two Rode Together he played an Indian warrior, and in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance he played John Wayne's faithful western Stepin Fechtit.
I have never liked John Ford's westerns but this one finally does him justice and offers an African American audience some long overdue credit.We have a Black man as hero but of course the Native Americans still had to be presented as savages, and that is the main problem with this film.
Those points are hammered home by John Ford as the court must ask itself is he being accused because of his being in the wrong place at the wrong time ?
But even so it drags the movie in the scenes where the two leads are playing romance then with Dealing with Woody Strode's Rutledge.
John Ford once again returns to Monument Valley to give us a tale of soldiering, military justice, and who-done-it, with a strong racial overtone.
Jeffery Hunter and Constance Towers are fine in their roles, Juano Hernandez is believable as an old soldier whose friend has been accused of a heinous crime, and Woody Strode handles the title role with dignity and appealing intensity.
Strode once remarked that in this film John Ford "put some good words in my mouth," and he certainly did.
Ford, who had approached the subject of racism four years earlier in "The Searchers," is less subtle in his approach here, but handles the subject expertly, telling the story of the Ninth Cavalry's "Buffalo Soldiers" with the respect that their place in history deserves..
Sergeant Rutledge (1960) *** (out of 4) Extremely well-made and dramatic film from John Ford about a black soldier (Woody Strode) accused of killing his superior officer and raping and murdering his daughter.
SERGEANT RUTLEDGE, for some reason, never really gets mentioned when people discuss the films of John Ford and that's a shame because it's certainly one of the best films of his later period.
I really enjoyed the way Ford told the story as we start off in the court room where we hear the charges and then through flashbacks we see all the events that led up to the murder and the aftermath.
I don't think I'm overstating things when I say this was without question one of the strongest roles for a black actor at this period in time and Strode certainly did everything he could to make it so memorable.
With that said, the incredibly strong performances and strong story are good enough to overcome this one flaw and SERGEANT RUTLEDGE is worth viewing..
John Ford who was among many who perpetuated black racial stereotypes, notably in Judge Priest and The Sun Shines Bright, got a chance to redeem himself with the making of Sergeant Rutledge.
A year before in the Robert Mitchum film, The Wonderful Country, Negro League baseball legend Satchel Paige played a black cavalry sergeant in a supporting role.
But in Sergeant Rutledge the story centers around such a character and the ordeal he goes through when accused of rape and murder.
The victims are his commanding officer and his daughter.The leads are Woody Strode as the accused Sergeant Braxton Rutledge and Jeffrey Hunter as the lieutenant who defends him in a court martial.
The story is told in flashback through the accounts of the many witnesses at the court martial and in some of those scenes, John Ford got to revisit his beloved Monument Valley for some good old Indian fights.The murders at the fort take place simultaneously with an outbreak from the Apache reservation.
Constance Towers who discovers both the results of an Indian attack and the fleeing sergeant at the railroad station, becomes both Rutledge's biggest champion and the object of Jeffrey Hunter's romantic intentions.The dilemma that Strode faced was that by so many black people, especially in the south.
The father might not have fired on a white man either.Woody Strode had he come along ten to fifteen years later might well have become an action hero star like Wesley Snipes for instance.
These became his career roles, too bad he didn't build on Sergeant Rutledge to get better parts like black actors did in the next generation.Two of John Ford's stock company regulars shine in Sergeant Rutledge, Carleton Young and Willis Bouchey.
This was her farewell screen role and she went out in scatterbrained style.Jeffrey Hunter turns out to be a pretty good lawyer himself and he brings the trial to a sudden end with a bit of fast thinking on his feet worthy of Perry Mason.This very first film dealing with the black buffalo soldiers of the U.S. Cavalry is great viewing for those who like both courtroom drama and westerns.
Granted this is the largest black cast ever assembled for a Ford film, but that does not really mean he was trying to make a civil rights message here.
The (sort of) running gag with the judge and his wife was wearing a little thin at some point, though.The cast members play quite well, with Wooody Strode as the stout-hearted Sergeant Rutledge as my personal favorite.
John Ford's grandson, Dan, wrote of "Sergeant Rutledge" that Pappy was really feeling his age on this one and I guess he's right.
Not just that it was made by John Ford, but that it's a courtroom drama with enough outdoor action scenes to keep a viewer interested.
Normally, a movie about the trial of a man accused of rape and murder would be suspenseful.
But since the movie was made in 1960, and the accused was a black man who supposedly raped a white girl, it was a given that the man was innocent.
But that is still thin gruel, for even if Sergeant Rutledge had been white, the trial is a flop, dramatically speaking.In place of suspense or dramatic value, the movie delivers, or is supposed to deliver, a sense of moral worth, in which the audience is allowed to take pride in the way it is above racial prejudice.
Well, Woody Strode was finally given the opportunity to act in this 1960 film and acted he did in an especially emotionally charged court scene.As for the picture itself, it's routine fanfare.
It's 1881 in the Arizona territory and the good sergeant has been accused of raping a young girl and killing her father.
While this has occurred, the Apaches are on the attack.Jeffrey Hunter played Rutledge's fellow soldier who defends him at his trial.
My best friends are black; Woody Strode and my servant who's lived with me for thirty years.
I consider the blacks as completely American!" - John FordSet in the late 1880s, John Ford's "Sergeant Rutledge" stars Woody Strode as a black sergeant in the United States Cavalry.
Strode's character is wrongfully accused of raping and murdering a young woman, a charge which he attempts to overturn.Released in 1960, "Sergeant Rutledge" was one of several attempts by director John Ford to address a very specific accusation: that many of his previous westerns presented racist, whitewashed versions of the Old West (by 1870, approximately 290,000 African Americans lived in the sixteen territories comprising the West, approximately twelve percent of the population).
In this regard, "Rutledge" finds Strode playing an archetypal "strong, righteous black man". |
tt0020534 | The Unholy Night | === 1962 ===
A boy (Cole Sand) tells a bell-ringing Santa Claus that he wants a coonskin cap for Christmas. The Santa packs up for the night and is approached by a man who tells him not to disappoint the boy. When Santa gets short with the man, he is shot. The shooter, dressed in the bloody costume, enters a residence and kills Susie Lancaster's (Tehya Scarth) parents (Chris McGarry and Lara Harris) when they cause him to lose his "Christmas spirit." He then goes on an unseen killing spree.
=== 1963 ===
The killer is known as Leigh Emerson and becomes a patient at Briarcliff. Sister Jude (Jessica Lange) keeps him shackled, even for a group picture with the others, as she feels he is a danger both inside and outside the asylum. He proves her correct as he bites off an orderly's nose on Christmas. Jude sends him to solitary confinement and canes him in her office over the course of his stay.
=== 1964 ===
Sister Mary Eunice (Lily Rabe) tries to be festive with the patients in the dayroom, but claims Jude has thrown away all the tree ornaments. Mary Eunice tells the patients to be a creative as she improvises and decorates the tree with their belongings – dentures and hair clippings. In the laboratory, Frank (Fredric Lehne) prays over Grace's (Lizzie Brocheré) body and tells Dr. Arden (James Cromwell) they should report the recent kitchen events to the police. Arden asks if he wants them to know Frank killed Grace, who was unarmed, but Frank seems not to care.
Jude sneaks into her office and holds a straight razor to Mary Eunice's throat, threatening to end the possession. Dr. Arden and Mary Eunice's telekinesis breaks Jude's hold and he is asked to escort Jude out of the building. He mentions Frank's intentions to Mary Eunice, who claims she will take care of it. She takes a Santa suit to Leigh, intent on lifting his spirits. She recites his maniacal history, which began when he was arrested for shoplifting and raped in jail. She gives him the choice of being the victim or the victor.
Arden brings Mary Eunice a present of ruby earrings. She giddily takes them, even after he tells her of the jewelry's history. He took them from the feces of a wealthy "Jewess" in concentration camp who tried to hide them by ingesting them and died from it. He hoped the former Mary Eunice would be appalled at the story, but the current Mary Eunice is not. She calls him "pathetic" and warns that even God cannot help him, if he's not with her.
Lana (Sarah Paulson) worries that Mary Eunice hasn't done anything about Dr. Thredson (Zachary Quinto), but she discovers Kit (Evan Peters) has returned to the asylum. He has been drugged and dreams of a pregnant Alma (Britne Oldford) who morphs into a pregnant Grace. He apologizes for getting her killed and Lana wakes him from the dream. She explains to him that Thredson is the killer and she will prove Kit's innocence. He wants to help her but is too drugged to help at the moment.
Jude talks to Mother Superior (Barbara Tarbuck) about the country turning from God to commercialism at Christmas time. She thinks the Devil is the reason and vows to not let Mary Eunice be the next convert. Their meeting is interrupted with news that Dr. Arden wishes to meet with Jude. He admits to her that she was correct about Mary Eunice and seeks Jude's help. He vows loyalty to her if she can return Mary Eunice's innocence. He later lets Jude into the asylum through the kitchen entrance and she tells him she must speak to Mary Eunice alone in the office.
Monsignor Howard (Joseph Fiennes) delivers a pointy handcrafted star from the Boston archdiocese to put on the asylum tree. He commends Mary Eunice for allowing Leigh to have a chance at redemption, by allowing him to be unshackled and dressed as Santa. Leigh then knocks Frank down, slices his face with the star, and prepares to stab him with it, before orderlies tackle him. Arden arrives to tell Mary Eunice she has "pressing business" in the office.
Lana finds a phone but Thredson stops her while she is dialing. He tells her she has forced him to "kill" Bloody Face and destroy all evidence. He had planned on letting her talk to the police, as it would be the word of a mental patient against the word of a psychiatrist. She has, however, betrayed his trust and he prepares to strangle her with the phone wire. Kit enters with a fire extinguisher to knock Thredson unconscious. Lana wishes the doctor dead, but Kit needs him alive to show who the real killer is. They stow him in a storage closet, where Lana promises Thredson she will, one day, bury him.
Frank puts Leigh back in his solitary cell. Mary Eunice 'predicts' that Frank has had trouble with Leigh and slices Frank's throat with the straight razor. She feigns worrying about a rampage as Leigh maniacally laughs. In the office, Jude prays for guidance and strength. The door opens and she sees Leigh enter. When asked, he says he is there to open his "present." Mary Eunice locks the door from the outside and Arden affirms his loyalty to her. Arden leaves to take Grace's body in a cart down the death chute, so the Raspers can dispose of her. Along the way, he is stunned by a bright light and a deafening sound. He regains his senses to find an empty cart and missing Grace. In the office, Leigh reminds Jude of her cruelty to him by caning her across the desk. He intends on raping her but she stabs him in the neck with a letter opener. | revenge, murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0136658 | Quack Pack | The show centers around Donald and teenaged versions of his nephews Huey, Dewey, and Louie. The actual age of the boys is not made certain. Donald works as a cameraman alongside Daisy, who is a reporter. The group travel around the world looking for a big scoop. The three boys are triplets but Huey had once referred to Dewey and Louie as his baby brothers. Huey must have been the first to be born, therefore making him the eldest of the brothers.
Huey, Dewey and Louie have more distinctive personalities than when they had been presented as younger. They usually resort to extreme and strange measures to avoid getting into trouble with their uncle and to achieve their ambitions. They usually do this by tricking Donald, or whoever else they wish to manipulate. But they usually feel guilty for any of the wrongdoings they had performed which may have upset loved ones, proving that they do possess good morals. Huey, Dewey and Louie share similar passions such as listening to rock music, getting revenge on those who anger them, impressing girls, getting money, pulling pranks, role models whom they look up to and admire, playing games and reading comics. They also share a profound knowledge of cars and mechanics. But there are certain aspects of their personalities that stand out more in each of them. | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0332379 | The School of Rock | No Vacancy, a rock band, performs at a nightclub three weeks before auditioning for Battle of the Bands. Guitarist Dewey Finn creates on-stage antics, and a stage dive that abruptly ends the performance when the crowd doesn't catch him. The next morning, Dewey awakes in the apartment he lives in with Ned Schneebly and Ned's girlfriend Patty Di Marco. They inform him he must make up for his share of the rent, which is four months overdue, or move out. When Dewey meets No Vacancy at a rehearsal session, he finds out that he has been replaced by another guitarist named Spider. Later, while trying to sell some of his instruments for money, Dewey answers a phone call from Rosalie Mullins, the principal of the Horace Green Prep School, inquiring for Ned about a short-term position as a substitute teacher. Desperate, Dewey impersonates Ned and is hired. On his first day at the school, Dewey adopts the name "Mr. S" (as he cannot spell "Schneebly") and spends his first day behaving erratically, confusing the class about lunch and giving them recess, much to their delight.
The next day, Dewey overhears the kids in music class and devises a plan to form them into a band to audition for Battle of the Bands. He casts Zack Mooneyham as lead guitarist, Freddy Jones as drummer, cello player Katie on bass, Lawrence on keyboard, and himself as lead vocalist and rhythm guitarist. He assigns the rest for backup singers, groupies and roadies, with Summer Hathaway as manager. The project eradicates teaching but helps the students embrace their talent. He reassures Summer, who is initially casted as groupie until researching about them on the Internet, Lawrence, worried of his social image, Zack, whose overbearing father disapproves of rock, and Tomika, not good enough to be a roadie and then worried to audition for being overweight despite having an amazing voice. During one lesson, he teaches the kids that rock and roll is the way to stick it to the man. Groupies Michelle and Eleni, with Summer's approval, pitch the band name "The School of Rock."
Two weeks later, Dewey sneaks the band members out to audition, while the rest of the class stays to maintain cover. When Freddy wanders off, Dewey retrieves him but the group is rejected because the bill is full. Summer leads the band to fake a terminal illness, successfully auditioning. The next day, Rosalie decides to check on Dewey's teaching progress, forcing Dewey to teach the actual material. She explains that a parents' night will take place the day before Battle of the Bands.
Dewey is finally exposed when Ned receives a paycheck from the school. Dewey confesses and begs Ned not to tell Patty, but she manages to reveal the truth out of Ned, and calls the police on Dewey. During the parents' meeting, the parents question what Dewey was teaching until Ned, Patty, Rosalie, and the police confront him. Dewey reveals his real identity and is fired. Back home, Dewey admits what he did was wrong and giving up music isn't easy for him. Ned admits it wasn't easy for him to do so either, but that he had to know when to quit.
The next morning, the parents uproar in front of Rosalie at her office, while the kids decide to go nevertheless. When the new substitute discovers that the kids are missing, she informs Rosalie, and Rosalie and the parents race to the competition. Ned decides to attend the competition, too, and breaks up with Patty. A school bus comes to pick up Dewey, who leads the kids to the Battle of the Bands and decides that they play a song written by Zack earlier on. Initially dismissed as a gimmick, the band wins over the entire crowd. While No Vacancy wins, the crowd call for The School Of Rock to return, and Dewey leads an encore of "It's a Long Way to the Top (If You Wanna Rock 'n' Roll)".
Some time later, an after school program known as the School of Rock has opened as Dewey continues to coach the students he played with before while Ned teaches beginners. | cult, entertaining | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0113438 | Iron Eagle IV | While on a routine patrol on United States airspace west of Alaska, Doug Masters and his wingman test the g-forces of their F-16C planes. Their antics get them carried away, as they stray over Soviet airspace. As they are being escorted back into U.S. airspace, one of the Soviet planes has Doug on missile-lock. Doug requests to break formation and engage the Soviet aircraft, but is denied by flight control. He is immediately shot down, but safely ejects and lands on Soviet land, where he is promptly captured by nearby soldiers.
Several years have passed since that incident and Doug is still haunted by his days as a prisoner. He works as a crop duster, but is shortly recruited by his old friend, retired Gen. Charles "Chappy" Sinclair to be an instructor at his flight school. Chappy needs Doug's help, as his school is overrun by juvenile delinquents who fly his T-6 Texans with no regard for safety. These students were taken in by Chappy as a means of rehabilitating them. Doug is not happy to be an instructor to the delinquents, but Chappy assures him that he will see results from them in a week. Still, he shows no interest in training them.
During an exhibition show where the delinquents face off children from the Air Force, Wheeler, one of the female delinquents, cons a drug dealer out of $2,000 by handing him a bag of sugar disguised as cocaine. She attempts to take her training plane and fly out to Mexico, but Doug pursues her and tells her to land on an abandoned Air Force base and stay there until further orders. Upon landing the plane, Wheeler and her co-pilot Rudy Marlowe encounter a platoon that is ordered to kill them. Doug intervenes, allowing the teens to leave the air base. Chappy is told of the incident, and he and Maj. Gen. Brad Kettle head to the base that night to investigate on that platoon's activity on a storage bunker. After they are escorted out of the base by Air Force Intelligence, Doug describes to Chappy his eyewitness account of the soldiers carrying marked canisters, which are revealed to be chemical weapons.
Doug leaves the school, frustrated that his life came apart when he was imprisoned and Chappy was not there to save him at that time. Chappy is given a notice by the State Patrol that his flight program is terminated immediately and his students are returned to juvenile hall. Wheeler, however, avoids capture and steals a trainer plane, creating a diversion that allows the students to hijack the bus and head back to the school. Chappy and the students relocate their planes to Doug's former job site; Doug meets up with them afterward. Chappy then organizes the students to infiltrate the airbase and acquire enough resources for their operation to stop the convoy carrying the chemical weapons. Upon entering the airbase, Kitty Shaw and Chappy discover Operation Pandora, in which the chemical weapons are to be used on countries with regimes deemed hostile. They print out the data before leaving the premises and handing it to Kettle. Meanwhile, Dana Osborne and Rudy attempt to stop the convoy, but are shot down. As they attempt to escape on foot, Rudy is shot by Major Pierce, but Doug and the others arrive at the scene and capture one of the soldiers. Chappy and his team accompany Kettle to Craig Air Force Base, only to realize that Kettle is part of the entire operation.
Using a swarm of wasps as a means of psychological interrogation, Doug gets the captured soldier to reveal the location of the convoy. He then phones Chappy, but discovers that his team has been apprehended by Kettle. At one of the chemical weapon chambers, Chappy is told by Kettle that the first target of Operation Pandora is Cuba. After Kettle leaves the chamber, Kitty hacks the computer to set off the fire extinguishing units, giving Chappy's team time to escape. A stray shot from one of the soldiers ruptures the canister, contaminating the chamber and killing Dr. Francis Gully and everyone inside. As Kitty and Peter sneak into the cargo plane carrying the chemical weapon, Chappy sends a radio message, warning everyone of a hostile aircraft heading to Cuba. Shortly after recapturing Chappy, Kettle orders his fighter squadron to shoot down the trainer planes. The squadron of two fighters attacks the trainers, only to be confronted by Doug, who has commandeered a fighter plane. Doug and the students shoot down the attackers promptly. He then plays the cassette tape Chappy recorded for him before killing ace pilot Maj. Miles Pierce in a dogfight.
The students approach the cargo plane and attack it. Inside, Peter creates a diversion by opening the cargo door, causing the soldiers aboard to fall out. This leads to a fist fight between Peter and the plane's captain, who is ejected when Kitty assumes the controls. Peter then jettisons all of the canisters into the ocean. Seeing his mission as a failure, Kettle prepares to kill Chappy when Doug suddenly attacks the airbase, giving Chappy time to escape. As police arrive at the scene, Kettle enters the contaminated chamber - his fate unknown.
Days later, Wheeler tells Doug she is heading to Mexico for a new start, but he convinces her to stay. The Iron Eagle Flight School then prepares for a new batch of students fresh out of juvenile hall. | flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0290538 | Confessions of a Dangerous Mind | Tired of being rejected by the beautiful women he lusts after, Chuck Barris moves to Manhattan to become an NBC page with dreams of becoming famous in television but is eventually fired. He moves back to Philadelphia and becomes Dick Clark's personal assistant on American Bandstand in 1961. He writes the successful song "Palisades Park" and becomes romantically involved with a woman named Penny Pacino. Chuck is given permission to pitch the concept for The Dating Game at ABC. He is given $7,500 to create a television pilot, but ABC abandons the idea in favor of Hootenanny.
One night after Barris is kicked out of a bar for fighting, he is approached by CIA agent Jim Byrd, who recruits him as an assassin. Returning from a mission in Mexico, Barris finds that Penny has become a hippie. Meanwhile, ABC green-lights The Dating Game, and by 1967 the show is a phenomenon.
On a CIA mission in Helsinki, Finland, he meets female operative Patricia Watson. He finds more success back home when The Newlywed Game goes on air. He and Penny decide to move to Los Angeles, but Barris is cautious of marriage, much to Penny's dismay. In 1970, Byrd convinces Barris to go on a mission to East Berlin to assassinate Hans Colbert. Barris is introduced to German-American agent Keeler, whom he helps to kill Colbert. However, he is captured by the KGB and, after some weeks, freed during a West-East spy exchange.
In 1976, Barris creates The Gong Show and becomes famous as its host. Keeler is murdered and Byrd warns Barris of a mole in the agency. His TV shows are canceled due to poor ratings, and Penny threatens to leave after catching him cheating on her. One night, Barris finds Byrd sitting atop the diving board of his backyard pool. Byrd reveals to Barris why he was chosen by the CIA to become an assassin: he is the son of a serial killer and had been raised as a girl by his mother, so he "fit the profile". Barris threatens Byrd, and after Byrd is killed moments later, Barris is seen pointing his gun at him.
Faced with the unpleasant truth about himself, Barris begins to spiral out of control. After almost having a nervous breakdown on one of his shows, Barris shuts himself away in a New York City hotel. Penny manages to find him and tries in vain to convince him to return to California to get married.
Barris finally leaves his room and meets Patricia in Boston. After a cup of coffee with her, Barris collapses, seemingly poisoned. Patricia reveals that she is the mole. Barris has tricked Patricia into drinking from the poisoned cup, and she falls dead. After her death, he returns home and begins writing his autobiography, Confessions of a Dangerous Mind. He finally decides to marry Penny. At the end of the ceremony, he sees some of the people he killed in the crowd. Distraught, he confesses to her his double life as a CIA assassin, but she merely laughs, assuming he is joking, and he decides not to correct her. | psychedelic, psychological | train | wikipedia | We all remember Chuck Barris as the creator of some of television's most successful - albeit notoriously mind-numbing - game shows: `The Dating Game,' `The Newlywed Game,' and `The Gong Show.' But did you know that he was also a hit man for the CIA?
Well, that's what he claims, straight from his own `unauthorized autobiography' entitled `Confessions of a Dangerous Mind,' which has now been made into a movie by director George Clooney and writer Charlie Kaufman.
What most of us didn't know about Barris at the time was that, while all this was going on, he was ostensibly leading a double life as a secret agent, tracking down and killing any number of `bad guys,' all in the name of `national security.'Given the inherently incredible, jaw-dropping nature of the material, George Clooney, in his directorial debut, brings an appropriately surrealistic tone to the work.
Rounding out the cast are Clooney himself, as the mysterious CIA agent who draws Barris into this strange netherworld of intrigue and danger, Rutger Hauer, as a fellow hit man who pours out his feelings about his chosen occupation to Barris, Julia Roberts, as the icy cool CIA operative who pops up at various moments and in various places to keep an eye on the young recruit, and even Brad Pitt and Matt Damon, who show up for a truly hilarious cameo appearance together, one that had the audience at the screening I attended howling with delight.The $64,000 question becomes, of course, is this story even remotely true, or is it merely another case of this master showman's playing the public for all its worth?
Whether the film is really a true story or merely a grand lark perpetrated on an increasingly credulous audience, the fact is that `Confessions of a Dangerous Mind' turns out to be a thoroughly entertaining, utterly loony piece of original filmmaking.`Confessions of a Dangerous Mind' marks an auspicious debut for Clooney as a director, who, in his work behind the camera, demonstrates a thorough command of vision and style.
'Confessions' though is willing to give Chuck Barris the benefit of the doubt in regards to his dubious claims to have been a secret assassin for the CIA in the midst of his days as a game show host, giving life to such controversial classic as 'the Gong Show' and 'the Dating Game' while taking it from a range of human targets around the globe.
Regardless of whether the real-life Barris truly did have some incredible adventures within his time, or simply an overly-active imagination, this movie translates it into one heck of an enjoyable romp slick, stylish and entrancing on the surface, and with a bracingly poignant and sobering tale lurking underneath.Kaufman continues to rule supreme with his flair for developing the most heavily flawed and eccentric of characters, investing them with witty dialogue and sharp situations and, as with his previous screenplays, the humour is a pleasantly mixed bag lightly amusing at some points, laugh-out-loud hilarious at others, even outright alarming whenever it needs to be.
Sure, things can move a tad slowly every now and then, but with this number of niceties up there to be marvelled at you know you're never for a second going to be bored.It also draws a fine contrast between the two separate pursuits that Chuck Barris is called to follow the game show scenes are colourful, light-hearted fun, the assassin scenes murky and deliciously paranoid, and Sam Rockwell, at the helm as our savvy and hapless main man, has the timing, the energy and the appeal to emerge from the two as both a comic figure and a tragic one.
Kicking off as a likable, familiar kind of anti-hero, whose goofy grin and offhand ways have us smiling through the bar fights and the womanising, he gradually evolves into something more enigmatic and sorrowful; a lost, confused individual whose more innocuous contributions to society, in the form of lowbrow 'trash TV', are widely scorned (not that I've ever seen any of the genuine Chuck Barris's shows myself, but it would amaze me if they were really any worse than the kind of mind-numbing reality TV that's enjoyed popularity over the past few years), while the hidden talent he discovers in contract killing begins to understandably repulse him soon enough.
One of the most effective things about 'Confessions' is just how deftly it uses its gags and its pathos, along with interview snippets from those who were acquainted with the real-life Barris, which punctuate the story at various points, to reflect upon this man, his life, and just how much he really achieved either way, arriving in the end at quite a biting conclusion.
I don't think that any other rendition of 'If I had a Hammer' could feel nearly as sad and haunting as it does here.Drew Barrymore and Clooney himself offer nice support all the while, each epitomising different ends of the Chuck Barris spectrum Barrymore, as Chuck's bubbly girlfriend Penny, is a fun-loving innocent; Clooney, as his CIA director, is aptly subtle and mysterious.
But neither of them, or anyone else involved for a matter of fact, comes even close to upstaging Rockwell, whose input is simply fantastic there's no doubt in my mind that the Best Actor Award which, as the blurb on the DVD so proudly states, he picked up at the Berlin International Film Festival for his efforts, was well-and-truly earned.It's not an innovative, far-out, one-of-a-kind experience (a la 'Being John Malkovich').
Clooney Plays a Weird Story Straight Up. What if the creator and host of two of the 1970s biggest and lamest television game shows was also a part-time CIA hitman?
It is competently acted by Sam Rockwell as Barris, Julia Roberts as a fellow spy, Drew Barrymore as his love interest, and director George Clooney as his CIA recruiter and handler.
While Barris and Byrd are good characters, some aren't as well used and you get the impression that the script wishes they weren't involved at all, certainly Penny and Patricia were a little confused and what was hinted at was never revealed in terms of who they were.Rockwell runs the film really well and copes with the comic stuff and the darker stuff.
Definitely worth a watch if you enjoy strong acting performances mixed with offbeat plots.Clooney takes what is basically a poor mans "THE KID STAYS IN THE PICTURE" and makes a very entertaining and watchable film with great acting and stylish but reigned in technique.
George Clooney's directorial debut is a compelling dramatic biopic about `Gong Show' host Chuck Barris, who claims to be a hit man for the CIA.
So before seeing "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind", his debut as a director, I had my doubts...This time we don't get to see Clooney very often in the movie itself.
Of course without the interesting story and the good acting by all of his main actors Clooney wouldn't have been able to make this movie.
Also watch for Brad Pitt and Matt Damon in fleeting, non-speaking cameo roles.The film (and book) explore the double life of Chuck Barris who was once described as lowering the bar on television for ever.
"Confessions of a Dangerous MInd' was excellent and I'm surprised it doesn't receive more credit.The story is an 'autobiographical' tale of TV producer Chuck Barris (Sam Rockwell) who doubles as a CIA-assassin.
The cinematography is superb, and Director of Photography, Newton Thomas Sigel, creates a film with such innovative lighting and tones, and to top it off, the screen play is written by one of Hollywood's best, Charlie Kaufmann (wrote 'Being John Malkovich, Adaptation, Eternal Sunshine).The movie was shadowy but not dark, humorous but not too light, mysterious but not deceptive and was honestly one of the most original films I've seen in a long time.
Chuck Barris, who became a television icon in the mid-1970s while acting as producer-creator-host of TV's "The Gong Show", has his humble and strange beginnings reenacted by first-time director George Clooney, who curiously displays a loving affection for innocent American nostalgia and yet a puny breadth of imagination behind the camera.
This was a life story no one really wanted to see adapted to the screen, and even Clooney (as both director and supporting actor, playing the CIA operative who recruits Barris) is more cheeky than serious.
From the man who created such revolutionary concepts as "Date Game", "The Gong Show" and "The Newlywed Game", the predecessors to modern-day exploitational reality TV shows, comes "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind", the autobiography of Chuck Barris (Sam Rockwell).
While this involves a lot of spying, espionage and double crosses, the big difference between Oceans and Confessions, is that Oceans 11 had a lot of charm and tongue-in-cheek with itself.Sam Rockwell plays Chuck Barris here, as you probably know, if you've read his so-so book, was not only a hammy game show host, but also a CIA agent.
I actually almost felt, while watching Julia Roberts scenes, that she was thinking "Boy, Clooney owes me a big fat favor here".So-so story, so-so main character, excellent supporting actors..
Sam Rockwell, Drew Barrymore, George Clooney, Julia Roberts, Brad Pitt, Matt Damon, Rutger Hauer, Maggie Gyllenhaal...the big names just kept right on coming.
Watching this film, I couldn't help recalling another one, "A Beautiful Mind", the story of another troubled soul that parallels, in a way, the life of the main character of this one: Chuck Barris.It's a big stretch of the imagination to imagine the real Barris as a CIA operative, let alone, someone worth of a biopic with a screen play by Charlie Kaufman and an interesting directorial debut by George Clooney.
Barris insists that during his days as a creator and/or host for such shows as "The Dating Game" and "The Gong Show," the CIA employed him to murder "33 human beings."Whether or not you believe his story is really beside the point--as a story for a film it seems pretty reasonable.
I haven't read his autobiography, I heard it is very well-detailed and all, but knowing the type of scum Barris is in real life makes me think he's either a crazy loon or he just wanted to make it back into the spotlight, and so he came up with this crazy story (I prefer the latter theory).The film doesn't always make a whole lotta sense.
At best, the Clooney CIA character is Barris's version of the A Beautiful Mind hallucination.Sam Rockwell looked more like Kramer from Seinfeld than he did Chuck Barris.
But the ramifications are as much ambiguous as what George Clooney (an exemplar of the mainstream Hollywood mindset) wants us to believe, it does manage to shape a believe-it- or-despise-it logjam and according to the film's depiction, Chuck Barry is nothing but a pipsqueak (there is no reference of any flair in his ascending in the show business), a lunatic has a very troubled mental state (a dreadful imagination of someone is going to finish him off), a repellent womanizer/sex-addict has big commitment issues if we simply remove the " hit-man" halo, so from which one could imply is that the "other identity" suits well to rationalize his personal mire, it is his last straw, but from the eyes of an audience, it flunks by blatantly over-beautifying the double-identity situation, I never feel the frisson albeit the film is being cunningly shot in a retro-redolent grain, with a friendly comic tone and lively interactions between the cinematography and the editing, plus an ace soundtrack with the trademark of its time.
All sidekicks are come-and- go (with Drew Barrymore and Julia Roberts the female auxiliaries have longer stints, both equally awful I must say, Barrymore doesn't age at all along a two-decades span which is so dragging viewers out of the picture), the sole comic relief is the performance from Sam Rockwell, who was largely unknown at that time and overlooked by the awards season (a SILVER BERLIN BEAR for BEST ACTOR is his only trophy), his panache proffers the vitality of the film against its slightly mind-bogging narrative tempo, also his personal charisma transcends his character, and sublimates his character Chuck, a connection has been substantially built across the screen, a triumphant achievement in deed.
Sam Rockwell's portrayal of Barris is an obnoxious caricature, as is Drew Barrymore's long-suffering girlfriend, as is George Clooney's CIA man, as is Julia Roberts' double-agent seductress (will someone please make her go away already?).
Last year his autobiography was published, in which he claims to have been an undercover CIA operative while all this was going on, and when he chaperoned couples on their holiday dates, to charming places like Helsinki, west berlin and south east asia, he was actually on missions of murder and espionage.George Clooney uses this autobiography as the basis for his directorial debut, starring himself as a CIA man, The excellent Sam Rockwell as Barris, Rockwell is probably best known for his chilling portrayal of wild bill Wharton, that awful hillbilly murderer in the green mile, it also stars Drew Barrymore, who is just divine in the role as his long suffering girlfriend and Julia Roberts, oddly enough playing a CIA femme fatale.
And George Clooney can act a bit as well, what a voice and doesn't every guy just want to look like him.It's also a very different film in the way that the main character elicits little sympathy from the audience, he is not really that likeable, it almost could be confessions of a despicable and self-indulgent mind, but he is a fascinating character, this barris, and if it's all really true, what a story and what a life..
Clooney shows good performance just as Julia Roberts, Rutger Hauer (didn't see him for a while), Drew Barrymore and Sam Rockwell do.So after all "Confessions of a dangerous mind" is a good movie and worth watching !.
Clooney plays a CIA man with such robotic lack of conviction that his character comes off more like a very bad stereotype than a person who really existed.The story is absurd, the "humour" unfunny, and the film is quite dull in the second half.
And, since this film promises to be, like it says on the DVD, "In the cool, witty style of 'Ocean's Eleven'," Barris is recruited by handsome director George Clooney (as Jim Byrd) to kill dozens of people for the CIA.
This film takes Barris' distraction (the CIA story) too seriously, thus misses a mark; but, Mr. Rockwell is excellent and Mr. Clooney found a directorial "voice" in his next film.******* Confessions of a Dangerous Mind (5/02) George Clooney ~ Sam Rockwell, Drew Barrymore, George Clooney, Julia Roberts.
"Confessions of a Dangerous Mind", George Clooney's tongue in cheek directorial debut, is an adaptation of Gong Show creator Chuck Barris' memoir in which he claims to have murdered dozens as a secret agent.
Sam Rockwell captures Chuck Barris movements and idiosyncracies and George Clooney continues his obsession with the full backside nudity of the male body this time as a director in this movie and as an actor in Solaris.
Thus the fine directing of George Clooney and good appearances of Drew Barrymore, Julia Roberts and Sam Rockwell (who steals the show) as well as Mr. Clooney itself, I kinda was left confused whether this story of a double life between producer/host and secret agent is believable.
It had his feel to it, George Clooney did a great job, though he's not known for directing, and Sam Rockwell accurately portrayed the young, ambitious Chuck Barris.
TV producer Chuck Barris has "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind" in this 2002 movie directed by George Clooney and starring Sam Rockwell, Drew Barrymore, Julia Roberts and George Clooney with appearances by Dick Clark, Jaye P.
In Barris' writings, he claims that all the time he was developing and producing shows like "The Newlywed Game," "The Dating Game," and "The Gong Show," he was moonlighting as a CIA hit man.
He claims to have killed more than 100 people, though in the film he's credited with only 33.Done partially as a documentary, Barris' TV success is chronicled as is his love life with Penny (Barrymore); things get a little confusing when he gets drafted by the Clooney character and starts killing.
This movie is also the proof that George Clooney is more than a pretty face and a fine actor, he's a talented director as well.Sam Rockwell gives a funny, tragic and intense performance as Chuck Barris.
The trick that makes this film work is that it is entertaining enough that you will probably not care whether or not Chuck Barris really was a hit-man for the CIA.
There's an ensemble cast surrounding Sam Rockwell (playing Barris) that includes Julia Roberts, George Clooney, and Drew Barrymore, that in no way takes away from the amazing performance he gives.
Stylistically self-conscious directorial debut from George Clooney adapted by Charlie Kaufman (Being John Malkovich, Adaptation) from the "is it true" autobiography by real-life game-show host Chuck Barris (Matchstick Men's Sam Rockwell, who's great), in which he claims to have been a CIA agent.One thing about directorial debuts is they're usually fairly self-conscious, as i said (ie, you feel while you're watching it that the director has thought about style too much), but the good thing is they're always passionate.
well I'm confused.Confessions of a Dangerous Mind is the film adaptation of Chuck Barris' "Unauthorised" Autobiography in which we follow the life of the man who masterminded the cheesy American game shows of the 60s and 70s.Well that sounds like a barrel of laughs and possibly the most interesting autobiography ever written.
I simply didn't care.Add the naked man in-front of the TV(which added exactly what?), the funky camera tricks(unnecessary), Julia Roberts as a killer(yeah right), and I'm afraid that the movie just doesn't really cut it.Some things I like: extras on DVD, Sam Rockwell (excellent job as Barris), good actors(maybe not good casting!), and beautiful scenes.The story just didn't sell me. |
tt0030968 | When Were You Born | On an ocean liner sailing from the Orient to San Francisco, Mei Lei Ming (Anna May Wong) gives fellow passenger Nita Kenton (Lola Lane) a reading. When Nita's boyfriend, importer Phillip Corey (James Stephenson), scoffs at her predictions, she informs him that he himself will die within 48 hours.
Corey is later found dead in his San Francisco shop, an apparent suicide. Police Inspector Jim C. Gregg (Charles C. Wilson) is certain it is a homicide and has Sergeant Kelly (Frank Jaquet) bring Mei Lei in for questioning. She convinces him she is innocent and, after demonstrating her astrological powers by telling both skeptical policemen about themselves based solely on their birth dates, proceeds to help them solve the case and two subsequent, related killings. Police forensic scientist Dr. Merton (Maurice Cass), however, remains firmly scornful of Mei Lei's unscientific methods.
When Corey's Chinese business partner Frederick Gow (Leonard Mudie) shows up at the police station, he recognizes Juggler Barrows (an uncredited Sidney Bracey), who has been brought in for questioning about an unrelated crime. He pretends to cough and uses a handkerchief to conceal his face from Barrows as he enters Gregg's office. There, he announces that he wants to recover certain business letters from Corey's safe. Mei Lei becomes suspicious. When the letters Gow wanted are later examined, Mei Lei discovers a coded message that indicates Corey and Gow were involved in drug smuggling.
Corey was engaged to Doris Kane (Margaret Lindsay), though she herself was not attracted to the man, preferring instead crack shot Larry Camp (Anthony Averill). Under questioning, Kane later reluctantly reveals that Corey had blackmailed her mother into pressuring her to accept the arrangement. She also acknowledges that she went to Corey's home the night he was killed to try to persuade him to break the engagement. She was followed by Camp, who then quarreled with the victim. A shot was fired, but Camp claims that Corey fired at him. Corey's valet, Shields (Eric Stanley) is also a suspect.
Meanwhile, Gow runs into Juggler Barrows. Barrows is astonished to see him, as Gow had deceived him into believing he was Corey. Gow is relieved to ascertain that Sergeant Kelly did not believe Barrows when he claimed to have spoken to "Corey" some time after the real Corey had been killed. He lures Barrows away. Later, Barrows' dead body is flung from a speeding car.
Convinced that Gow is the killer, Gregg goes to his apartment with Mei Lei and some policemen to search the place. Gow escapes through a hidden passageway. He spots Mei Lei alone in his reading room and takes her captive. However, Shields had seen Gow entering the secret passageway and followed. He shoots Gow dead. Mei Lei, seeing how good a shot he is, gets him to admit he killed his employer. Gow had hired Barrows to open Corey's safe. When Corey returned unexpectedly, they hid. Shields entered the room at just the wrong moment and was accused of theft. He was forced to shoot Corey in self-defense. | murder | train | wikipedia | Astrology may be bunk, but this film is fun..
This B-movie murder mystery is unquestionably different than most films of it's time.
The clap-trap about using astrology as a crime fighting tool is an odd gimmick, but what the heck?This sort of programmer benefits from the unusual astrology "window-dressing", and though it is supposedly solved by using astrology, this pat little mystery can be figured out by the characters simply using their heads, anyway!The cast is entirely competent, and the pace is swift.
The pre-war San Francisco Chinatown background, the hidden passage-ways in the Chinatown home, and Miss Wong's monkey, all add to the enjoyment of this film.As a devoted fan of B-movie murder yarns of this period, I may be somewhat prejudiced, but I loved watching this film, and highly recommend it to fellow fans of the genre.
Entertainingly exotic B-mystery with an astrological twist!.
This supremely entertaining B-mystery from Warner Bros features a wonderful lead performance by Anna May Wong as an astrologer in San Francisco's Chinatown who helps the police solve a murder by using her uncanny star-gazing talents.
Anyone even remotely interested in astrology will find the story-line quite pleasing (and pretty accurate, given the participation of Manly Hall, a noted astrologer of the day).
Even those without much interest in astrology (except those who are stubbornly judgmental and predisposed to be negative about these things) should find this fast-paced, amusing mystery a cut well above the average.
The adroitly talented supporting cast--including Margaret Lindsay, Lola Lane, Jeffrey Lynn, James Stephenson and Olin Howland--give the film an additional sheen.
Highly recommended; definitely check it out whenever it turns up on Turner Classic Movies..
Love this movie!!!.
Love this time period especially the murder mysteries.
Caught this movie recently and watch it over and over.
It's addicting!!
It's fascinating.
I really love it!!
Mei Ling is a wonderful character & so interesting.
I don't believe in Astology but this is just a fun and intriguing movie!
It has a good cast of characters and keeps you guessing until the very end about who committed the crime.
The pieces of evidence as presented keep you fascinated as the police attempt to solve the crime.
I loved the Mei Ling character and wish there were many more movies made like this.
A series like they did with Charlie Chan would have been nice!!
I highly recommend it for a good flick..
Not to be taken seriously..a fun who-done-it.
Oh heck...I gave it practically a rave review because I was not bored for one minute.
Those that stated the astrological slant being ridiculous due to so few facts to cast a chart...well...the movie is for astrology semi-buffs that do nothing more extensive zodiac-wise than read their daily horoscope.
It was a neat tale supported on GENERAL characteristics of each of the zodiac signs.
All the actors were great and seemed to be treating the material with respect.
For the plot read the others' reviews..
I just had to put my two-cents in by saying, PLEASE do not take this fun short film too seriously..
Plot may strain credibility, but nice work from Anna May Wong.
I agree with the first reviewer that it's a bit much to believe the astrologer can be so accurate with every utterance, but the movie is light fun, and Anna May Wong gets a lot of good screen time.
She doesn't just recite star charts; she also helps the police ferret out legitimate clues and solve puzzle or two.
Don't take it too seriously..
It Should Be Seen....
...because of ANNA MAE WONG!!!Typically tight (65") WARNER BROTHERS' mystery 'B' programmer that was churned out from the 1930s' till the mid 1950s', when T.V. took over.
This story is wrapped up in the 'pseudo science' of Astrology.
Which each character is given a sign and a sub-plot of the Zodiac.
It starts off with the 'horoscope' of Nita Kenton (Lola Lane/Cancer) whose character disappears after the proclamation of doom for Philip Corey (James Stephenson/Libra).
The rest of the story weaves around his murder and how it is deciphered by Mei Lei Ming (Anna Mae Wong/Aquarius) and her astrological expertise.Though billed second after Margaret Lindsay (Doris Kane/Leo) it is ANNA MAE WONG that drives this story.
Ms. Wong gives her usual professional performance dominating every scene she is in.
Unfortunately like most of her Hollywood productions of this time it is in a 'B' effort.
Most of her more accomplished efforts having been done earlier or in England/Europe.
This was because of the racial discrimination of the time.
Today her career would have had a entirely different course.Due to how Chinese or Oriental characters where portrayed at that time Ms. Wong appeared in what was considered traditional dress.
While all other characters appeared in period apparel.
It would have been better if she had been shown off in some of the 'chic' fashions she normally wore.
There is no doubt of her physical appeal, Ms. Wong being strikingly attractive.For those who have not seen Ms. Wong this is a good start, but do not stop here.
See her early work like THE THIEF OF BAGDAD (1924), PICADILLY (1929) or the SHANGHEI EXPRESS (1933).
She is a wonder to behold..
The Play's The Thing.
Or, at least, the story's the thing, and this is a murder mystery - and the story is pretty good.
At 65 minutes it goes by quickly, so the viewer must pay attention or something will be lost.
Nowadays, we have DVR's and can rewind if needed - and it's needed.
The solution hinges on a specific time frame and several characters give the times of their alibi, and it's hard to keep them straight.The plot is a good one, but much is made of the fact that Anna May Wong's character is an astrologist, which was very popular around the time this was produced.
She has a habit of giving people the pros and cons of their zodiac sign after asking the title question, and it becomes tiresome.
Her acting seems stilted, as though reciting from memory and not natural.
In any case, you won't guess the murderer; as I said, the story is a good one.
Two things; it is told at breakneck speed, and the time frames of the alibis are crucial to solving the murder.
As I said in the beginning, pay attention, especially towards the end..
Astrological Crime Fighting?.
When Were You Born?
(1938)An interesting angle on the murder mystery genre adding astrology to the caper flick.
It's a simple B movie, but very entertaining.
It comes off kind serious with a mysterious Manley P.
Hall telling us about astrology (sort of like Ed Wood style).
Naturally, all twelve characters of the zodiac will be featured in this film.Beautiful Anna May Wong is the Chinese-American astrologer, Mei Lei Ming, who has a lot of insight to the people she meets.
She meets Phil Corey (James Stephenson) on board a ship from China to San Francisco, U.S.A. and predicts that he will die within a couple of days.
When Corey is killed, Miss Ming is one of the prime suspects.Soon a very doubting taurus, Inspector Jim Gregg (Charles C.
Wilson) considers having Miss Ming hang around just to give her insights over the various suspects..
It's All In The Stars.
Wacky programmer that fails for the most part.
Looks like WB was trying to rival Charlie Chan with the much prettier Anna Mae Wong, except Mei Lei (Wong) uses astrology to crack cases instead of logic.
Well that is a different approach, for sure, and the script's not shy about reinforcing Mei Lei's star-gazing powers.
To make their premise go down easier, science is treated as supplementary to Libra, Taurus, et al, and not in conflict with the mystical signs.
I wonder how that goes down with Sherlock Holmes, never mind Cal Tech or MIT.
Wong is the best thing about the 65-minutes, treating a troublesome part with genuine authority.
It's really she who deserves top billing even though Lindsey and Lane furnish abundant eye candy.
Maybe my planets are in the wrong house, but I found the whodunit a messy bore.
There's not much action, while the talkfest seldom leaves interior sets.
All in all, I can see why there were no movie sequels, at the same time the ladies went on to bigger and better things.
Anyway it's an oddball idea even for adventurous WB.
(In passing-- Watch for Clayton Moore, TV's Lone Ranger {1949-57}, in a minor part as Ass't DA, but don't look for the mask or Tonto.).
Remake.
When Were You Born (1938) is an non-credited remake of From Headquarters (1933).
The plot is the same.
The differences are WWYB introduces an astrologer to aid the police, while FH is a straight police procedural.While both are interesting "B" pictures, FH is, in my opinion, the better of the two.
It has more stylish photography, moves along a bit faster, and has a somewhat better cast (though Margaret Lindsay appears in both films as a lead).Watch closely in this version, however, and you will see TV's The Lone Ranger (Clayton Moore) without his mask.
(by Dr. Charles G.
Waugh).
A bizarre screenplay in a well-made murder mystery solved by astrology..
Since I've always felt that astrology can be described at best as fraudulent, the goings on here annoyed me very much.
Tell Anna May Wong your birthday and she can look up your chart and tell you everything about you.
She tells James Stephenson he has two days to live; Jeffrey Lynn that his wife will have twins; Inspector Charles Wilson that there will be two more murders, etc.
It goes on and on and she's never wrong!
Mind you, she says these predictions are only generalizations, because she doesn't have the exact time of your birth.
The opening scenes has Manley P.
Hall (the one who concocted the original story) on-screen telling how astrology enables you to predict the future and he cites laughable examples of it.
He also explains the 12 signs of the zodiac and the characteristics of the people born under those signs.
To me it was all nonsense.
You might note that the character of each of the 12 credited actors was born under a different zodiac sign which was specified on-screen.The film is well directed by William McGann, who sets a nice pace for the 65 minute length of the film, and it was somewhat fun to watch the mystery unfold.
But I cringed every time Wong opened her mouth with some item seemingly picked out of the air.
If you believe in astrology, you may like this film.
You don't have to believe in astrology to enjoy this film.
I should know - I'm a firm non-believer in anything even remotely associated with astrology, but I still enjoyed "When Were You Born" - to a degree.
Besides, if I were to take it too seriously, I should be offended: my zodiac sign - Libra - is represented by the most negative character in the film!
But at least the skeptics in the audience are fairly represented too.
The problem with the film is that it's too static - about 75% of the "action" happens inside one police station.
But it makes clever use of flashbacks, and Anna May Wong, playing an astrology specialist who ends up offering valuable assistance to the police, gives more conviction to her lines than most other actresses would - and make no mistake, she is the star of this film; top-billed Margaret Lindsay's part is relatively small, third-billed Lola Lane's even smaller.
It's all written in the stars.
****SPOILERS*** Weird sort of movie where everyone in it is identified by their astrological signs not just their names with Chinese astrologist Mel Li Ming, Anna May Wong,cracking this puzzling murder case by interrupting the astrological charts of those involved in it.
We also get a 7 minute introduction to the movie by the narrator-whoever he is-Manl;y P.
Hall who's like Miss.
Ming supposed to be an expert on the subject of astrology.
It's on a cruise from Hong Kong to San Francisco that Miss.Ming in noticing businessman Philip Corey's, James Stephenson,birthday on his passport predicts that he'll be dead within 48 hours.
When that in fact happened she's a suspect in his what looks like his murder not suicide with her friend and former school mate Doris Kane, Margaret Lindsey,Corey's fiancée held for questioning.It soon turns out that Doris' brother Larry Camp, Anthony Averill, was the last person to see Corey alive who in fact is later exposed by the sharp eyed Miss.
Ming in her getting the astrological charts of all those involved in knowing his astrology chart that Miss.
Ming realizes that he's not her brother at all but her lover!
With the police going nowhere in the case it's Miss.
Ming who puts all the loose ends as well as son moon and planets together in finding out who Corey's killer is.
This is done by her finding out the charts of all those involved and identifying from them the killer's identity.****SPOILERS**** It soon turns out that Doris's mom was being blackmailed-in her having a serious drinking problem- by Corey to get her to agree her to have have her daughter Doris marry him by also-I if the drinking story didn't work-coming up with this story that she's involved in a drug trafficking operation with Corey and his business partner Frederick Glow, Lenonard Mudie, that in fact Corey was the head had honcho of.
The confusing final that takes place in San Francisco's Chinatown has Glow exposed and on the run as Corey's killer who ends up getting all that's coming to him with Corey's loyal valet Shields, Eric Stanley, a crack shot and Olympic gold medal winner who spotted Glow taking Miss.
Ming hostage shoots him dead as he tries to make his escape. |
tt1229989 | Lalola | Ramiro "Lalo" Padilla (played by Juan Gil Navarro) is the director of the media company "High Five", editor of the famous magazine Don, and has many women around him. Romina (played by Marcela Kloosterboer), who is in love with Lalo, decides to punish his lack of commitment to her. She hires a witch to cast a spell on him, which turns him into a very beautiful woman, as Romina wanted him to know what it is like for a woman who is being harassed.
Lalo (now played by Carla Peterson) awakes as a woman, in a state of utter confusion. However, Lalo's friend Graciela ("Grace") Neira (played by Muriel Santa Ana) believes what happened as she heard Romina's phone call to Lalo's home saying what she did. As it seems unlikely anyone else will believe that Ramiro has been magically transformed, so Ramiro assumes a new identity: Dolores "Lola" Padilla, cousin of Lalo. Lalo "had to make an urgent trip to Germany because his father became ill", and has appointed Lola to take his place. While trying to find a way to change back, there are a whole new set of challenges to face that Lalo didn't have to experience before, both within and outside the workplace.
The show has been officially remade in 12 other countries: Portugal, Chile, Peru, Spain, Belgium, Greece, Turkey, Russia, India, Vietnam, Indonesia and the Philippines. All of these remakes start with mostly the same initial premise but many of them head in very different narrative directions and ultimate conclusions than the original show. | revenge, fantasy | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0030241 | Holiday | Iris Simpkins (Kate Winslet), a society columnist for The Daily Telegraph in London, has been in love with Jasper Bloom (Rufus Sewell) for over three years, despite his infidelities and the fact they have broken up some time previously. When she learns at a company Christmas party that he is engaged to be married, Iris despairs over the state of affairs in her life. Meanwhile, Amanda Woods (Cameron Diaz), a workaholic in Los Angeles who owns a company that produces movie trailers, discovers that her boyfriend, Ethan Ebbers (Edward Burns), has been cheating on her with his 24-year-old secretary. On the spur of the moment she decides to get away for the Christmas holidays and visits a home-exchange website on which Iris has listed her "quaint cottage in Surrey." Amanda contacts Iris, and the two women quickly agree to swap homes for two weeks.
While Iris revels in the luxury of Amanda's Los Angeles home, Amanda is disappointed by the slow, quiet pace of life in Iris's Surrey cottage. Amanda grows bored after just a few hours and books a flight home for the next day. Later that night, Iris's brother, Graham (Jude Law), knocks at the door thinking Iris is home. Graham asks Amanda to let him spend the night despite the fact that he is a stranger, as he has been drinking at the pub and doesn't want to drive. Because of the obvious chemistry between them, they end up sleeping together.
In the morning, Graham receives phone calls from Sophie and Olivia, which arouse Amanda's suspicions that Graham has girlfriends. Graham, knowing that Amanda is planning to return home imminently, says to Amanda that "if the flight gets cancelled, [he is] having dinner at the pub" with friends. At the airport Amanda decides to stay and goes to the pub. Graham enters the pub and looks for her but cannot see her until he meets his friends and then sees Amanda. Amanda drinks far too much that night, and Graham agrees to stay the night with her. The next day Graham suggests they go to lunch to get to know one another better. During lunch, Amanda shares with Graham that her parents divorced when she was fifteen and since then she has been unable to cry. Graham tells her that he cries all the time: movies, books, and birthday cards. He also reveals himself to be a book editor. While obviously enjoying each other's company, Amanda is nonetheless worried that the relationship will become "complicated."
Meanwhile, Iris is enjoying her stay at Amanda's house. She meets Ethan's friend Miles (Jack Black) when he comes with his girlfriend Maggie (Shannyn Sossamon) to Amanda's house. Later, she meets an elderly neighbour named Arthur Abbott (Eli Wallach), standing lost at the corner, and she escorts him home. She learns that he was a screenwriter during the Golden Age of Hollywood. The two become fast friends. Arthur notes that Iris's relationship with Jasper is not serving her well, and he suggests movies for her to watch that include strong female characters, in hopes that she can acquire what he calls "gumption."
Amanda chooses not to see Graham again but, alone again in the cottage, she has a change of heart and surprises Graham at his house. He looks uncomfortable at the door, Amanda asks Graham whether he is alone, and he says he isn't. Before she can turn away, Olivia and Sophie come to the door, revealing that they are Graham's young daughters. Inside the house, Amanda asks Graham in a whisper if he is married. He says no, revealing that his wife died two years earlier. Amanda asks him why he did not reveal the existence of his daughters to her during their lunch, and Graham explains that he doesn't usually tell women about them because he doesn't know how to date women while also being a dad. Amanda gets along beautifully with Sophie and Olivia, making Graham consider how Amanda might fit into his family life.
Iris discovers that the Screenwriters' Guild wants to throw a grand celebration in Arthur's honor, but he is reluctant to attend for several reasons, chief among them being that he cannot walk without the assistance of his walker, and does not want to embarrass himself on stage. Iris encourages him to go because it's a tremendous honor for him, and promises to help him prepare to attend the award function with her. She undertakes an exercise program with him, determined to help him walk without his walker. During this time Jasper contacts her, asking her to assist with the book he is writing. She agrees to look over his pages, but ends up having so much fun that she doesn't have the time.
Iris and Miles have slowly become friends, and one night go to the video store to rent some other films that Arthur had recommended. From the video store, Miles sees his girlfriend Maggie in the arms of another guy. He is shocked, as she told him that she was in Santa Fe on an extended film shoot and would not be in L.A. on Christmas Eve. He runs out of the store to confront Maggie and realizes that she has been cheating on him. Iris and Miles then return to Amanda's house, where they discuss their tendencies to fall for people that they know are wrong for them, and they begin to bond with each other. Shortly afterwards Miles and Iris are eating lunch together, and Maggie calls Miles wanting to see him. Miles leaves to see her, but promises to come to Arthur's award ceremony that night. Iris returns to Amanda's house, and is later surprised to find Jasper at her doorstep. Iris is touched at first, but then asks if he is still engaged. When he responds that he is, she finally realizes he is no good for her and breaks up with him for good. Meanwhile, Maggie tries in vain to convince Miles to forgive her. He realizes that Maggie was never meant for him, ends his relationship with her for good and rushes to attend Arthur's award ceremony.
Iris and Arthur arrive at the ceremony and are pleasantly surprised to find that, despite Arthur's fears that the ceremony would be sparsely attended, the hall is filled with attendees standing and applauding his achievements. That, and the music that Miles wrote especially for Arthur for this moment, give him the confidence to walk onto the stage unassisted. Miles arrives and asks Iris for a date on New Year's Eve. Iris responds that she will be back in England by then; Miles replies "I've never been to England." Iris responds that she would love to spend the evening with Miles. Meanwhile, Graham confesses his love for Amanda on the night before she is scheduled to depart, but Amanda is still doubtful that a long-distance relationship will work. On her way to the airport, she cries for the first time since she was fifteen years old, and returns to the house to find Graham crying, too. Amanda tells him that she has decided to stay to spend New Year's Eve with him, and they embrace. Iris and Miles celebrate the new year with Amanda and Graham and his daughters, enjoying the evening, and laughing and dancing together. | comedy | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0075376 | Up! | In 1939, nine-year-old Carl Fredricksen idolizes famous explorer Charles F. Muntz. When Muntz is accused of fabricating the skeleton of a giant exotic bird he says he discovered at Paradise Falls, he vows not to return until he captures one alive. One day, Carl befriends a girl named Ellie, also a Muntz fan. She confides to Carl her desire to move her "clubhouse"—an abandoned house in the neighborhood—to a cliff overlooking Paradise Falls.
Carl and Ellie grow up, get married and live in the restored house. Carl sells toy balloons at the zoo where Ellie works. After she suffers a miscarriage and they are told they cannot have a child, the two decide to realize their dream of visiting Paradise Falls. They save for the trip, but repeatedly have to spend the money on more pressing needs. Finally, the now elderly Carl arranges for the trip, but Ellie suddenly becomes ill and dies.
Years later, Carl still lives in the house, stubbornly holding out while the neighborhood homes are torn down and replaced by skyscrapers. When he accidentally injures a construction worker, the court deems him a public menace, ordering him to move to a retirement home. However, Carl comes up with a scheme to keep his promise to Ellie by turning his house into a makeshift airship, using thousands of helium balloons. Russell, a young Wilderness Explorer who visited Carl in his effort to earn his final merit badge, for assisting the elderly, becomes an accidental stowaway.
After surviving a thunderstorm, the flying house lands on a tepui opposite Paradise Falls. Carl and Russell harness themselves to the still-buoyant house and begin to walk it across the mesa, hoping to reach the falls before the balloons deflate. Russell encounters a tall, colorful flightless bird, whom he names "Kevin". They then meet a Golden Retriever named Dug, who wears a special collar that allows him to speak and who vows to take the bird to his master. The next day, they encounter a pack of aggressive dogs led by Alpha, a Doberman Pinscher, and are taken to their master, who turns out to be Charles Muntz. Muntz invites Carl and Russell aboard his dirigible, where he explains to them that he is searching for a giant bird. When Russell notes the bird's similarity to Kevin, Muntz becomes hostile, believing they are attempting to capture the bird themselves. Carl flees with Kevin and Dug, but Muntz captures Kevin and starts a fire beneath Carl's house, forcing him to choose between saving it or Kevin. After Carl saves the house, he and Russell eventually reach the falls, though Russell is upset at Carl for abandoning Kevin. Carl looks through Ellie's childhood scrapbook and is surprised to find that she has filled in the blank pages with photos of their marriage, along with a note thanking him for the "adventure" and encouraging him to go have a new one.
The repentant Carl goes outside, only to see Russell sailing off with some balloons and the leaf blower as propulsion to try to rescue Kevin. Carl lightens the house enough to follow. Russell is captured by Muntz, but Carl manages to board the dirigible, tether the house, and free Russell and Kevin. Dug inadvertently defeats Alpha with his cone of shame and becomes the dogs' new leader. Muntz pursues them around the airship, trapping Dug, Kevin and Russell inside Carl's house. Carl lures Kevin back onto the airship, with Dug and Russell clinging to her back. Muntz leaps after them, but snags his foot on some balloon lines and falls to his death. The house then descends out of sight through the clouds.
After reuniting Kevin with her chicks, Carl and Russell fly the dirigible back to the city. Carl presents Russell with his final badge: a grape soda cap that Ellie gave to Carl when they first met. Meanwhile, Carl's house has landed on the cliff beside Paradise Falls, fulfilling his promise to Ellie. | pornographic, comedy, psychedelic, murder, violence | train | wikipedia | The film begins quite mysteriously in a dungeon where a young man is torturing an Adolf Hitler look-alike
We then quickly cut to a stunning nude, played by Kitten Natividad, who teasingly introduces the audience to the setting
We are in Northern California, in a small, rural community
Just outside of town, a very beautiful, buxom young lady is hitchhiking along a lonely country road
She is picked up by a young man, who happens to be the infant terrible of the local rich set...
He tries to take advantage of the girl's abundant sexuality but after a short sequence involving a brutal rape, she turns the tables and ends up killing him...Russ Meyer has never been one to linger too long on a single shot
He likes to cut, especially to ladies running naked as jaybirds around the lush countryside
In this case, however, he has added more than just a tease with Kitten Natividad, who narrates the events of the story with a husky, British accent while displaying her terrific figure
The true star of the show, however, is Raven de la Croix, whose piercing dark eyes and fully rounded, voluptuous figure combine with some firmly loyal acting for an explosive performance.
This is something like the odd film out in Russ Meyer's later film career.
In no way is it as well crafted as "Vixen", "The Supervixens" or "Beneath the Valley of the UltraVixens." Of course it's far superior to "Blacksnake," "The Seven Minuets," or "Beyond the Valley of the Dolls." As far as its "plot" is concerned, well, in order to have ANY appreciation of Russ Meyer films in general, you really can't be too concerned with the "plot" to begin with.What makes this movie worth watching (especially if you're a hetero male) is Raven De La Croix in the role of Margo Winchester.
This Beautiful-Busty-Lovely-Dynamo Brunette Chick is IT--the bottom (and TOP) line.Actually, she's a little over-the-top, but that's part of her charm!This is Raven's one and only movie for Meyer, and it's a shame that he didn't use her as much as he did Uschi Digart or Kitten Natividad.
It is truly a shame that Raven didn't get as many featuring roles as she should have in the 70s and 80s.As I said in another review, this movie makes for a fine half of a double feature with one of Raven's other movies, "The Lost Empire." You can watch them back to back believing that "Margo Winchester" is just an alias of "Whitestar." It has been joked about that a remake of this film should be done.
During the 1970's Russ Meyer established a reputation for producing low budget movies exploiting violence and nudity which were very successful as midnight features in conventional cinemas, or at drive in cinemas.
They established a recognisable genre which usually followed a similar template and made a Russ Meyer film very easy to recognise.
Other common features in Russ Meyer films are (1) great photography of a variety of exceptionally scenic locations (to my mind this is often the most attractive feature of his work), (2) a naked siren or spirit who watches over the proceedings, and periodically comments on them in a moralistic way, (3) a corrupt law enforcement officer with a voracious sexual appetite who eventually meets a "just" death, (4) a script which ultimately delivers violent death to all those characters that Meyer regards as completely antisocial (these include all homosexuals, anyone associated with the drug trade, and any Nazi supporters who have survived World War II), and (5) some sort of postscript that summarises the lessons which we are expected to have learned from the film that we have been viewing.
"Up" was released in 1976 and is I believe the best, (or the worst - according to ones point of view), of the films of this genre he produced.Such a film could not be easily imitated today, it dates from a time when the augmentation of mammaries was not usually practiced, so the fairly vigorous movements Russ required from his cast always led to very pronounced "bouncing boobs".
Nevertheless Raven de la Croix has an extremely expressive face which, when compared with some other Russ Meyer films, minimises any deficiencies in this respect.
Continued flashbacks make it difficult to follow, but this film is comedy rather than drama, and anyone viewing it today will be watching it for the visual effects (including both the types of spectacular natural scenery so generously featured), rather than the story line.A good review should help its reader to decide whether they would regard the film as worth watching.
With "Up!" this is simple, if you are a fan of Russ Meyer but do not know this film, you should certainly, in my opinion, accept any opportunity to see it because it is a more mature production than many of those which preceded it.
If you are one of those to whom Meyer's somewhat incoherent films will not appeal, the information above should be sufficient to save you from investing valuable time watching it..
Meyer's perverse mix of humor, sex, and violence is at its best in this film.
The many positive sex scenes in the movie are not shot as porn so much as parodies of the notion of sex as bliss (note the quick cut aways and the scene changes (mostly in beautiful natural spots), creating a sense of hours of lapsed time while preventing any build-up of erotic aura).
Russ Meyer makes his films, when they're at their best or most brilliantly deranged, like the dream of some sexually charged sixteen year old who's seen his share of pornos and 70's era exploitation films.
To give just a brief example- and maybe as one of the quintessential scenes in any exploitation flick- the scene where two completely naked women, one Eva Braun Jr with a knife and screaming maniacally about the fall of Nazism and the plight of his 'father', run after one another trying to kill each other in the woods.So Up!
is in another in a whole body of works where Meyer turns the conventions of the usual in movie-making, like a kooky member of National Lampoon, but at the same time I'm not sure it's one of his very best.
It's a little scatter-shot in the story, if there is one closely to even follow with the Greek Chrous (Kitten Navidad) where in every time whatever semblance of a story is taking shape we're led off by this narrator and Meyers's editing which takes us into a strange loop of sequencing of events and images (which in and of themselves are good, but distracting).
Mostly this involves the early scenes with Adolph Schwartz (ho-ho), who gets masochistic sex from a dominatrix and a man with a huge thing, and then gets killed mysteriously in his bathtub.
Then we're thrust into some backwoods group, including a shifty but well-intentioned sheriff (Monty Bane), a big, uproarious homunculus in Rafe (Bob Schott), and of course Meyer's 'harem' of girls.It's fun, in all basic intentions, to see these girls have fun and go into exuberant glee doing their scenes, as opposed to the more degrading XXX features that get pretty boring after a while.
While the actual content is sometimes all over the place, like with Rafe's rape scenes, where he turns into a true drunken gorilla, the actual quality of the film-making is nearly flawless.
demonstrates some great Meyers' product: beautiful, voluptuous, and mostly funny women (loved the one woman who's voice sounded out of femme fatale noir), total horn-dogs and beasts in men, and a bit of vicious satire to boot.
My personal favorite of Russ Meyer's films.
Pretty much everything that could possibly happen sex wise is thrown into this thing including three different rapes, which makes me wonder why Ebert went out of his way to try and get certain films banned due to their "treatment of women".
The lack of plot really helps matters because in the end this is a very fun film full of laughs but it's mostly the outrageous sex scenes that make it so memorable..
I love Russ Meyer movies!
That's really just an excuse for a slew of scenes like none you've ever seen, and dialogue (co-written by Roger Ebert!) that continually astounds.Kitten Natividad makes her mark as "the Greek Chorus" but the real star here is Raven De La Croix (as Margo Winchester) who is the most stunning women to ever grace a Meyer flick.
This film was made later in Meyer's career and is more along the lines of Supervixens and Beyond the Valley of the Ultra-Vixens rather than Beyond the Valley of the Dolls and Vixen - and that's OK with me.
There is a slim plot line in this film - revolving around the murder of a man named Adolf, who looks a lot like Hitler.
The film really focuses on the absolutely stunning Margo Winchester, a sexy lady who waltzes into town shortly after the murder and gets into a scuffle with a man who tries to pick up her up, and ends up killing him.
The local cop gets her out of trouble, and she takes a job at a local cafe...Russ Meyer endows his film with a truly surreal style, and that helps to ensure that Up is the hilarious fun time that it is intended to be.
This girl is absolutely amazing and pretty much makes the film worth watching on her own, the fact that the rest of it is so good only increases the appeal of Up. The narrator idea comes off as being a bit corny, but it fits in well with the style of the film and the way that the topless girl telling the story goes about her business never fails to amuse.
The fact that the film stars a Hitler look-alike might make you think that Meyer has some sort of point to make - but if he did, I didn't catch it.
Overall, Up isn't my favourite Meyer movie, but it's a very good one and comes highly recommended!.
one can imagine pretty clearly why the Sex Pistols wanted Russ Meyer and Roger Ebert to make their movie.
The film opens with Hitler bottoming for his well hung hustler Paul (played by Robert McLane, who was in the queer 'Love Story' A Very Natural Thing 1974).
Up!, writer-director Russ Meyer's twenty-fifth film, is a rare find: a feature that should be a bona-fide turn-on for many.
Most of the rest of the film deals with the question "whodunit?" although the activities of busty characters like Margo Winchester are interesting distractions for sure.
This is the second Meyer film I've seen that features a black woman giving head to somebody, and the subject matter hasn't ceased to titillate me yet.
Meyer, or "King Leer" as he was sometimes called, hasn't failed to deliver an erotic, primal, and at times silly motion picture that wouldn't be complete without the undulating of a totally nude Kitten Natividad as she narrates the story.
Natividad's "roll call" of the characters gets a bit tedious by the third go-round, but who watches Meyer films for the story?
I just watched Russ Meyer's up yesterday and i thought it was really funny.
I have heard Russ Meyer used a lot of strippers and go-go girls from that time and with big natural breasts, this is before silicon.
And i thought Kitten was very funny, talking between scenes and doing these ridiculous go-go steps and screaming like she's coming.
Russ Meyer's movies have always struck me as a cross between porn and the Loony Toons.
Adolf then takes a nice, relaxing bath, reads the paper, & gets eaten alive by a piranha called The Nimrod.Summarising the story would be an idiotic exercise - it involves a young couple, Paul & Sweet Li'l Alice (Paul is the previously mentioned Pilgrim, & Sweet Li'l Alice is a nymphomaniac, surprise surprise), a stranger in town called Margo (also, presumably, a nymphomaniac), a corrupt cop called Homer (I guess you could call him a nymphomaniac, except he's a guy), & loads of drooling, sex-starved hillbillies.
Get the picture?Plus, the plot (ho, ho, ho) is helped along by the Greek chorus of a romping, naked wood-nymph who keeps reminding the audience of the ongoing investigation into Adolf Schwartz's murder.
'Up' is no exception, but unfortunately, it's one of his later films, which tend to display a much nastier, truly misogynistic bent, & contains two of the most offensive scenes I've seen in a Meyer film.The first involves Margo being beaten almost to death & then raped while unconscious.
An extremely violent, graphic & gratuitous scene which seems totally at odds with the comic atmosphere that the film is really trying to achieve.The second is even worse in its own way - Margo is gang-raped in a bar, with Russ Meyer himself in the crowd, egging it all on.
Things go really crazy when the giant lumberjack raping Margo grabs Sweet Li'l Alice & tries to rape them both at the same time.
Doesn't make much sense on any level, but little does in this film.Meanwhile, the murder investigation continues, & the resolution involves the offspring of Adolf Hitler & Eva Braun...Meyer fans will find a few laughs in 'Up!', as he seems to be going for insanity over titillation, but anyone else will be baffled, offended, or both..
The dialogue, though at times brilliantly funny (screenplay was co-written by film critic Roger Ebert!), is totally nonsensical.
Oddly enough, even with the one-woman Greek chorus, UP still doesn't make any sense: Paul dressed as a Pilgrim; the time at the bottom of the screen (why?!?!); Margo who starts talking like Mae West; the one-woman Greek chorus naming suspects of people who obviously have nothing to do with the killing of the Adolph Hitler look-alike Adolph Schwartz; after the chainsaw scene, Margo and Alice become "friends" but the next scene, Alice wants to kill Margo; the whole conversation between Margo and Alice when they run around in the forest at the end contradicts everything that we just saw in the film, like when Alice says Paul is into young boys and yet we saw Paul making out with her and Margo and a couple of other women throughout the entire movie; Margo's real "official" identity at the end, etc.
It looks like Russ and company forgot to shoot many scenes that would have given the film a more cohesive feel to the entire loony proceeding but as it is now, it's a near total mess.
And it also looks like they ran out of money when they were shooting the last scene, when Margo, Alice and Paul confront each other, as it suddenly stops right then and there.
And to make things more hard to take, UP, like so many late Russ Meyer films, is an overindulgent and way too boisterous movie.
Questionable moments in UP, like the rape scene at the bar, where Rafe, the big silent lumberjack rapes not one but two women at the same time, come to mind.
At one point, as Rafe rapes Margo, men at the bar gather around him and cheer him on.
Comical because that scene, like the entire movie itself and like all Russ Meyer films made after BEYOND THE VALLEY OF THE DOLLS, was made to look like a cartoon.
Russ Meyer is to adult films what Tex Avery was to cartoons.
The rape scene is really filmed like a cartoon, with tons of screaming and men with axes in their stomachs that spew blood all over the place and yet they walk away like nothing had happened.
A first in a Russ Meyer flick!), everything that follows sorta looks quaint.
Margo, played by Raven De La Croix, was okay and seems to have a lot of fun but she's not much of an actress.
More than any other Russ Meyer films, except for ULTRA-VIXENS.
And there isn't a single impotent men in the entire picture (another Russ Meyer first), so everyone is having a good time.
when people talk Meyer films, I never hear Up!
Love the rednecks and hillbillies in Meyer films- they don't seen Hollywood.
I should preface this review by pointing out that Russ Meyer films are loved by many and berated by an equal amount.
The themes of violence, sexual exploitation and taboo content either delight some, or greatly offend others.I encourage you to develop your own take on Russ's unusual films.The film opens with an S&M session involving Paul, the Nazi Adolf Schwartz (who bears a striking resemblance to another famous Adolf) and several concubines.
Alice the owner and wife of Paul, knows a good thing when she sees one and realizes that Margo's beauty will attract customers.
The other bar patrons hear the cop arriving and flee leaving only Alice, Rafe and Margo inside.
As Rafe continues to rape Margo, Alice jumps on his back attempting to end his barbaric assault.
In a torrent of splashing gory blood Rafe is torn to shreds with the chainsaw.The movie then cuts to Margo making a phone call at a phone booth near the woods.
And if all this gets too confusing, Russ Meyer helpfully arranges for a one- woman nude Greek chorus (Kitten Natividad) to pop up at intervals to explain what's going on, even if she fails to entirely do so.
Its typical delightful Russ Meyers campy world of sex, violence, suspense and hot girls with ridiculously huge knockers.
This 1976 movie was co-written, produced, and directed by Russ Meyer.
The movie starts with Adolph Schwartz (Edward Schaaf), an old German guy who looks like Adolph Hitler, being killed, when a hungry piranha is dropped into his bathtub.
Later, the breathtakingly beautiful Margo Winchester (Raven De La Croix) hitch-hikes into town, gets a job at the local diner, and becomes romantically involved with the sheriff.
Near the end of the movie, Margo discovers who the murderer is. |
tt0250202 | All Over the Guy | All Over the Guy is about Eli (Dan Bucatinsky) and Tom (Richard Ruccolo). The film is told mostly in flashback, with Eli recounting his side to Esther (Doris Roberts), an HIV clinic worker as he waits for test results and Tom to a guy he meets at an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting. Tom is the son of emotionally distant alcoholic WASP parents who never quite accepted his sexual orientation and as a result is a heavy drinker himself and has a penchant for random hookups with different men. Eli's parents are both Jewish psychiatrists who raised him to be emotionally open but ended up making him neurotic.
Tom and Eli are set up on a blind date by their best friends, Jackie (Sasha Alexander) and Brett (Adam Goldberg), who think they would be a perfect match. They're both looking for 'The One', but don't recognize it when they find it. On the date, a boring evening is broken up only by an amusing diatribe by Tom against the movie In & Out. A few days later they run into each other at a flea market and hit it off, winding up back at Eli's place where Tom spends the night. The next morning Tom says that it was a mistake.
Jackie and Brett decide to try again to set them up, and the two men start to develop a relationship. Tom's fear of becoming emotionally close coupled with Eli's own insecurities makes it difficult for them to maintain, but Jackie and Brett get engaged which forces Tom and Eli together. They disguise their unease behind petty arguments over meaningless details of grammar and pronunciation but are finally able to push past the pettiness and make love. Eli tells Tom he loves him and Tom, terrified, lashes out at him the next day and drives him away.
The flashbacks end here on the day of Brett and Jackie's wedding. Esther tries to teach Eli to be more understanding of Tom's emotional needs. The AA member tries to sexually assault Tom, and when he tells Jackie she upbraids him for throwing Eli away for daring to fall for him. At the reception, Eli and Tom come to realize that they have to overcome their families' dysfunction and their own fears. | romantic, flashback | train | wikipedia | I find it difficult to watch films of actors I have worked with because it's hard to separate the character from the person I know.
Most of all, the characters of Brett and Jackie are very funny in a superb role reversal -- instead of the ubiquitous second-banana gay best friends, we have second-banana straight best friends.The only problem I have with the film is the same problem I have with straight versions of this kind of story.
This of course is because heterosexual males only feel safe if the gay men aren't portrayed as masculine (that's why so many of the straight guys are terrified of Cruising, seeking comfort in the delusions of The Man Show and Howard Stern).All Over The Guy is a film that breaks the barriers and focuses on issues of intimacy and finding ways to communicate -- and it's a big shame it didn't get the major distribution it deserves as it is right on the mark and so much more enjoyable than the endless line of circuit boy romances being released.
Dan Bucatinsky's character of Eli may be well groomed, but he isn't snapping his fingers and saying "girlfriend" ...these guys are just regular men, and it is comforting to know that someone out there knows the truth that many gay men are just as average as most people.
Joana Kerns was a nice surprise and as always, I WORSHIP the ground Andrea Martin walks on, she's one of the funniest women around.It's one of the only films I've seen that touches on issues that I've been trying to get so many people to understand: how so many assume gay men are only looking for quick sex and that when you get two guys together, it is assumed that one certain type of sexual act will occur.
Even the club-type "Future Love" tune during one scene was more akin to a B-52's song than the fluff that saturates Queer As Folk's soundtrack.It gives me great hope when I see a breakthrough film like All Over The Guy. It's for everyone, as this is not exclusively a "gay" film.
Well, with the likes of Andrea Martin, Lisa Kudrow, Christina Ricci and Doris Roberts in support, what do you think -- and how can you lose, especially since Dan Bucatinsky's script is so frequently sharp?Forget the nay-sayers and see this one.
And it has a script that is witty and sympathetic towards its characters, gay or straight, with some hilarious comedy from Eli's psychologist parents as portrayed by Martin and Abatemarco.
The movie constantly touches on an interesting issue or storyline, but chickens out before anything goes too far away from the mainstream (as in the story about Tom's parents and his sister, alcoholism).
It still is nice to see a movie with gay characters acting as normal people.
It is a complex and wonderful story of 4 friends, and it includes a seldom-seen-in-films friendship between a straight man and a gay man which was very real and very wonderful to see.The romance between the straight characters is less interesting than that of the two gay men, however, because the two gay men come from such different worlds: one is an alcoholic WASP with alcoholic parents and the other is the son of hyper-analytical Jewish psychiatrists.
The hetrosexual relationship is perfectly mirrored with their own gay one, the four leads are perfect and I loved Doris Roberts as the straight talking STD clinic worker.
It is a good addition to a growing genre of films, which deal with human issues about relationships in a gay/lesbian/bisexual context.
I think anyone who reads this comment can be guaranteed a good film and should go an see it to experience its warmth, humor and intelligence about people in love..
Eli (Dan Bucatinsky) and Tom (beautiful Richard Ruccolo) are both gay and attracted to each other but while Eli wants a firm commitment, Tom is afraid.
Like a lot of reviewers have said here, it's nice to see two gay men viewed in the true representation of their lives.
These two guys came together and brought so much garbage with them that they couldn't see each other and the love that they had for each other.I really don't have that much to say about this film, except that I truly enjoyed it and I would watch it again anytime.
The characters are so full of life that in the end of the movie we have that urge to know what happened in the day after.
Wonderful movie about normal people who, straight and gay, theirfriendships, relationships and their lives.
He adapted his play for the screen and got this film made with participation from some of the best comic actors (although Lisa Kudrow's scene is somewhat pointless).
Doris Roberts is wonderful, and gives a lot to the role of a character who's primary function is to sit and listen.Julie Davis's skilled direction sets the tone for this film, and she keeps things light mostly.
(According to IMDb user comments, she seems to have done much better directing this film than the ones she herself wrote.) For this film, that is fine, but the subject of alcoholism is not really dealt with in too much depth, and that character's parents are not given enough screen time to give real insight into their relationship with their kids (or lack thereof).
Best scene: Andrea Martin cursing out the television when a certain movie she has issues with comes on.You may or may not believe these two men will stay together, but the journey each one makes is worth coming along for the ride.P.S.
For all the references making fun of Eli's psycho-babbly touchy-feely embarassing parents, they seem to have raised a great brother and sister who support each other and get along well, so maybe this film is more of an endorsement of hippie parenting than Dan thinks!.
Wait till you get to the scene where the two boys (and that's what they seem like, boys, not men) argue over "Fuzzy Wuzzy was a bear." The "clever" dialogue makes you grind your teeth it's so numbling banal and self-congratulatory.The film also brings in a straight couple to try to balance things.
The whole thing plays out like a laughless gay sitcom pilot: boring people, limp dialogue and some embarassing "big" scenes at the end to try and whip up your interest.I was astonished that people like Don Roos and Doris Roberts were associated with this film that reeks of a vanity project.
One or both of the gay male leads was miscast; there was absolutely no chemistry between them and Richard Ruccolo looked like he'd rather be kissing a dog.
These reasons would make for some interesting characters, not the fight or the make-up scene in bed (lame even if you liked the movie).Andrea Martin and Adam Goldberg shine as their characters, but it doesn't make the film worth renting.
Dan Buchatinsky also wrote the film, and when one of his characters repeats a line that they never heard in the movie previously (because it was said to someone else, and this person wasn't there), it really sticks out.
The acting was excellent and i think Richard did a very good job so as all the other casts of the movie.
I can watch this movie over and over again and it leaves you with a warm feeling inside.Sadly I don't agree at all with movieman-151's description of the movie, but maybe that's because I'm not a gay man or a man at all, for that matter.I liked the fact that two people who at first don't seem to connect or mesh at all can find love - just like in the real world.
Movieman-151, it's people who don't believe that two people like Tom and Eli in this movie can get together are the kind of people that create these stereotypes and prevent non-clones from getting together.Eli was wonderfully witty and says all the things you wish you had come up with in retrospect.
The story would have been complete sap if it had been played the other way around as you suggested.I thought it wasn't a movie about gay politics, it was a movie about gay relationships without being sappy like The Sum of Us.
Good Job. It's like Eli says it in the movie: why do all gay-movies have to be about sex, not about love?
They fumble along with the help of their best friends Brett and Jackie.Dan Bucatinsky wrote and stars in the film as Eli, a slightly neurotic column writer.
Ruccolo plays Eli's love interest Tom woodenly and seems to be hung over the whole film.
This is more like a movie to watch right around the time you are thinking about taking a relationship to the next level....to allow you both to see acceptance, with flaws.
As a film festival programmer who's viewed more than 300 submitted movies in the past year, AOTG ranks up there with the best of them in the "gay comedy" genre, and which should appeal to the majority of "straight" movie-goers, too.
It's a "feel-good" date movie, well-directed and exceptionally well-acted (particularly Richard Rucollo, in a role that's a far departure from his former TWO GUYS AND A GIRL TV-Series persona), which deserves to become a break-out hit during its theatrical run.
Featuring guest cameos by Lisa Kudrow, Christina Ricci and Doris Roberts, AOTG is foremost a comedic love story between two twenty-something men in search of "the one." And more impressively, a film whose light tone, upbeat score and clever one-liners are a welcome departure from this year's crop of "brooding and complex gay issues" movies which are currently circulating the cineplexes and festivals.
I particularly applaud Ricci because it is not the first time she stars in a gay related film that I watched, the other being The Laramie Project.The plot itself is quite complex, with the main story with two small side plots about the two main characters telling their story to other people.
This is a story about Eli and Tom, who met, fell in love, discovered that they have issues with each other, thus setting up the standard will-they-or-won't-they-live-happily-ever-after romantic comedy scenario, except that in this case it is about two men.
There are many things to recommend this film, a good script, the reasonably good acting (for the most part, not sure about Dan Bucatinsky), characters that you might care about, the gentle comedy, but above all, a good heart.A number of things fail this movie however.
While it is obvious that for Eli it is love at first sight (or rather when he first looked into Tom's eyes), it's hard to tell what Tom sees in Eli. There is a good reason why the leads in romantic films are generally attractive people (and Richard Ruccolo is good looking), and it is to stop us asking this awkward question.
I start because I really like watching Ruccolo and then stay because the supporting cast is as good as you'll find in any major studio "romantic comedy" (including a hoot-out-loud cameo by Lisa Kudrow) and the script is much, much smarter than most.
It's refreshing a movie like that, because almost all the gay movies are or stereotyped or tragic.It's a funny comedy about two men quite so different sometimes, but with some nice connection that grows with time - in fact one is the opposite of the other but at the same time not just in this order -really nice actors, nice quotes, fun to watch, to cry.
I found the movie to be very believable and actually know people who could be these characters.
I think the real story of this movie is that none of us know what we're really looking for until we actually find it.
I just loved the way the characters Tom and Eli interacted together as well as the way their friends worked to set them up.
It was great seeing one of the characters who was having problems coming to terms with his own wish/need for lasting love grapple with his demons and finally allow himself to reach out and touch some real happiness.
We need more films like this to allow American society to better understand gay life.
I loved the screen play, though the acting of Tom (Richard Ruccolo) detracted (clearly a straight guy trying to act gay after seeing Russell Crowe in the Sum of Us one too many times; except that Russell Crowe has that special talent so difficult to duplicate).
The first date of Eli (Dan Bucatinsky) and Tom (Richard Ruccolo) goes down in flames, but on a second meeting something ignites.
Here's why:There aren't many films with opinions are widely and clearly polarized as those regarding `All Over the Guy.' That's a nice way of saying you either loved it or hated it.
Even when I'm there, I'm square, so where's the incentive?') Overall, I thought the dialogue was sharp, and the juxtaposition of a gay relationship against a straight one was handled nicely.I also really liked the acting in this film.
We're asked to believe that it's because he sees something greater in Tom, but by the final quarter of the film it looks more like Eli hasn't an ounce of self-respect.
The ending seems entirely forced; any two everyday gay men in Los Angeles would have called it quits long, long before these two.It's too bad, because there was so much in this movie that I really enjoyed.
Funny, poignant, and I thought a great film that just happens to have two gay characters.
It was great to see a movie with a gay plotline with good production values.
I've met several guys like Tom in real life, and many like Eli, so it makes a pleasant change to see some believable characters in a gay film instead of all pumped up muscle boys and prissy queens.
While most boy-meets-girl (or in this case boy-meets-boy) feature characters who wind up falling head over heels with each other and completing each other entirely, this film shows a relationship that evolves very much like one in the real world -- complete with mixed signals, missed opportunities and people struggling with various issues.
The two main actors are good, especially Richard Ruccolo from "Two Guys and a Girl", but the standout performance comes from Sasha Alexander as the "best friend".
The dialogue comes a little too fast at times...your laughing and Adam Goldberg's much too fast delivery covers much of the terrific script, but the movie is worth your ticket price for the large cameo performances by Lisa Kudrow and especially Doris Roberts as the STD clinic receptionist.
Although the film is nothing special in the totality of the movie world, it is somewhat special in using a gay theme for a more or less traditional romantic comedy.
The audience at the Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras film festival found this movie very funny.
I like movies with glib, funny dialogue, but this script is a far cry from "All About Eve." It's more like a sophisticated sitcom, with better jokes and a lot of curse words (although I don't know anyone in real life who uses "f**k" as much as these people did.) I was puzzled as to why the two gay male characters were attracted to each other in the first place and why they kept going back to each other.
It was the first time I watched an independent film which happened to be a romantic comedy, which happened to have two gay men as it's subjects, which happened to have all the humor, heart and Hollywood romance of a big-budget, studio romantic comedy...
I think this film will go down in history as being able to tell a story with gay characters and straight characters while bringing itself into the mainstream.
Anyways this movie is incredible and the BEST gay film i ever saw!
i highly recommend it!@ you will Cry, Laugh, all that good stuff...its on of those movies where you actually feel like the plot is real and you are hoping and wishing for the character..
One reviewer commented on the music saying it was refreshing not to hear Cher or music like "those mainstream gay movies".
This movie is okay - more good than bad - but it has a couple of huge flaws.First, the attraction between Eli (Dan Bucatinsky) and Tom (Richard Ruccolo) is completely unbelievable.
Since that relationship is the heart of the movie, its total lack of believable passion is a very serious flaw.Better casting of either (especially Tom) or both roles could have solved it.
And no one is mentioning how the "Brokeback" movie had the lead character murdered, just like gay films have been doing since the beginning.
A pure romantic comedy this is NOT.........perhaps, more correctly, it's a "dramedy." After all, how many mainstream gay movies have you seen in which a character utters such descriptively jarring words (see title of this comment, above) after a sexual act that's earlier taken place?
Generally, standard Hollywood films (like the mentioned In & Out, which is a great movie don't get me wrong) about gay couples are very cliché.
And what a way to think, that maybe we can be happy if we're not married to our dream man/woman, in the house with the white picket fence, but perfectly happy with friends, family, and the things in life that can be just as important as love.More importantly, I found that this movie was really realistic in portraying gay men.
What I mean by that is here is a movie about gay men that contains people I want to meet, that I would want to be friends with.
Eli and Tom are two men that are thrown together due to the fact that their respective (straight) best friends would like to build on their "meet cute".
I believe I dated Tom (the character in the movie) for about three weeks in 1990. |
tt0057925 | The Cat Above and the Mouse Below | In a concert entitled "Signor Thomasino Catti-Cazzaza Baritone", Tom is a famous legendary baritone singer who will perform at a concert to sing Largo al factotum from The Barber of Seville. Tom arrives in a very long limousine, and emerges, tossing a rose into the crowd. He walks on stage to applause and begins to sing for the audience watching. While all this is taking place, down below the stage, Jerry is trying to sleep, but is awakened by Tom's operatic tones.
Jerry tries to gesture for Tom to stop, by banging on the stage with a toothbrush but in return Tom, while singing, stomps on the floor enough to get Jerry to shake and bounce around his "room". Enraged, Jerry uses a hammer to pound a floorboard, shooting Tom out of his tuxedo into the air, from where he falls back into it, but upside down, and legs through sleeves. Tom tiptoes offstage to change back to normal.
Next, Tom sings again, this time, stomping the floor while performing, much harder than before, creating a huge rumble in Jerry's house, eventually causing Jerry's bed to collapse on top of him. Jerry thinks it's war and decides to get revenge. Tom continues the performance and Jerry holds up a sign through the vent onstage that has "PSST" written on it. Tom continues singing as he pokes his head in, and Jerry snaps his lips closed in a pucker with a doubled rubber band. In retaliation, Tom uses the rubber band to shoot a long staple into the vent, which shoots down, ricochets several times, and then whisks Jerry right out of his nightshirt, and pins him up on the wall by his neck. Jerry crosses his arms, one leg over the other, and then "taps" his foot midair, looks exceedingly annoyed.
As Tom sings in the middle of his performance, Jerry manages to get free from the staple and at the side of the stage licks a lemon so Tom gets sour by the thought of the scene, and sweating, his lips pucker and shrink. Frustrated, he goes to Jerry and while continuing to sing, juices the lemon on Jerry's head. Tom returns to the spotlight. Jerry then drills a hole in the floor and uses a hooked wire to pull the bottom of Tom's vest apart causing the chest portion to spring up and whap him in the face. Tom grabs the wire and yanks it up and down banging Jerry's head on the board until Jerry thinks to let it go. While Tom is singing the "Figaro!" part, Jerry aims a plunger at Tom's mouth and scores a direct hit. Jerry imitates Tom mockingly; but then Tom sticks him to the floor with the plunger. Using Jerry's bow, he shoots Jerry in the plunger onto a wall offstage.
Jerry frees himself and unintentionally drops a huge sandbag on Tom as he is reaching the climax, sending him crashing through the floor. Everything is silent until Jerry walks out in a tuxedo. Now the mouse is above, and the cat stuck below, and Jerry sings the last section of the performance himself (albeit sped up). An infuriated Tom raps on the floor with a broom and sends Jerry flying, but this just adds to Jerry's drama singing the final few notes as he makes a graceful balletic landing before gets a loud applause and the words "The End" appears on the close curtains as a cartoon closes. | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | Tom is clearly a cat of parts!. As is clear to those who follow the exploits of Tom and Jerry, they are both quite artistically gifted. Tom himself has played piano and bass and here sings opera. While I personally prefer his rendition of "Is You Is, Or Is You Ain't, My Baby?" (in Solid Serenade whilst playing the afore-mentioned bass), I freely admit that Tom is in fine voice here (that of Terrance Monck, to be precise) but Jerry still steals the cartoon. There is a sequence featuring a lemon in two sight gags that is absolutely priceless! Even those who aren't especially fond of opera will enjoy this take on the artform. Not "What's Opera, Doc?", but good enough in its own right. Well worth watching. Recommended.. Along With "The Cat Concerto",The Greatest Catoon Ever". I'm twenty years old ,and I'm still crazy about cartoons,and the"Tom And Jerry" cartoons are the best ever made.But if I had to decide what is the best cartoon ever made,I would be in deep trouble,because like "The Cat Concerto",this "The Cat Above And The Mouse Below",is a unique Masterpiece.It all start with Tom,in a very fancy suit(Looking just like Fred Astaire)trying to do his job and sing the barber song from "The Barber Of Sevilha". Guess who decided to take a nap,under the theater floor.The whole film is a delicious sucession of jokes and like always there is Tom.I've said once,and I would say again:Tom is the greatest cartoon character,and "The Cat Above And The Mouse Below" is the second greatest cartoon masterpiece,losing only for "The Cat Concerto" of,course. One of the better Chuck Jones directed Tom and Jerry cartoons, and possibly the funniest. I love Tom and Jerry, and while The Cat Above and the Mouse Below is not one of their best, it is one of the better Chuck Jones-directed Tom and Jerry cartoons and much better than any of Gene Dietch's efforts, most of which in my opinion were abominations.While too short and rushed in places, The Cat Above and the Mouse Below I feel has a quite neat set-up. I loved the cartoon's idea and I thought it was executed more than satisfactorily. Granted, it is not the most original concept in the world for a cartoon, but that didn't stop from being entertained. The animation is not bad either, it is not the best looking of the Tom and Jerry cartoons and lacks the "classical" feel of the T&J cartoons of the 50s and 60s but the backgrounds are much less static, the characters are better drawn and the colours are more vibrant.The music is a complete delight. I am a big classical music/opera enthusiast, so hearing Tom singing Figaro was refreshing and very fun to watch. The cartoon is also very funny, to be honest I find the Chuck Jones T&J cartoons rather hit and miss, some are funny, some are borderline, some are lacklustre. When it comes to the humour, some of it is actually hilarious. Especially the gag(s) with the lemon, that is priceless and one of the funnier sight gags in any of the 60s Tom and Jerry cartoons.All in all, not the best, but very entertaining and one of Chuck Jones' better T&J efforts. 8/10 Bethany Cox |
tt0142775 | Presumed Guilty | Two lawyers struggle to free a man, Antonio Zúñiga, who has been wrongly convicted by the Mexican judicial system. Zúñiga was arrested on charges of murder and convicted largely on the testimony of one man. Zúñiga was told by authorities “You did it and that’s it”. Zúñiga was given the sentence of 20 years in prison for a crime that was impossible for him to have committed. Three witnesses explained that he was at his place of work during the time of which he was accused of murder. However, the man was a close relative of the victim who had no firm evidence against Zúñiga, while the accused produced several witnesses able to place him far from the scene of the crime at the time of the murder. Despite this, Zúñiga was found guilty, and when lawyers Roberto Hernández and Layda Negrete learned about his case, they agreed to help him. Hernández and Negrete cautiously advised Zúñiga, knowing that many case like his had failed before him and they were fearful of providing Zúñiga and his family with too much hope. Before leaving for graduate school in Berkeley, CA, Hernández and Negrete advised the family to go public with this case- they felt it was their best shot at pressuring the Mexican judicial system to admit their error and free Zúñiga. After it was revealed that the lawyer appointed to represent Zúñiga did not have a valid license to practice law, authorities grudgingly agreed to a new trial, but with the same judge, Héctor Palomares Medina, presiding. This judge showed little interest in evidence that Zúñiga was falsely convicted. Battling an arrogant judge, uncooperative witnesses and a legal system riddled with corruption, Hernández and Negrete found that it was easy to prove Zúñiga's innocence, but hard to get the authorities to acknowledge this fact. “The conviction was eventually overturned in 2008 after the filmmakers persuaded the judges hearing the appeal to watch the videos. Zúñiga was immediately released" Presumed Guilty was a selection at the 2009 Toronto International Film Festival.
Unfortunately, situations like these are more common than one would hope after viewing “Presumed Guilty.” One woman, Rosa Juilia Leyva Martinez, told the Washington Office on Latin America that she was traveling within Mexico to buy seeds with some people in her town. Unbeknownst to her, she carried one of their bags through the airport that contained heroin. Once arrested, she reported that she was tortured, raped, and forced to sign a confession which sentences her to 22 years in prison. She was released after 11 years. “According to the Mexican Ministry of the Interior's 2012 National Survey of the Criminal Justice System, only 6% of the Mexicans surveyed had confidence in the justice system. Responders said the main problems were that criminals are not held accountable, the system is corrupt, the judicial process slow, and the service from public servants is poor.” Some other startling facts that the documentary display for the viewers are the following: • 95% of verdicts are convictions • 92% of those convictions are not based on physical evidence • 78% of inmates are fed by their own families • 93% of inmates are never shown arrest warrants • 93% of defendants never see a judge
The story of Presumed Guilty was made into an episode of the TV series "P.O.V." that aired on 27 July 2010. It subsequently was nominated to three Emmy awards for "Best Research" "Best Documentary" and "Outstanding Investigative Journalism." | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0247097 | The Fugitive | Dr. Richard Kimble, a prominent Chicago vascular surgeon, arrives home to find his wife Helen fatally wounded by a one-armed man. Kimble struggles with the killer but he escapes. The lack of evidence of a break-in, Helen's lucrative life insurance policy, and a misunderstood 9-1-1 call result in Kimble's conviction of first-degree murder. Being transported to death row by bus, his fellow prisoners attempt an escape. The pandemonium sends the bus down a ravine and into the path of an oncoming train. Kimble escapes the collision and flees. Deputy U.S. Marshal Samuel Gerard and his colleagues Renfro, Biggs, Newman and Poole arrive at the crash site and begin the search for Kimble. Kimble sneaks into a hospital to treat his wounds and alter his appearance. He eludes the authorities, but Gerard corners him at the edge of a storm drain over a dam. Kimble leaps into the raging water and escapes.
Kimble returns to Chicago to hunt for the murderer and acquires money from his friend and colleague Dr. Charles Nichols. Posing as a janitor, Kimble enters the local county hospital's prosthetic department to obtain a list of people who had their prosthetic arm repaired shortly after his wife's murder. Following a police lead confirming Kimble's recent whereabouts, Gerard speculates that Kimble is searching for the one-armed man. Kimble breaks into the residence of one of the people on the list, a former police officer named Fredrick Sykes. Kimble discovers that Sykes is the murderer and is employed by a pharmaceutical company, Devlin MacGregor, which is scheduled to release a new drug called Provasic. Kimble investigated the drug in the past and revealed that it caused liver damage, which would have prevented it from being approved by the FDA. He also deduces that Nichols, who is leading the drug's development, arranged a cover-up and ordered Sykes to kill him – his wife's death was incidental. Gerard follows Kimble's lead to Sykes' home and draws the same conclusion.
As Kimble takes an elevated train to confront Nichols at the drug's presentation in a hotel, Sykes appears and attacks him. In the struggle, Sykes shoots a transit cop before being subdued and handcuffed to a pole by Kimble. Kimble arrives at the pharmacon conference and interrupts Nichols's speech, accusing him of falsifying his medical research and orchestrating his wife's murder. They fight while being chased through the hotel by the marshals and police. Gerard calls out to Kimble that he knows about Nichols' conspiracy. Nichols knocks out Renfro and takes his gun and attempts to shoot Gerard, but Kimble attacks him from behind, knocking him unconscious. Kimble surrenders to Gerard, who escorts him out of the hotel. Nichols and Sykes are arrested. Kimble is exonerated and driven from the crime scene by Gerard. | murder | train | wikipedia | This is my first 'Fugitive' film/movie/series I have seen, and it's so suspenseful.
Tim Daly does a great job with playing Dr. Richard Kimble...
It's great, and worth a watch!
The whole thing is well done and the acting is great, and these are the reasons I saw it from the first episode to the last.
I mean, all of us are in the mist and have exactly no idea what has happened to Kimble and that one-armed man!?.
The 2000 version of the '60s Fugitive TV series was one of the very few remakes that was actually good and refreshing.
Tim Daly was a fine Dr. Richard Kimble (the man wrongfully accused of murdering his wife), but no one could ever hold a candle to David Janssen's portrayal of the doctor on the run.
(Ironically, when this remake debuted in 2000, it had been a full 20 years since Janssen's untimely death.)But believe it or not, when I first heard about plans to remake the old Fugitive, I was convinced that it wouldn't last.
You know the old saying: "Been there, done that!" And I think that apathetic response played a role in the new Fugitive's premature cancellation.
In addition, the series aired on Fridays (one of the least watched TV nights).
Therefore, the show was axed after only one season.Worst of all, the last episode ended with a cliffhanger!
(WARNING: Stop reading here unless you want it given away!) An FBI man, supposedly tracking the one-armed man, shoots Lt. Gerard, and then corners Richard Kimble and the one-armed man.
No one really knows for sure if Kimble and/or the one-armed man were actually shot and killed.
Nor do we know for sure whether Gerard lived or died.It's a real shame that the cancellation of the new Fugitive wasn't confirmed until after production had officially wrapped for summer hiatus.
And unless the series is miraculously brought back or followed by a post-series TV-movie, we may never know what actually happened to the unfortunate doctor..
Bad news for fans of "The Fugitive".
As a child (although in many ways I'm STILL a child *L*), unlike my contemporaries, I grew up watching reruns of shows like "Batman," "I Dream Of Jeannie," "The Love Boat," "Star Trek" (original series), and, of course, "The Fugitive."When I first heard of a theatrical version starring Harrison Ford (who played Han Solo, the only character at the time that I liked from "Star Wars"), I jumped to see Dr. Kimble and the One-Armed Man make the leap to the big screen.
As if my excitement and expectation level wasn't high enough, I did cartwheels in my living room when I found out that the gorgeous Sela Ward was to play Helen Kimble and the great Tommy Lee Jones was to play the great U.S. Marshal Samuel Gerard.
When I finally went to theatres to see the movie, was I disappointed?
Sure the film had the added bonuses of Joe Pantoliano, Andreas Katsulas (playing the bushy haired One-Armed Man, no less -- if you're a true fan of the original series you'll know why I mention the hair), and a cast of entertaining supporting characters.
Add to all that a series of great action sequences and you've got a great movie.
That something was all the subplots that appeared in every episode of the series (with the exception of the two-part series finale).
I did understand, though, that this was due to the fact that all the subplots would have taken away from the movie by not focusing enough on the main plot (the search for the One-Armed Man).
Definitely something that would make mainstream audience members looking for some entertainment look at their watches hoping it would end or simply doze off hoping someone would wake them once the end credits began to role.That was 1992.Flash forward to the year 2000 and Dr. Richard Kimble is back on the run.
This time the chase for the good doctor in search of his wife's one armed murderer is back on the small screen.
This time Dr. Kimble is portrayed by Tim Daly (of the series "Wings" and the voice of the Man of Steel in "Superman: The Animated Series"), Helen Kimble by Kelly Rutherford (best known as Megan Lewis Mancini McBride in "Melrose Place") and Lt. Philip Gerard (nice touch by whoever chose to return the original name) is portrayed by Mykelti Williamson (sorry, I never heard of him before).
This series chooses to take its basis from the movie rather than the original series.
This is not surprising since most TV viewers these days are surprised to hear that there was actually a series before the movie.
Not really since the movie added it's own twists and turns to the tale of Dr. Richard Kimble's search for his wife's killer.
Also, it had the potential to merge the movie's approach with that of the original series.
This series tends to focus on over-the-top action sequences (an obvious attempt to attract those only watched the movie the bus/train wreck featured prominently in the film's trailer) and only marginally focusing on Kimble's interaction with the different people he meets (and often helps) along his way towards the One-Armed Man and as he hides from Gerard's pursuit.
Sadder still is that all the character's are one-dimensional and end up being mere caricatures rather than the real people they were meant to be.
True he's Kimble's pursuer but he was simply a man who took his job seriously, not some super prick that has a vendetta against Kimble for reason's that are too ridiculous to believe (yes, many cops can be driven by ego but there's always a motive for that ego -- that's not present here).
Worse still, this only the first episode of the series and Kimble will already square off against the One-Armed Man in the next.But there are other reasons to dislike this new rendition of such a classic series.
I wouldn't be surprised if Povasic (or something similar) makes an appearance as a random plot point later in the series.In short, this is very bad news for old school "Fugitive" fans.
But what can you expect from a television season that has premiered crap like "Dark Angel" (I didn't need to watch that one to know how idiotic it'd be)?.
Along with C.S.I., this is the best new show of the season and the only one worthy of an audience.
Daly is great, and while I'm not wild about the casting of Gerard, I'll give it time.
Although I was slightly disappointed that the series is more an adaptation of the original and not the film (contrary to "other" reviews), it looks like it'll still work.
The dialogue between the two leads was great, and the opening sequence with flashbacks intercutting with Kimble's escape is the best sequence of a television series I have ever seen (and I've seen a lot).Great acting, great writing, great action and suspense, and great music all ad up for a great series that is the best of the new shows this Fall.
I too was very skeptical when a series that had an ending was brought back.
It seemed unwise at the time, but good acting and interesting new twists on an old theme made it work.
We reviewed all of the original stories from the first series and would be interested in having people review the 2000 version.
We also have two members who extended the series by writing fan fiction...and extending the story.Check out...http://TV.groups.yahoo.com/group/THE-FUGITIVE-VIEWS-AND-REVIEWS/ and feel free to join and be part of the discussion.bobbynear owner/moderator.
It's not too late for a follow-up movie (one with a decent ending).
I'm writing this on behalf of all the "Fugitive" TV show fans who were as disappointed as I was at the abrupt ending to the 2000/2001 show.
It's not too late to continue the saga even if it just means a single episode or TV movie.
Like so many others I am completely baffled at the media's obsession with ridiculous reality shows, while intelligent programs just keep getting pulled off the air.
"The Fugitive" was a well-acted, action-packed, FUN show that had a larger audience than the network seems to recognize.
Even Gilligan's Island had 3 made for TV movies long after the show ended.
Daly excellent, great series.
Anyway when you start with a great story remakes can be quite good.
But Daly is marvelous playing Kimble with Pathos.
I heard it was getting the axe, I at least hope they do get to finish the season with a series finale and not leave it without a conclusion.
This update of the Fugitive is by far the best new show of the 2000-2001 TV season and will hopefully be around for several more years to come.
It has everything you could ask for in an action series.I have never seen the old TV series so I can't compare to that, but I like this version with Tim Daly and Mykelti Williamson much better than the 1993 movie.
The Fugitive works a lot better as a TV series because everything can be extended rather than being crammed into a two-hour time period.
My entire family watches this show every week and it is one of the few times we all come together to watch the same show.If you only have one hour to dedicate to television each week this is the show you should be watching!.
I just wanted to say that this is the best show I have seen in a long, long time!
It is full of action, suspense, humanity, laughter(at times), and lots of good-looking people.
Especially the main character, Tim Daly, is the main reason that I watch the show.
The men out there would also like this show, especially if you are into a good and well thought out show.
I was hooked about five minutes into the first episode,(when he jumped off of the semi), that was the best!
This is the best version of the fugitive I have seen and I just wanted to say to the cast, production team, director, etc.
The best new series on television!.
Tim Daly does a great job and is very compelling.
I am a fan of the David Jansen Fugitive and I don't like remakes.
This series is so good with the great acting by the 2 stars and the location filming like the old Rt#66 show that I really enjoyed it.
I think that someone like that, with a rich voice, would help the end of each show.
I don't know a lot about the original series, being only 21 years old, but I saw the film version, and I love it.
This series is, in my opinion, even better than the movie!
Tim Daly is awesome as Dr. Kimble, and Mykelti Williamson from Forrest Gump, whose last series was Showtime's The Hoop Life, is just as good as the detective who will never end his pursuit of the wanted man.
Kimble, in the pilot befriends a building inspector, as he finds himself in Miami looking for the one armed one truly responsible for his wife's death.
You find yourself rooting for the good guy the entire time, Kimble.
It's a great show, and I think it will be around for some time.
I was never much of a fan of the original 1960s series, yet I was very skeptical about this new version since I couldn't see the point in topping or trying to top the original.
But, I gave it a try and after four episodes or so, I am hooked; I now look forward to Friday nights for the best hour on television in years.
Even though my generation knows the outcome of Dr. Kimble, the writing is so good that I find myself totally involved.
I also like Tim Daly's depths of emotion over David Janssen's stone faced expressions.
I think Daly is another reason that gives the show it's appeal.
The new "Fugitive" also makes CBS' previous action adventure "Early Edition" look thoroughly pathetic.
I'll keep watching the new "Fugitive" until it bores me, which I don't think is possible..
I have to warn you if you are a "common" TV watcher who don't like "strange" finals.
I just finished to see this series here in Italy.
The last episode of the series is a cliffhanger, because CBS cancelled the show before the end.
So, enjoy it because the series is VERY good, with good actors and plots, but forget to see how it will finish!
The last episodes gone to black screen leaving you with a lot of question to what happens.
I am really disappointed to this, but however the series was enjoying and after a couple of minutes you start to laugh about this...
well, this is the first series I see that finish this way!
even thou this excellent and thrilling show lasted only one season (each episode cost an average of $2 million to make) it proves that remakes can prove better than the originals.Tim Daly and the suspenseful storylines make this one of the best shows around.
Most people would recognize him as the best and only good voice of Superman in the WB cartoons.
Gerard is great too as well as the one armed man and the rest of the cast.Pity that the finale doesnt give us the final answer.
As it is one of the best finales you will ever see!
Good luck for everything else you do in the future Tim Daly..
Maybe it was the over hype, maybe it was that Tim Daly ("Wings") had to follow both David ("O") Jansen and Harrison ("Indy") Ford (Daly does a great job by the way, he's the best thing about the show, but he's no "O" or "Indy"), maybe it was because the "most expense hour in television" looked like an average episode of "NYPD Blue." Hey...wasn't "Born Free...the series" the most expensive?
Tim and Melissa you should leave TV for good and do film only (and maybe Tim CAN be the next Ford).
I have not seen that new show with "Coach" playing a "D.A." so maybe that's cool, but otherwise, very chilly man, very chilly.
Better than the original TV series and the movie..
I do remember the original Fugitive TV series from the 1960's (and I've seen them recently on re-runs) and of course the Harrison Ford movie version which had a large special effects budget, but neither one drew me in like the new TV series.
It is very engaging and well done, much more so than the original TV series and the movie (special effects notwithstanding).
I had watched the first episode expecting it to be another loser like 95% of the shows on television (I only watch 3 other TV shows per week).
I give most shows 'one watch' and that's it, but this one really surprised me, I was hooked and have watched every episode without fail.
It seems to have much more of an air of humanity about it than the movie and not as morose as the TV series from the 60's.
Although I want Kimble to be found innocent I want the series to go on for a long time, something the movie could never do (two hours and it's over).
This story lends itself to being a series not a movie.
Best new series of 2000-01 Season, followed by CSI as #2 new series..
Okay, the original FUGITIVE television series with David Janssen was probably the greatest series ever put on television.
The movie with Harrison Ford was also a great movie.
Especially since the series finale to this one sucked the big green weenie.
And it seems like Kimble's motives for killing his wife (which he didn't) just keep getting weaker every time they recycle this series.
There were some good things in this series.
Tim Daly did an admirable job of playing the good doctor.
I like that they made Gerard a driven character, obsessed with his work because he couldn't save his wife from an automobile accident.
And the actor who played the one-armed man in this version bore an eerie resemblance to Bill Raisch.Unfortunately, the bad ruined the show completely.
First of all, Kimble is totally out of character in that episode.
He injects the one-armed man with some time activated poison or something and says it will kill him in a matter of hours and tries to drag him to Gerard to make a confession.
Kimble or the one-armed man?
I have commented before on television's tendency to amuse itself by giving us cheap shot endings to series finales, so I won't reheat that hash here.
All I will say is this is why I don't watch television often and instead watch videos and DVDs. I have quite a sizable collection now of great movies and a few shows from television's glory years.
And this series, or this version of a great series will most assuredly not be among my collection.
"The Fugitive" is no classic, but it was a good series nonetheless.
The individual episodes were great, it's just that they were so similar to each other!
Ever seen the same movie more than three or four times and just got sick of it?
That's what happened with this series...However, it was still entertaining, with a good score, tight direction and strong performances by the two leads.
However, due to mediocre ratings and a high cost ($2 million average per episode, making it the most expensive series on TV), CBS axed it after just one season.
And yes, there was a series finale rather than just finishing it without a conclusion, but it probably would've been better without the finale...
(possible spoiler), as Dr. Richard Kimble, played by Tim Daly, was just shot in an alleyway, clearly a last minute add on after the series was killed. |
tt0116118 | Doctor Who | Following the Master's trial and execution at the hands of the Daleks, the Doctor, currently in his seventh incarnation, is transporting the Master's remains to Gallifrey via his TARDIS. En route, the box with the remains breaks open and an ooze leaks out, infecting the TARDIS. The Doctor is forced to make an emergency materialisation in San Francisco's Chinatown on 30 December 1999.
As he exits and locks the TARDIS, the Doctor is shot by a gang chasing down Chang Lee, a young Chinese-American man. Lee calls for an ambulance and escorts the unconscious Doctor to a hospital, unaware the ooze from the TARDIS has gotten aboard. At the hospital, cardiologist Dr Grace Holloway attempts surgery to remove the bullet but is confused by his strange double-heart anatomy, and accidentally lodges a cardiac probe in the Doctor's body, apparently killing him. The Doctor's body is taken to the morgue, while Lee is given the Doctor's possessions including the TARDIS key. Meanwhile, the ooze takes over the body of the ambulance driver, Bruce, transforming him into a new body for the Master.
Later, the Doctor's body regenerates, and the new Doctor, suffering amnesia, gathers clothes from remnants of a recent party. He recognises Holloway, who has resigned from the hospital after the failed operation, and follows her to her car, proving to her he is the same man by pulling out the cardiac probe. Holloway takes him home to recover. Lee returns to the TARDIS where the Master arrives and puts him under his mind control by claiming the Doctor had stolen his body. The Master convinces Lee to open the TARDIS and then to open the Eye of Harmony within it, which requires a human retinal scan. When the Eye opens, the Doctor is flooded with memories and realises the Master is searching for him, and tries to block the scan. He warns Holloway that while the Eye is opened, the fabric of reality will weaken, and potentially destroy the Earth by midnight on New Year's Eve if they cannot close it. However, he needs an atomic clock to do so, and Holloway finds one on display at the San Francisco Institute of Technological Advancement and Research.
Outside, they find the ambulance with the Master and Lee waiting for them, offering them a ride. The Doctor does not immediately recognise the Master, but discovers his true identity en route, and he and Holloway escape, but not before the Master can spit an ooze-like substance on Holloway's wrist. The two continue to the Institute and obtain the clock, returning to the TARDIS. The Doctor installs the clock and successfully closes the Eye, but finds the damage to reality too great and that he must revert time before the Eye was opened to prevent the destruction of Earth. As he connects the proper TARDIS circuits to do this, the Master remotely takes control of Holloway's body, causing her eyes to become inhuman, and she strikes the Doctor unconscious.
The Doctor wakes to find himself chained above the Eye, the Master poised to take his remaining regenerations while Lee and Holloway watch. The Doctor is able to break the Master's control on Lee, and Lee refuses to open the Eye for the Master. The Master kills him, and then releases his control on Holloway to return her eyes to normal. He forces her to open the Eye and then begins drawing the Doctor's lifeforce. Holloway, under her own control, is able to complete the final circuits to put the TARDIS into a time-holding pattern, preventing Earth's destruction, and then goes to free the Doctor. The Master kills her, but this has given enough time for the Doctor to free himself and attack the Master. The Doctor gains the upper hand and pushes the Master into the Eye. The Eye closes and time reverts a few minutes, undoing Lee and Holloway's deaths.
With no further risk to Earth, the Doctor prepares to leave. Lee returns his possessions, and the Doctor warns him not to be in San Francisco on the next New Year's Eve. The Doctor offers Holloway the opportunity to travel with him, but she politely refuses, and instead kisses him goodbye. The Doctor departs alone in his TARDIS.
=== Continuity ===
==== The Doctor ====
Until 2013's "The Night of the Doctor", the television movie was Paul McGann's sole televised story as the Doctor. It has inspired an ongoing Doctor Who novel line, comic strip, and audio series that featured the Eighth Doctor for years, beyond the TV series' return in 2005. The Eighth Doctor was also featured in a series of BBC7 audio plays since 2007.
The Seventh Doctor is seen wearing a different costume from the one he wore during his 1987–1989 tenure: gone are the question mark pullover and umbrella. The costume does include the original hat, which is actually owned by Sylvester McCoy.
When reluctantly filling out an emergency medical treatment form, Chang Lee (who had only met the semi-conscious Seventh Doctor minutes earlier and did not know his identity) gives the Doctor's name as "John Smith", a recurring alias originally given to the Second Doctor by companion Jamie McCrimmon in The Wheel in Space.
Much of the movie's plot rests on a revelation that the Doctor is half-human, "on [his] mother's side". Following the movie, several Eighth Doctor Adventures novels seek either to explain or elaborate on this premise, often with conflicting results. Alien Bodies suggests that only the Eighth Doctor is half-human, and that his interest in Earth people is "something to do with his retroactive ancestry". Unnatural History and The Gallifrey Chronicles suggest that the Doctor is the child of a Victorian lady called Penelope Gate and a Time Lord named Ulysses. The Taking of Planet 5 takes a different approach, suggesting that the Doctor slowly became half-human through repeated regeneration in close proximity to humans, causing the Doctor to absorb aspects of their DNA. Although the issue has yet to be explicitly revisited on-screen, in "Journey's End" a second version of the Doctor is created through a combination of the Doctor's and his human companion's physiologies; unimpressed with his half-human body, this new Doctor wonders how humans can manage with only one heart. In the 2008 Doctor Who comic book The Forgotten the Doctor states that, upon finding out that the Master had escaped from the box, he used the Chameleon Arch to deceive the Master with the fiction of being half-human.
The Seventh Doctor's two hearts on the radiograph are seen but dismissed as a double-exposure. His newly regenerated third incarnation suffered the mistake in Spearhead From Space.
The Eighth Doctor steals his first wardrobe from a hospital staff locker room, as had the Third Doctor and, later, the Eleventh Doctor.
The Eighth Doctor examines a mask of Richard Nixon. The Third Doctor crossed paths with a Nixon waxwork figure in Spearhead From Space, and Nixon would be a significant supporting character in the Eleventh Doctor stories, "The Impossible Astronaut" & "Day of the Moon".
==== Daleks and the Master ====
Although the Doctor's most famous alien adversaries, the Daleks, are not seen in the film, they are heard condemning the Master to death during the film's opening sequence (sporting their trademark war cry of "EXTERMINATE!").
The Master tried to use the Eye of Harmony to obtain a new set of regenerations before, in The Deadly Assassin. He was also offered a new set of regenerations by the Time Lords in The Five Doctors, but his continued quest for regenerations in later stories like Planet of Fire implies that he never received them. Later, however, he would be granted a new cycle, as confirmed in the 2007 episode "The Sound of Drums".
==== The TARDIS ====
Although the TARDIS interior changed several times throughout the original series, the movie's set was the most dramatic change yet, replacing the sterile white corridors and "roundel"-based design. Several subsequent tie-in novels attempted to explain the change.
This film introduces the idea of including Earth-centric elements on the TARDIS control console, such as an early 20th-Century automobile handbrake, apparently used for a similar purpose. This was used again in the 2005 and 2010 designs of the console.
The Deadly Assassin (1976) established that the Eye of Harmony is held on Gallifrey; its inclusion on the TARDIS in the film conflicts with this.
The film further states that the "Eye" can only be opened with the scan of a human retina, a fact apparently tied to the Doctor's own partially human retinal pattern.
==== References to other stories ====
The book that the Doctor sits down to read at the beginning and the end of the movie is The Time Machine by H. G. Wells. The Doctor shared an adventure with Wells in the Sixth Doctor serial Timelash and would meet him again in the Tenth Doctor comic "The Time Machination". In 1973's Frontier in Space, the Master is seen reading Wells' The War of the Worlds. In the untelevised story Shada, Professor Chronotis can be seen with a copy of The Time Machine, which is later visible throughout the episode.
This is one of six Doctor Who adventures to be set on New Year's Eve 1999 and New Year's Day 2000. The comic strip Plastic Millennium, published in the Doctor Who Magazine Winter 1994 Special; Craig Hinton's Virgin Missing Adventures novel Millennial Rites (October 1995); Justin Richards's Past Doctor Adventures novel Millennium Shock (May 1999), the Short Trips: Seven Deadly Sins story "Suitors, Inc." (2005) and the Fourth Doctor's segment from the comic The Forgotten (2008) all take place on those dates, as do elements of the Torchwood episode "Fragments".
The "time tunnel" effect of the 2005 Doctor Who series onwards is reminiscent of the vortex that the TARDIS travels through in the opening credits and climax of the television movie which in itself is reminiscent of the vortex in the opening and closing sequences of 1974-1980.
=== Cast notes ===
Yee Jee Tso would later return in 2002 to play Major Jal Brant in the Seventh Doctor audio drama Excelis Decays and Doctor Reece Goddard in the Sixth Doctor webcast Real Time.
Daphne Ashbrook would later return in 2004 alongside Paul McGann's Eighth Doctor as Perfection in the audio drama The Next Life.
Tso and Ashbrook returned to Big Finish together playing Captain Ruth Matheson and Warrant Officer Charlie Sato of UNIT in the audio dramas Tales From The Vault and Mastermind, both part of the Companions Chronicles series, in 2011 and 2013. | cult | train | wikipedia | Whoever you are reading this review never EVER give up on your hopes and dreams because for DOCTOR WHO fans in the early 1990s not one of us ever believed we`d be seeing our favourite show return , never mind seeing a big budget American production or that this version was gong to have BAFTA award winning actor Paul McGann in the title role .
I`d read every article I could find about the production in telefantasy magaziness , Paul McGann`s Doctor had appeared on the front cover of every British TV guide and the trailers led me to believe the Daleks were going to be heavily featured alongside the Master .
My own memories of Roger Delgado`s original Master soon faded as Roberts bad-ass TERMINATOR inspired American arch enemy of the Doctor stole the entire show .But unfortunately much of the bad outweighed the good and most of this was entirely down to Matthew Jacobs script which involved far too much continuity and extremely bad continiuty at that which not only displeases diehard fans but will alienate casual viewers at the same time .
Paul McGann, however, makes an original Doctor and it's a shame a potentially interesting incarnation of the great Time Lord wasn't allowed to develop.
Can't people accept somebody who is an alien?This film certainly has its moments and shows great potential for a new series, but it's just a shame Fox couldn't get their act together and make that series instead of allowing it to fall back into the clutches of the money-minded BBC where it'll probably never be seen again.Not an example of Dr Who at its best by any means, but if you're a fan of the program like me then it's worth watching just to see the Doctor back in action, if only for one adventure..
In 1996, seven years after the original Doctor Who series was canceled, the American network Fox thought a USA reboot of the show might be a good way to bring everybody's favorite Time Lord back to the small screen.
Nevertheless, as messy as it is, this 1996 version of Doctor Who (which is part of the official mythology) has a few valid selling points that make it worth tracking down on a boring Saturday afternoon.The original show ended with the Doctor being played by Sylvester McCoy, the seventh incarnation of the character, and it is still McCoy, albeit credited as a guest star, who controls the TARDIS at the beginning of the story.
As for the Doctor, once he's regenerated into a half-human eighth embodiment (Paul McGann), he has to stop his nemesis once and for all.The plot is a classic good vs.
What I do dislike is the fast-paced, action-oriented nature of the story, which prevents character development (Chang Lee is the chief offender here) and doesn't allow any room for the Doctor to act like a detective (which is his usual schtick).Still, good effects, a rockin' music score and some nice arty camera work elevate this far above the average TV production.
So many fans went bananas over things like the Doctor being half-human and the Eye of Harmony being on board the Tardis and the Master being able to slither around in that black snake form to find a new host body or why he was put on trial by the Daleks.
I'd like every Dr Who fan who can't sleep at night fretting over this bit to explain to me what the White Form in the story where Tom Baker regenerated into Peter Davison was and why the other regeneration scenes took place without such a White Form "merging" with the Doctor.As for why the Eye of Harmony was on board the Tardis I'll say that if a new Doctor Who series had resulted from this pilot movie they could have done a flashback story at some point featuring Sylvester McCoy's Doctor and explained all that.
I thought the Master being put on trial by the Daleks was kind of cool - sort of like they were saying "This guy is so evil even the Daleks are outraged!" If a new series had resulted they could have done another Sylvester McCoy flashback story at some point to explain what led up to the Master being put on trial by the Daleks.
Sylvester McCoy was pretty cool for agreeing to appear in this movie to give the potential new Doctor Who series a legitimate link to the original British show.
The poor guy had to come in with a lame regeneration scene and went out the same way and the effort was for nothing since the show's own fans turned up their noses at this film and the new series was never given a chance.
Let us mercifully pass over the spectacle of the Doctor's first on-screen kiss--except to say that if he was never tempted by some of the companions in his past (particularly Romana, who at least was of the same species!) then why the heck would he be tempted by some jittery Earth woman who didn't particularly like him?Please, o scriptwriter, if you're going to use characters and equipment that have been established over a quarter of a century, does it not make sense to have some passing familiarity with what you are writing?
The Movie itself starred Paul McGann in the best ever first 'New Doctor' performance since the Original episode starring William Hartnell.
I loved Doctor Who in its original form, and I think that while this movie did not catch on to the true greatness of SF storytelling that made the show in the first place, it DID capture the spirit of the series and continued it well..
The Doctor Who T.V Movie was excellent!!Paul McGann was a great Doctor (even though he only played it once!!)The acting was superb and the direction/script was good.I say the BBC should stop earning a penny for the Doctor Who franchise, if they're not going to make new episodes....don't you think??Bring back The Doctor......no new Doctor Who is driving me crazy!!I hope this has helped the BBC decide.Kind Regards,The Doctor ^?.
The interesting thing is that both Baker/McGann rein from the great city of Liverpool.The designs of the TARDIS, Plus the costumes and Special effects, all hit the mark and help make this look like a $40million movie.
If it was that simple why didn't he do that in 500 odd episodes of the television series?Overall though, excellent Theme Music [John Debney, Brilliant Hartnell style costumes for the Doctor, a Good TARDIS set, nEAT sfx and up to the standard acting.
There were a few annoyances however: the change from "chameleon circuit" to "cloaking device", the half-human revelation (as a biologist, I find that hard to swallow, despite the frequency of hybridization in the 'natural world'-- but it does explain things like the Doctor's traditional difficult regenerations), and a few weaknesses in the plot and continuity from the series.
Eric Roberts' portrayal of the Master is good and strong, as can be expected of him, though perhaps not as memorable as his predecessors.The movie also has enough exposition so one doesn't have to know all the ins and outs of Doctor Who in order to enjoy it, but the fact it's a TV production perhaps prevents it from blowing the viewer's mind.
People take against Paul McGann because they thought that the overall film sucked but his performance here was actually quite in tune with the previous doctors, still very English, and I admit he's no Tom Baker or Patrick Troughton, and his assistant was no Sarah Jane Smith, but you can't say that this was worse than the twin dilemma can you?.
Although the actor recently expressed his true feelings that he couldn't care less if he isn't chosen for BBC1's proposed revival of the Dr. Who television series, based on this and a reappraisal of his movie role, I believe he should continue as the Doctor at least for one season..
First of all, I'm heartened to see the previous comment, it's good to see the Americans know it was terrible too.Now, imagine my surprise and delight at the news that Doctor Who was making a long awaited come-back, I even loved the tagline, "He's back, and it's about time." Quite clever and catchy if I do say so myself.
What's more they relied on the Doctor Who name for success, and if you consider them apart from it as films in their own right they're not much cop either, I'm just glad there's no sign of a series being spawned from it.Basically, it's all very well trying to find new things for the Doctor to do, but you can't just rewrite the entire universe like that, I really do wonder how they managed to make it without someone saying "You're actually going to do this??
Only a non-fan would regard it as not being true Doctor Who!!All the elements are present - the TARDIS, though I prefer the smaller control rooms seen until 1989 - a companion, Grace, and danger to the world in the form of the Master, a good try from Eric Roberts.
It is amazing that an 89 minute long movie which introduces and even develops a character as interesting and fun as the Eighth Doctor can possibly be so horrible but somehow the inept team behind this abysmal abortion of a project manage to make this such a thoroughly horrendous movie in every way imaginable outside of some minor positives.Let's list those and get them out of the way: The titles and the arrangement of the theme are both quite good, McGann is just great as The Doctor, and he's surprisingly given some pretty good dialogue to work with (which is miraculous considering the unutterable dialogue for the rest of the characters).
The best scene in the entire movie other than McGann attempting to find clothing is the motorbike chase, which is a good bit of fun (with a nice lead-in with the jelly babies gag) and at least a bit of a rest from Eric Roberts' truly abysmal, ridiculous, and insulting Master.Oh I don't even feel like covering what was done to The Master in this movie but it was simply insulting.
The script has no concept of pacing, the editing techniques used to create 'tension' are far cheesier than the worst-looking rubber monster Doctor Who ever had, and the camera angles and general look of the film are hysterically, abysmally bad on a Coleman Francis scale of ineptitude thanks to the director Geoffrey Sax.I usually don't rate things 1/10 unless I find nothing to enjoy in them, but despite McGann's Doctor and some of the design in this movie I simply have to give it a 1/10 on principle.
The only bad thing I can think about the Doctor Who TV movie is that it didn't become a new series.
Shown seven years after the cancellation of the television series and nine years before the relaunched series with Christopher Eccleston, it was the only new Who in the 1990s.It also brings a lot of ingredients that was used in the relaunched series as Russell T Davies studied what it did right and what it did wrong.Sylvester McCoy returns as the seventh Doctor who having been shot and receiving botched hospital treatment regenerates into Paul McGann's eighth doctor.The Tardis lands in San Francisco in 1999, the Master escapes in a snakelike form from the Tardis and plans to take control of the Eye of Harmony once he has occupied the body of a paramedic (Eric Roberts).
The visuals were grand and obviously some of the morphing techniques were inspired by films such as Terminator 2.The casting of Paul McGann was the master stroke, with the 60 minutes screen time he had, you really felt that he was the Doctor, a Byronesque romantic (he even got to have a kiss) and man of action, it was a shame we have seen so little of McGann's time lord apart from the mini adventure, The Night of the Doctor; although there is plenty of Eighth Doctor audio adventures.I also liked the malevolent interpretation of the Master by Eric Roberts who really pushes up the dial of campiness when he puts on the time lord regalia.
From a corrupt, evidence-destroying hospital administrator, to a confused plot-line about New Years Day 2000 (maybe the writer really thought the world was going to end and nobody would be around to see the stupidity in his script.) It is these standard clichés that give Hollywood such a bad name, and wreck this effort.I've never completely bought into the whole "Curse of the Time Lords", business, (it always seemed something could be going on between the Jon Pertwee Doctor and Jo Grant) so found the kisses between the Doctor and companion trite, but not devastatingly so.
the film has big budget special effects which looked pretty good for the time, the new design of the Tardis interior is very well made and its influence on the later interior designs in the revived series can be seen.
there are also a lot of unnecessary concepts that have been added to the film, such as the idea of the Doctor being half human, which doesn't work for the character at all and is an example of the Americans trying to be a little bit too clever.
This movie was supposed to be the kickoff for an American/British revival of the show.The good stuff- Having Doctor Who #7 (Sylvester McCoy) in the beginning of the film.McGann himself was pretty good.
I think in some ways he was trying too hard to be Tom Baker (The Fourth Doctor), and he was written in such a way to be like that version, the one probably best known and most popular to Americans.Still, it's a better movie than I remember it being than when I saw it in 1996, but that's probably because I'm now used to seeing The Doctor with decent production values thanks to Eccelston, Tennett and Smith.
We're presently up to the Jon Pertwee era, so I have had the pleasure of watching the Master in action, which added to one reason why I was disappointed with the film.I love the camera work and editing, especially the cutting between the regeneration and the Frankenstein movie, what I call the 'Rebirth' of the Doctor and the Master, and finally the costume change and Lee going through the Doctor's things.Paul McGann was a terrific choice for the Doctor and I wish he could have stayed on longer- he has a sense of humour, a slightly angsty side, a playful side, a sneaky side (putting a gun to his own chest to threaten the policeman comes to mind)...
So, with the Master onboard, the movie can really only hook fans of the TV series, not get too many, if ANY, new, casual viewers to turn their eyes from some established US sitcom or drama on at the time its up against.
The Doctor is at his best when he is on the hunt, searching for the answer to the mystery, piecing the clues together while at the same time, with the help of his assistants, taking the viewer with him on the adventure.Paul McGann turns in a very good performance, as does Daphne Ashbrook, but the hammy performance of Eric Roberts has turned the Master into a Disneyvillain.The best thing to do would be to explain away this chapter in The Doctor's life as some kind of time/space paradox..
After the cat is finally out of the bag (or Water/Air Snake...thats the form The Master takes!) all subtlety goes out the window (or what this show THOUGHT was subtlety) and Eric Roberts starts being the campest incarnation of the character.There are also plot points that are only just brought up in this film like The Doctor being half human (despite the fact that Gallifreyans, from what we've seen in the Classic and New show are basically human looking so why did that plot point exist?), The Eye Of Harmony being an "access Regeneration" point for other Doctors (I guess that was a way of writing in a "safety net if McGann stuffed up and being like "say hello to Doctor #9 - Tom Baker!").So overall is this special AS BAD as people make out?
Star Trek managed it, this Doctor Who TV Movie didn't quite do it.Paul McGann made an excellent Doctor, and the supporting cast were all pretty good - including a hysterical, over-the-top Eric Roberts as the Master.In this movie, the Doctor's 7th incarnation (Sylvester McCoy) is shot in San Francisco.
It was always about the plot, and the never ending story of a renegade Time Lord on the run from his people in a rackety old Tardis.Now Paul McGann was a perfect choice to carry on the role of the Doctor.
However, with the graphic CGI and first-time orchestration of the historical theme tune, and stunning performances by Sylvester McCoy, Paul McGann (the Doctors), Daphne Ashbrook (Dr. Grace Holloway), and particularly Eric Roberts's portrayal as the Master, this TV Movie, although seen by only 9 Million people in the UK (despite there being no new WHO for seven years!)on original broadcast on Monday 23 May, 1996.
And yes Hollywood have ruined it with this movie but there are some good bits in there.McGann is excellent as the new doctor, with a touch of his predecessors about him he is believable as the awkward yet clever doctor, sometimes a bit nonsensical but always behind it all a genius.Eric Roberts (another actor I like) is miscast as the master, he is way to "Ming the merciless" which to be fair is the scripts fault but he just doesn't come across as the doctors evil counterpart.
Previously, this incarnation appeared only in an American produced TV movie broadcast in 1996, bridging the gap between the original series and the 2005 revival.In this film, the Eighth Doctor is played by Paul McGann, best known for starring as the eponymous "I" (or Marwood) in Withnail & I (1987) alongside Richard E. |
tt0093284 | It Couldn't Happen Here | In the early morning, dancers are warming up on an English beach (Clacton-On-Sea.Essex), and Neil Tennant appears on a bicycle. The song "It couldn't happen here" is being played. He cycles up to a kiosk, where he buys some postcards from the shopkeeper (Gareth Hunt). The shopkeeper complains about the political faults of the modern world, but Neil ignores him and fills out his postcards.
Meanwhile, Chris Lowe is at a bed & breakfast. He is in his room packing everything into a seemingly bottomless trunk. He runs downstairs and waits for the landlady (Barbara Windsor) to bring him breakfast. In the breakfast room, an Uncle Dredge (Gareth Hunt) is making bad jokes. When the huge fried breakfast arrives, Chris empties the contents of the tray over the landlady and runs out onto the street. He runs along the promenade being chased by a group of Hells Angels on bikes.
Back at the beach, Neil continues to cycle along the beach. He passes a priest (Joss Ackland) who is reciting verses whilst leading a party of school children. Two of the boys are the Pet Shop Boys at a younger age and they run to the pier (Clacton Pier). In a building on the pier, the adult Neil is seeing an exotically dressed female fortune teller; as he leaves she uncovers her face to reveal that "she" is Chris Lowe. The young Neil and Chris (Nicholas and Jonathan Haley) look in a Victorian era Mutoscope and see a short bedroom farce: a slapstick performance featuring a squire (Chris Lowe) and a butler (Neil Tennant) making advances to a French maid (Barbara Windsor). The priest catches up with the boys and shouts more verses at them. The boys escape into the amusement arcade where they see a rock star (Neil Tennant) in a gold tasselled suit. Then they pass into a theatre, where they see a group of nuns perform a risqué dance routine to "It's a Sin". The priest catches up with them again and he takes them outside where it is now evening. On the pier, he commands twelve fishermen to haul a huge cross out of the sea and onto their ship.
The adult Neil and Chris pass three rappers performing "West End Girls" and go to buy a classic car. The salesman (Neil Dickson) insists on presenting his full sales spiel, so Neil and Chris try to interrupt. They pay for the car in cash and drive off with Chris at the wheel. In the car, the news report on the radio tells of a hitchhiker who has hacked to death three people who have given him lifts. Chris pulls over for a female hitchhiker whom they see on the roadside, but instead an elderly man (Joss Ackland) gets in after a scream and banging is heard. The passenger, who fits the description of the killer from the radio, offers strange and witty anecdotes to questions asked before turning on the radio, which plays "Always on My Mind". During the song, the passenger, with a mad look in his eyes, unpacks several knives from his bag then suddenly asks to be let out and the Pet Shop Boys continue unharmed.
They arrive at a transport cafe where they're sat next to a traveller (Gareth Hunt). Whilst 'Love Comes Quickly" plays on the jukebox, they order an inappropriate gourmet meal, but the waitress doesn't flinch. At another table a pilot (Neil Dickson, more or less reprising his lead role in Biggles: Adventures in Time), fiddles frustratedly with a hand-held computer game that says "divided by... divided by... zero" (taking lyrics from "Two divided by zero"). A voice from the traveller's briefcase asks to be let out and the traveller does so, revealing a ventriloquist's dummy. The dummy starts philosophising about the concept of time. He asks whether time can be likened to a teacup in that a teacup is no longer a teacup if no one has the intention to use it as such. To shut him up Neil puts a record on the jukebox ("Rent") and the wall of the cafe rises to reveal some dancers.
Meanwhile, the pilot is seen back in his office reading W.H. Newton-Smith's book 'A Structure of Time'. After a while he reaches a conclusion that "the dummy's a blasted existentialist". He boards his plane, determined to put an end to such daftness. Neil and Chris are driving along a country lane, when the pilot attacks. "Two Divided By Zero" is playing. The car is covered with bullet holes but the Pet Shop Boys drive on, again unharmed. The pilot's monologue piece is known to be extracted from Newton-Smith's book.
They stop by a telephone box which is being vandalised by a group of youths. Instead of attacking Neil, they politely open the door for him and he phones his mother (Barbara Windsor). The two of them exchange the lines to "What Have I Done to Deserve This?". At the end Neil puts his head against the broken glass on the door and blood appears.
In a suburban street a commuter leaves home and there is a scantily clad woman in his upstairs window. He is covered in flames but doesn't seem to notice. At the railway station, a zebra is led by two zebra-faced men into a goods van. Neil and Chris sit on the platform watching, then get into another van where a large snake coils itself around them. The van takes them to Paddington station.
At Paddington station, army soldiers stand guard and there is a limo waiting for Neil and Chris. They get in and drive through a tunnel as the chauffeur (Neil Dickson) quotes passages from Milton's Paradise Lost at them. They are driven through a battlefield with bombs exploding all around them. They pull up by a nightclub and Neil and Chris enter. They perform "One more chance" to a crowd of dancers. Each dancer has a number on their back. Once the song is finished, Neil and Chris walk up the stairs to leave and on their back are numbers too – except that both of them read "0". | absurd, cult, comedy, psychedelic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0213890 | Mohabbatein | Narayan Shankar (Amitabh Bachchan) is the strict headmaster of Gurukul, a prestigious all-boys university. Narayan wants the best out of his students, and places emphasis on tradition, honor and discipline. He has run the university for 25 years and over that time, he has forbid the students from any kind of romance — anyone he catches falling in love will be expelled. The film focuses on three of the school's students: Sameer (Jugal Hansraj), Vicky (Uday Chopra) and Karan (Jimmy Shergill) who all fall in love. Sameer is in love with Sanjana (Kim Sharma), his childhood friend. Vicky falls for Ishika (Shamita Shetty), a student at the all-girls university next door to Gurukul. Karan becomes smitten with Kiran (Preeti Jhangiani), a girl he sees one night at a train station. All three know that if they're caught they'd be expelled, so they at first do not pursue their love interests.
Raj Aryan (Shah Rukh Khan) joins Gurukul as a music teacher. He challenges the status quo and slowly introduces changes that Narayan dislikes. Raj is a strong believer of love, and when he learns the stories of the three boys, he encourages them to follow their hearts. The boys take his advice, but are disappointed: Sameer discovers that Sanjana has a boyfriend; Vicky only makes Ishika dislike him when trying to woo her; Karan learns that Kiran is married to a pilot who is assumed to be dead. Raj tells the boys to not be disheartened, and tells them that his love, Megha (Aishwarya Rai) is dead, but he continues to love her and imagines that she is still by his side. Raj encourages the boys to continue to stay loyal to their loves.
One day Raj throws a party in Gurukul, inviting the students from the girls' school from next door as part of his plan to spread love in Gurukul. Narayan is furious and threatens to fire him. Raj then reveals he was a student at Gurukul years ago, and he fell in love with Megha, who was Narayan's only daughter. Narayan had expelled Raj without ever seeing his face, and afterward Megha committed suicide. Raj returned to Gurukul as a teacher in the hopes of changing Narayan's ways and honoring his love for Megha. Raj promises that before he leaves Gurukul, he will fill it with so much love that even Narayan will not be able to remove it. Narayan accepts this challenge, and allows Raj to continue as a teacher for a while longer.
Sameer, Vicky, and Karan one by one win over the girls they love. Narayan retaliates by tightening the rules of Gurukul, but the boys continue to break the rules, which encourages other students to do the same. Narayan finally decides to expel the three, and Raj speaks up on their behalf, telling Narayan that he is the instigator and the boys should not be punished for it. Raj also says that he feels Narayan lost the battle, because his daughter left him and now Raj (who considered Narayan an elder) is leaving him. Raj's words make Narayan realise his mistake. He publicly apologises to the students and steps down as the principal, allowing Raj to take over. Raj turns Gurukul into a love-filled university. In the end Raj, Narayan and a vision of Megha walk happily together towards the gates of Gurukul. | melodrama, romantic, philosophical, flashback | train | wikipedia | I have never seen any character, in movies or real life that believes in love and the power of love as strongly as Raj Aryan does.
what really makes the movie kinda drag is the tacky ending, in which narayan shankar (an excellent amitabh bachchan) gives this exceptionally long lecture about him losing to love.
all six newcomers (though jugal hansraj isnt technically a newcomer) have managed to give decent performances, and have stood their ground in front of amitabh and shah rukh.the movie is reminiscent of several other blockbusters of the past, such as dilwale dulhaniya le jayenge (also directed by aditya chopra), kuch kuch hota hai, and dil to pagal hai..
Means he will teach the student the cheap acts of how to write love letter in more effective ways (like using 'Piple ka Panna' as letter), or bung the lecture to meet the girlfriends, and also by bringing neighboring girls to the hostel in absence of principal.(In reality, one of those girls will get pregnant in such situation.)By doing this he think he is doing a great thing for the boys and for the society.By now, you must have understood what my problem is.
Raj Aryan believes in freedom of expression through music, and love being more powerful than Narayan Shankar's rule through fear.Through the lives of three young students, Raj Aryan tries to break Gurukul's traditions, and bring love back to life.Maybe the story is unrealistic, maybe the songs are not as original as they could be, but Mohabbatein works.
For some people it was Amitabh Bachchan who stole the film, for others it was the love stories between the youngsters.I'm fairly sure, if you have ever felt true love and true loss, you will love this movie.
I spent all my time waiting for Mr. Aryan and Mr. Shankar to come back onscreen.As for the story, I was completely out of sympathy for the silly idea that it's more important to spend your college years running around trees and going to dance parties with scantily clad girls than to be studying or going to prayer.
As a westerner who has watched my own treasured Catholic traditions thrown overboard one by one for every goofy, modern idea that comes down the pike (clown Masses, anyone?) I was firmly on the side of Mr. Shankar: `I don't like change, Mr. Aryan!'I've since learned that Amitabh Bachchan is like the Sean Connery of Indian cinema, and that Shahrukh Khan is known better for his manic, over-the-top performances than the quiet, mature act I saw in Mohabattein.
It has some great songs that are almost completely destroyed by the ancient, crackling voice of Lata Mangreshkar (sorry if I spelled it wrong), and I still can't sit through the endless love stories of the three young couples.
Mohabbatein is a beautiful and sensitive.It is one of my favorites.This was Aditya copra's Second film after Ddlj(Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge).I have heard Aditya wanted this to be his debut.He has done a great job.The story is sweet.It opens when 3 boys named Karan,Samir,Vickram are going to Gurukul.The headmaster says no to love.Later the 3 boys are in love with Ishika,Sanjana,Kiran.Then a music teacher cames to school named Raj.On valentines day he tells that he used to be a student there.He also told he was in love with principals only daughter Megha.When Megha found that he was thrown out.She committed suicide by jumping out of a window.Years later (Possibly 6-7 years)Raj has come back to take revenge.On valentines night he found everybody in love.Raj exxplains to him.AND BELIEVES IN LOVE..Shahrukh dominates the flick with a brilliant performance.Ash did good.Bachan was wasted.Sanjay Dutt should have played his role.Shamitha,Kim,Uday did a bad job.The other 3 new comers did well.Anupham,Archana,Amrish,Shefali were good in cameo.Dialogs are terrific.Scenes were the boys except Jugal when they say the girl there emotions were beautiful and lovely.Chemistry beetween Ash and Shah Rukh was amazing the other lead pairs did not have chemistry.Songs are great.The songs like"Hum Ko Humise" and"Zinda Rethi Hain"are deeply moving and soothing and are emotional ones.Highly Reccomnded.
Sure, the story is the oft-repeated tale of forbidden love, unappreciated lovers and the traditions that gag and bind us, but the all-star cast, the skilled direction, and lively musical numbers all contribute to make this a movie worth noting.The setting of Mohabbatein is the Gurukul School, an elite school housed in a cold, uninviting, castle-like edifice.
Narayan Shankar (Amitabh Bachchan) is the stern, disciplinarian and somewhat tyrannical headmaster of Gurukul who rules the school with an iron fist.The story begins on a dark and quiet night at the local train stations where three young men, prospective students at the school, meet on the platform and set out on a journey that brings them closer together than they ever could have imagined.
As with every true-to-form Bollywood movie, their love stories are met with several obstacles, such as differences in class, no-good boyfriends, and familial obligations, but the most important hurdle in their path is none other than Narayan Shankar who is convinced that love is a pure waste of time.
A glimmer of hope comes their way when a maverick music teacher, Raj Aryan (Shah Rukh Khan) sweeps into the picture and helps nurture their young loves.
Before i reveal 13 Facts and Problems about the film, Id like to say Mohabbatein does have nice Music and it was the first time that paired Amitabh Bachchan and Shah Rukh Khan together.
Two Great Actors in a movie directed by Aditya Chopra who has directed the Great DDLJ.1.STORYLINE = In short, This film is about these 3 guys, who cant love because their head teacher says No to Love.
Is she mental, or is she impressing her father in law in a unrealistic way.6.JOB INTERVIEW = Amitabh has his own rules in the film, but yet he gives the job of a teacher to stranger Shah Rukh Khan.
Was she trying to prove a point or was her character plain stupid and weak.Anyway, The film was still enjoyable in some scenes, Mainly the scenes with Amitabh and Shah Rukh.
Shahrukh Khan whom I admire and absolutely love his acting, he was a real disappointment in this movie, I think any other mediocre actor could have took up Shah Rukh's role,Aishwariya once again another talented actress gone to waste!
Mohabbatien(Love stories) is another in a long line of films based on the boy meets girl formula.
However this time though we are dealing with not one but four love stories.The film is a complete disappointment from the word go.The characters of the boys are extremely one dimensional there.
Its plot is contrived, and predictable to say the least.The only thing worth a notice is the production design which is quite good.Overall its just sad to see that all Indian filmmakers today are just reworking the same boy meet girl formula over and over again.I would like to end this by just letting the viewers know of the number of indian films in the past few months with this formula,Har Dil Jo Pyar Karega (every heart that falls in love) Dhadkan (my sweetheart) Deewane (crazy in love) Tera Jadoo Chal Gayaa ( you cast a spell on me) Hamara Dil Aapke Paas Hai (my heart belongs to you) Dhaai Akshar Prem Ke ( some letters of love) Kahin Pyaar Na Ho Jaaye ( i hope i don't fall in love)I mean could you please make a film where love is not mentioned ,it seems that Indian writers are all love starved or something..
This is a great movie to watch and I would recommend it to anyone who likes good love stories..
A hindi film which truly captures the essence of poetic justice, the acting of both Shah Ruhk and Amitabh was, as usual, superb...and the irony of the "passing on" of tradition which is found in the movie, can be applied in reality, with the passing on of Amitabh to the new star of today Shah Ruhk...the supporting cast can be somewhat annoying at times, but the great story line carried them through it...and I can't forget to mention Aishwaya Rai, who as always, looks perfect.
Yash Chopra's films defy logic and this remake of DEAD POETs SOCIETY is good at places but isn't as greatThe scenes between Amitabh and Shahrukh are interesting but sadly the characterization of Bachchan is flawed Actually it's difficult to understandThere are too many sub plots too but some love stories like Uday- Shamita rest are clichéd especially Jimmy'sbut overall it gets boring later-on This being a YRF film you have lot of songs, cheesy scenes.etcThe last face/off between Amitabh and SRK is well handled but the last speech of Bachchan is too muchAditya Chopra handles some scenes well but the film drags too much and they are too many plots Editing is weak Music is good especially AANKHE KHULIAmitabh underplays his part well and suits it SRK doesn't ham mostly and manages to stand up to Bachchan in this film He acts well when he is restrained though they are some scenes he hams Aishwarya doesn't have much to doUday Chopra is likable, Jugal Hansraj is awkward and Jimmy Shergill hams it up and apes SRK a lotAmongst heroines none are that impressive.
Into this atmosphere comes Raj Aryan (Shah Rukh Khan), the new music teacher, who believes in the power of love, and encourages his students to break Gurukul's traditions.
Favorite Love Story Movie Of All time....
I love this film very very much..(1) SRK and Amitabh Bachchan acting is superb in this movie..
and all other actors and actress acting are also very much good..(2) Story , Screenplay , Cinematography , Dialogue (One of the best part of Movie) , are brilliant(3) I just love the outfit of Shahrukh Khan in this film..
Director Aditya Chopra does justice to his genre of romantic movies, with beautifully choreographed songs and glamorous dialogue yet the movie fails to lift from its hyped name; an easily forgettable performance by Shahrukh Khan; Amitabh however delievers after his long break; Jimmy Shergill out of all the debutants inspires promising acting; a great movie to watch with family but some may not seem it relevant.
This is truly a fantastic film and really impressive story-line amazing editing Shahrukh khan and Jimmy Shergill are only reasons why i liked it and chose to watch it Jimmy shergill is superb shahrukh is superb uday is funny jugal does well Amitabh bachchan is remarkable Aishwaria rai is superb but sadly she was a special guest appearance but she was not a special appearance she was the lead role Preeti is brilliant shamita is good Kim is brilliant anupam was superb amrish is remarkable Good story-line good screenplay good direction good background music score and excellent songs Overall 4/5.
The movie is an old take of a classic called Dead Poets Society.Movie deals about 2 characters Raj and Narayan.Both are stubborn.One believes that Love can conquer all the other does not.Takes place in Gurukul one of the best schools.Shah Rukh was a former student fell in love Amitabhs beautiful daughter Megha(played by Aish Rai).Amitabh banned Srk from the school due to that reason and Megha commits suicide.Years later is back to undo every thing.The ending is the typical old.Story is sweet and is well paced.This is 3 hours long because it deals about the 3 young JodisIn the acting side,Amitabh and Shah Rukh are the stars of the movie and have acted wonderfully.The very beautiful Aishwarya Rai superbly stands out in a brief role.I do wish she had a longer role.The 6 new comers are pretty forgettable.Shamitha hams and shows more color than acting and the same goes to Kim Sharma..there are some unnecessary characters that could have been cut out.Amrish Puri,Anupham Kher and Archana Puran Singh leave no mark.Hellen makes a pleasant cameo and her dance to O Haseena Zulfovali is a delightTechnically this is fine.The movie has been shoot in Long leat(Uk,the place for the school)is gorgeous.Inside of it looks GorgeouS.The songs are great especially Aankhen Kuli and Humko Humise.Picturisations and Chereo are Fab.May not be the best movie of Yash Raj banner.But will still entertain me for years to come.
no - not a gory ghost - a friendly ghost - like Casper..floating lovingly around in the premises where she died - without culminating love into Marriagehood- she wanted to marry the guy seen above who is playing the guitaar - Indian girls go crazy when they see a guy with a musical instrument actually - it reminds them of Lord Krishan actually..so the entire blame of unchastity, two-timing, illicit relationships which married women are having with unemployed men seen around in Bengal alleys ...and under lamp-posts...are all done in the name of Lord Krishna !!In this movie a father of a motherless daughter (seen in Picture) who is also a Principal of a Boys college - Gurukul - is very strict in his Principles !
Not being able to bear separation from Lover Romeo, Juliet a.k.a the daughter (seen garlanded in this picture) commits suicide writing thusly: Father I cannot do without him - I know you will be sad but I am sadder - stay with your principles - but I hereby bid you goodbye !!Father ages gradually and after soem 6-7 years a male Music Teacher joins his college - he is the same Lover (of his daughter but the old man fails to recognise as he had not even seen him !!)..came to take revenge...and promised to make this Gurukul a Lover's paradise...he finds romantically inclined male students and instigates them to fall in love with neighbouring college semi-nude girls or a widow ..or even a girl who is already having a boyfriend...basically he wanted to take revenge from the old man and made use of romantically inclined idiots.There is a lot of use of Special Effects - the Chinar leaves which floats on and off the entire movie during scene change .Good for my students in Arena Multimedia !
"Mohabbatein" is a Bollywood version of "Dead Poets' Society" about an elite school with strict rules and a young teacher set out to teach a sense of love and individuality to his students.
However, depite the lush sets and the obvious amount of effort taken to turn this into a hit movie, it is mostly a disappointment.The script is simply weak; the love stories aren't particularly convincing and look like rehashed versions of things we have seen a thousand times before; the college concept is not really credible because the focus on Narayan Shankar and Raj Aryan is such that we could almost believe they are the only two teachers there; Shankar's change of heart seems unmotivated and out of character; and the no less than five love stories seem utterly unfocused.Add to that an abysmal score by Jatin-Lalit, who seem to have simply recycled music from other movies for this one.The plus point are strong performances from Amitabh Bachchan and, surprisingly, Shahrukh Khan, who really shines in this movie.
Aishwarya Rai plays big B'd daughter who killed herself cause she fell in love with Shahrukh who was a student at a only boys school, her father was the head teacher at this school and he did not want them to be together, Big B is such a legend there will not be another man like him in bollywood ever again, he was amazing in the film and the guy is really tall to, i never noticed that in his other films but in this one he kinda stood out.Uday Chopra and Shamita Shetty, they made such a cute couple, awww it was so cute watching those 2 together, and you will see Jimmy Shergill too, overall this is a must see movie, its clean too so you can watch it with parents, i really hope that they bring that era back where there is no nudity at all.
Serious i have never seen a more touching and heart felt piece of cinema before so well written and well played by each and every character.I know people complain that it was long well if it has 5 love stories of course it will be long but i never got bored not for one minute.The best thing about the film was the message the film was trying to portray and many people didn't understand the actual thing.
This movie was a long awaited one as it has two great actors, Amitabh and Shah Rukh ...and does it live up to it's expectations ?
when u watch the film, you can feel the love in this movie, as shahrukh said you fall in love.
Their university principle is a very strict man and dislikes the works of love on his students,the music teacher of course knows this but does not care since he fell in love with the principals daughter and she committed suicide because her father did not like the sound of it.
Amitabh B acting was good.But I just couldn't help but laugh at how ridiculous the other love stories were.
In this movie, Shah Rukh become a music teacher at Gurukul, one of the most pretigious college in India while Amitabh acts as the college principal.
aditya chopra is trying to do but i think yash raj banner can do more than just rope in big names.the story follows three new students at a university called gurukul(wherever the hell that is)who fall in love with girls but then suddenly find out that there principal amitabh bachan is going to expel students who fall in love,out of nowhere a violin teacher who is also a preacher of love comes and dares the boys to do as they please,actually the teacher is the boyfriend of the principals daughter who committed suicide when there union was denied by the principal,the film has some good songs but some of the lines are totally superficial.this film is for people who would like to spend their lives in a dream world.. |
tt0110018 | Hercules in the Maze of the Minotaur | In a sun-dappled forest, two men are searching for buried treasure. They pace out the step given with the map, and discover a cave overgrown with bushes. The two men break through the plants and enter the cave. In the cave they find a huge wooden door, as they try to get through the door, a monster breaks through the door and chases after them. One man is captured and the other flees as the monster tells him to bring Hercules. Meanwhile, Hercules works on his farms, he sees his sons fighting and tells them that they should not fight. They say that Hercules fights, Hercules explains that he only fights when he has to and only to prevent other people from being harmed. He tells about the time when he had to fight Eryx the boxer to stop him from killing anymore people. He asks the boys if they understand, and they say they do. Later that evening, Hercules is working in the stable, Zeus appears and they chat. Hercules tells Zeus that there have been no monsters for a while, which is good as he has now settled down with Deianeira to raise the children. Zeus gives him a scale from a sea serpent and Hercules remembers the time when he and Deianeira were swallowed by a sea serpent while looking for the lost city of Troy. While day-dreaming he snaps back to reality at the dinner table to find the dog eating his dinner. Back in the cave, the Minotaur broods in wait for Hercules.
At night the children ask their father to tell them a story, Ilea asks for Hercules to tell her about when he and Deianeira first met. Hercules begins relating how the fire had vanished from the Earth and that Deianeira's village needed fire, and how he got the fire back from Hera's temple. Halfway through the story Hercules realises the children are asleep. He and Deianeira retire to bed and she asks him if he misses his adventures and battling monsters, he says truthfully that he does miss it. The following day, Hercules is working in the stables and sees something flit past the door, he goes to look but sees nothing. As he walks back into the stable a man jumps down upon him, Hercules turns to see it is Iolaus. They begin talking about their adventures and the time when they had to fight the Lernaean Hydra that Hera had sent to kill them. The two men go inside to get a drink, Iolaus tells Hercules that he met a man who taught him some new moves that allow smaller men to overpower a bigger man. Hercules says he won't fight Iolaus, but he is eventually persuaded. The two men strip off their tops and prepare to spar. When Hercules attacks Iolaus he is overpowered by the smaller man, but after a short while Hercules gets the best of Iolaus as he sees Deianeira and Ilea standing in the doorway. Deianeira tells Iolaus that since Hercules gave up his adventures he has become depressed. A man arrives at the stable looking for Hercules, he tells him that he must help his village and that a monster has taken his brother. Hercules says he can't go and the man says he has to because he is Hercules. Later that evening Deianeria asks him why he refused to help and he tells her that he promised to stay and raise the children with her. She tells him that he shouldn't try to stop being Hercules, not for her or the children. She tells him to go and the next day her and Iolaus set off for Alturia. As they travel to Alturia a young couple are looking for somewhere quiet, they find the cave and enter. While they are making out the Minotaur comes and attacks them.
When Hercules and Iolaus arrive in Alturia they ask a woman where the monster is and she tells Hercules that there isn't any monster. Underneath the village the Minotaur swears that Hercules will pay, Zeus appears and tells the Minotaur that he still has not learned his lesson, he replies that he has been feeding on hate. Minotaur taunts Zeus because he was unable to kill the Minotaur. Hercules and Iolaus are in a tavern and end up fighting some men because they don’t believe that he is really Hercules. Outside the tavern three men are killed and Hercules goes to investigate, only to be found by the villagers. They think he killed the men and chase him and Iolaus. The man who had asked for Hercules's help comes and takes Hercules to the cave where his brother was captured. Zeus appears and tells Hercules what the monster is and why he wants Hercules. He asks Hercules to kill the Minotaur, and he enters the cave. In the center of the cave he finds the Minotaur, who challenges Hercules. They begin fighting and as Hercules is about to kill the Minotaur, the creature reveals that he is really Hercules' brother Gryphus and Hercules cannot kill him. The Minotaur then attacks Hercules and Hercules ends up killing him by throwing him onto a stalagmite as Zeus arrives. As Gryphus lies dying, Hercules says he is sorry Zeus had to lose a son this way. Zeus says to Hercules that Gryphus was lost the day he tried to lead the people against him and that it didn't have to be this way. When Gryphus begs for Zeus not to let him die like this, Zeus changes Gryphus back to mortal form as a mist covers over Gryphus' dead body. As Zeus declares that Gryphus is now "free," Hercules helps Iolaus and the other people being held by the Minotaur and the two brothers are reunited. With the people of the village now safe and Iolaus freed, the two men journey back home. | cult, violence | train | wikipedia | Closest to the series.
Of all the Hercules tv-movies that were made, this one manages to achieve the tone and theme of the Legendary Journeys.
Kevin Sorbo and Michael Hurst have good chemistry with each other.
My only problem with this tv-movie was the flashbacks.
In my opinion, they really just slowed things down.
Other than that, this pretty good and should be seen..
Good, but it could have been great.
This is the fifth and final episode of the Hercules television movies.
This movie contains a lot of flashbacks of the other four movies.
Because of this the story itself slows down and most of the times the flashbacks are annoying.
And that is a shame, because this could be the best episode of them all, because it has the best plot.
It could have been so much better if they put King Minos and all the others in the movie as well.
But in stead we just see the Minotaur.
But still, this Hercules-movie is a good and enjoyable action/adventure movie with good acting, great locations and a good climax.
It still is a lot better than the tv-show that followed..
too many flashbacks spoil it.
Hercules sits his kids down to tell them stories of his past, trying to recapture a little of his glory years.
Yet deep inside he yearns to be going out on adventures.
Michael Hurst is back as Iolaus, so it must be cause for celebration.
RIGHT??!!?
RIGHT??!!?
Wrong.
Half the story is flashbacks to the other previous TV movies, thus making this one a tad lame to sit through, but sit through I must since it leads up to the great TV series.
The parts that new are good but the flashbacks kill it and make this the least engrossing of the TV movies.
Pity as this was the one that came closet to capturing the feel of the subsequent TV series.My Grade: C-.
"But wherever there was evil, wherever an innocent would suffer, there would be Hercules.".
Hercules, married and a father of three, is settled down and longs for the adventures of his past, which leads to lots of flashbacks.
Eventually he does get a chance for new adventure and heads off with Iolaus to fight the Minotaur.This is the fifth and final of the Hercules TV movies before Hercules: The Legendary Journey was launched.
In a way, it serves as a good primer for that series because it's basically a clip show.
While I enjoyed the Hercules TV series, they did do a lot of clip shows where they showed past clips from episodes with a few new scenes to fill time.
This was done to save money but still meet the ordered per-season episode count.
Not sure what the excuse is here but it's probably about saving money as well.
It's nice to see Michael Hurst back as Iolaus.
His chemistry with Sorbo is great and the Hercules/Iolaus friendship provided the show with its buddy comedy heart.
Tawny Kitaen's sexy as ever.
Anthony Quinn appears as Zeus for the last time.
A miniature Rose McIver plays one of Hercules' kids.
The Minotaur looks pretty cool but the excessive flashbacks are annoying.
It's the least of the five movies but still entertaining..
The weakest of the five.
In the final Hercules made-for-television movie, Hercules is called upon to save a village from a Minotaur.
But things are not as simple as they seem.
The Minotaur has a secret that Hercules must overcome if he is to save himself and the village.This is easily the weakest of the five movies that preceded the television series.
Half of the running time is filled with flashbacks from the four previous movies.
It gets old real quick.
The actual battle with the Minotaur is a disappointment as well.
The costume worn by the actor playing the Minotaur makes it all but impossible for him to move with any grace during the fight scenes.
The relationship between Hercules and Iolaus, which would become one of the highlights of the television series, seems very unnatural.
Almost all of the dialogue is designed to set up the next flashback.Too bad, because this one has a lot of potential.
The plot concerning the Minotaur's secret is one of the best in the five movies.
Although the way it is handled makes it very obvious for anyone to guess. |
tt0040614 | Mr. Peabody and the Mermaid | The film stars William Powell as Arthur Peabody, who is undergoing a midlife crisis as he approaches his 50th birthday. Much of the story is shown in flashback as Peabody tells his skeptical doctor the source of his malaise.
Peabody goes on vacation with his wife Polly (Irene Hervey) to a Caribbean resort. While there, he hears singing coming from a distant key (small island) and takes his boat to do a little fishing. To his surprise, he reels in Lenore, a beautiful mermaid played by Ann Blyth.
Although mute, Lenore is mischievous and childlike and more than a little bit alluring – so much so that before long Peabody has taught her to kiss. He hides Lenore by letting her soak in a suds-filled bathtub and then in the resort’s fish pond. But confusion ensues as his wife thinks he has a big fish in their bathtub and later suspects him of infidelity with Cathy Livingston (Andrea King), a vacationing singer.
Things get even more complicated when, after Polly returns home without Peabody, police suspect him of murder. But by the film's conclusion, Peabody and his wife are happily back at home in Boston with only Lenore’s comb left to prove the reality of his adventure. | romantic | train | wikipedia | The central character in this well-loved feature is an man (William Powell) who has reached the age of fifty.
A highlight of the film comes when she dons a bathing suit (she is a champion swimmer and gorgeous) and investigates the mermaid tale underwater, where Blyth bites her on the leg.
Clinton Sundberg, one of the best line-readers on planet, plays a man who is giving up smoking with whom Powell has droll conversations.
Ever the practical sort, Powell tries to buy half a bathing suit, with hilarious results; he also eventually has to explain the goings on to his wife; this is a character-based adult script by Nunnally Johnson adapted from Guy and Constance Jones' novel "Peabody's Mermaid"; and it makes, by my lights, an unforgettable, charming and beautiful made film.
Carmen Dirigo is credited with the film's challenging hair stylings and Bud Westmore with the makeup for Lenore the mermaid and the rest of this talented and beautifully-chosen cast (a hallmark, I suggest of Nunnally Johnsons' films, since he co-produced as well as writing the script).
This is not a film about someone being old; it is a wistful and intelligent look at being human, using the fantasy of a mermaid who is decidedly real as a symbol of youth itself--Mr. Peabody's youth--in which others believe or do not depending on their attitude to selfhood and individual desert.
The man is William Powell, reaching the age of 50 [supposedly a land mark in a man's life] and feeling in low spirits with still such an attractive wife, played by the attractive Irene Hervey, snags a beautiful mermaid while out on a fishing spree.
Of course, he is all in a dither to have caught this delectable sea creature, played with such lovely and simple sincerity by Ann Blyth, that he proceeds to bring her home, placing her in the bath tub, where she takes a bubble bath.Mr. Powell is wonderful in these type of semi-comedy films where he can show his sensitive side as well as his impeccable timing of high class comedy.
He steals the film, along with Miss Blyth, fresh from her scene stealing scenes as the bad girl in MILDRED PIERCE, who never speaks a word, but does some very intricate underwater swimming, including a water ballet that would make Esther Williams jealous.
However, Miss Blyth had a fish tail attached to her.Other cast members include Andrea King as a delicious woman out on the make , she swims and sings] Clinton Sundberg cast in a very funny role of a man trying to give up smoking and Art Smith as the psychiatrist who examines Powell for possible lunacy in having met a mermaid only to reveal later that he, himself, had visions of a small ice skater who proceeded to skate across the window shade.
Watch for another funny scene in a ladies' apparel shop when our hero requests from the saleslady, played wonderfully by Mary Field, for half a bathing suit.This is a first rate small film, directed by Irving Pichel and written by Nunnally Johnson, made in the 40s, when films were an escape.
William Powell whose days as a leading man were waning plays a man who is turning 50 and going into a mid-life crisis (Powell was in reality 56) so while on a seaside vacation with his wife away, he snags a mermaid while out fishing.
A beautiful mermaid, played by the 20 year old Ann Blyth who in 1948 was breaking away from teen roles with this film and two others released that year, A Woman's Vengeance and Another Part of the Forest.
This is adapted from the Constance and Guy Jones novel Peabody's Mermaid by noted screenplay writer Nunnaly Johnson who wrote The Grapes of Wrath, Tobacco Road and The Three Faces of Eve. Versitle director Irving Pichel who worked in comedy, drama, film noir, westerns and sci-fi and did such films as The Most Dangerous Game, Tomorrow is Forever, They Won't Believe Me and had just come off the sentimental The Miracle of the Bells, directs.
Ann Blyth looks beautiful and makes one of the best on screen mermaids ever in an unusual role.
She affirms that he is still a man who can be loved and needed.If you wish to be charmed not only by the lovely little mermaid but also by an interesting psychological study of aging and life itself, see this film.
It stayed in my memory as a mysterious and haunting film, with her song still ringing in my ears 56 years later.Luckily I found out that my TV/video is compatible with the NTSC system.(There is no DVD made as far as I know.) So through the magic of E-bay I bought the video from someone in America, who posted it to me in Australia.
William Powell, unwilling to face the encroachment of old age, receives the gift of a visitation from an altogether fetching mermaid, who sparks the diminishing flames of his youthful ardor.
Slightly bizarre little '40's comedy about a middle-aged married man's mid-life crisis solved by the discovery of a young mermaid while fishing in the Caribbean.
William Powell (The Thin Man series) carries the picture on his charm alone and Ann Blyth (Veda in Mildred Pierce) makes a very cute and seductive sea creature.
Some droll set pieces -Peabody's attempt to purchase a swim top for his catch, the various encounters with the busy-body's who come to snoop- work quite nicely and Powell actually creates some genuine moments of heartfelt desire but it runs out of steam before long, turns dark, then ends with a thud.
Mr. Peabody and The Mermaid is a film that was shown quite often as I was growing up, but I haven't seen it for years.
This film was any young boys dream come true, to go out and catch a beautiful mermaid and to bring her home was such a wonderful fantasy.
Mr. Peabody's Catch of the Day. William Powell stars as Mr. Peabody, a married man and on the verge of 50, and Ann Blyth as a mermaid he snags on his fishing rod one fanciful day, and ultimately falling for her.
You can't help but like anything that William Powell is in; he gives anything he's in charm and a high regard it may not possess without him.Having said that, this movie suffers mostly from a weak script and an awkward feel to it due to its staginess and the use of a flashback, in the form of telling the story to a psychiatrist.
It does a mystical feel to it and I can see how someone would have fond feelings for it having seen it as a child and therefore see past its technical flaws.Ann Blyth is good and quite striking as the mermaid, who rightly doesn't speak a word, unlike Glynis Johns in "Miranda." With Glynis Johns' "Miranda" being made in 1948 also, I get the feeling that this was made to capitalize on "Miranda"'s success.
It may not have the magic and humor that "Miranda" has, but, if you like William Powell and like his usual quirky approach to life's dilemmas, you'll be pleased for 90 minutes..
Wm. Powell is so gentle and earnest in the role of Mr. Peabody, and almost as sweet as the lovely young mermaid, Lenore.I found the set at the Peabody home with the fish pond and underwater grotoe where the mermaid lived to be much like the enchanted world I'd love to live in as my mermaid alter-ego, Sirena.I found myself wishing for a colorized version of the movie..
Mr. Peabody and the Mermaid (1948)There could have been some real pathos here in the device of a man facing his mid-life crisis also happening upon a beautiful and very young mermaid.
It's a good movie, and a deliberately limited one, the events taking place mostly in a little resort-seeming set where the lead man, Mr. Peabody (the wonderful William Powell), fights with the meaning of a mermaid who has fallen in love with him.I say pathos right away because what the movie needs is some edge, and it's almost there.
The mermaid, played by Ann Blyth (who was nineteen when it was filmed, next to Powell's 56), is certainly a coy and apparently enticing thing.
He does however seem to abandon his wife at one point (or she abandons him, and he lets her), so the complications are echoes of the most ordinary situations in post-war America: an older man finds a younger woman and makes a mistake, or what the movie portrays as a mistake.There are psychological and social depths here that are only hinted at, as would be the mode of the era, but in a way that's enough to make it a "delight," which is no demeaning word.
None other than the daughter from "Mildred Pierce."Scuba fans and underwater types will love all the really good footage of Blyth (the mermaid) doing a great job swimming and being a bit randy, as any good mermaid would who hadn't met a man for who knows how long.
The relentless saleslady (Field) won't give poor addled Peabody (Powell) a break as he tries oh-so-tactfully to buy half of a swim suit for his uncovered half-woman half- fish (Blythe).
Note how he doesn't even mention the pertinent word 'brassiere', a sign, I suppose, of Code-enforced times.Powell's superb in this whimsical fantasy of replacing your ordinary pet goldfish with a lovely pet mermaid who can trill a siren's song.
It looks like the screenplay wanted it both ways, happiness with both the mermaid and the wife.
But the underwater climax makes no sense and gets only a half-hearted explanation (an air pocket) as if writer Johnson is flummoxed too (maybe by the demands of a meddlesome producer).Nonetheless, the movie remains an amusing slice of fantasy served up in Powell's inimitable style..
When William Powell was lent out to Warner Brothers for Life With Father it marked for him a transition to roles more suited for his age.
In her memoirs Esther Williams noted that Powell felt very ridiculous trying to play a convincing love scene with Esther.
MGM lent him out to Universal for Mr. Peabody And The Mermaid and while the film is not a classic like Life With Father, it is still a charming fantasy that holds up well after over 60 years.The film is told in flashback by Powell narrating his involvement with a mermaid to a sympathetic psychiatrist Art Smith.
Powell is on vacation in the Caribbean with wife Irene Hervey and he's finding it hard to admit he's reaching that crucial age of 50.
In real life Powell was 56 when he made Mr. Peabody And The Mermaid.Hugh French who's a vacationing lizard and would be gigolo puts the moves on Irene.
Powell gets to do some deep sea fishing and catches a mermaid by hooking her tail.
The mermaid is Ann Blyth who is absolutely enchanting as she steals the film without a word of dialog.
Blyth gets a temporary home in the resort aquarium and Hervey suspects Powell of trying to romance vacationing Broadway singer Andrea King.
King in fact gets to meet Blyth and she's not quite the same after that.This fantasy had elements of it in the Ron Howard film Splash, but Mr. Peabody And The Mermaid will still delight audiences even today.
1948 was the year of film mermaids as it also featured Glynis Johns in "Miranda", a comedy much closer to "Splash" (1984) in style and tone.
"Mr. Peabody and the Mermaid" is a much darker film, with a mute mermaid (wonderfully played by a perfectly cast Ann Blyth), the manifestation of the protagonist's mid-life crisis fueled imagination.The hope that William Powell's "Thin Man" popularity would translate into a box office bonanza led to his unfortunate casting as the title character.
While both styles work fine on their own, their lack of unity makes the film far less powerful than it might otherwise have been (insert source novel here).The 5' 2" Blyth was 19 when this was filmed while Powell was 56 and in poor health, which made him look a bit older and make their scenes together even more surreal.
The island police believe that he has murdered someone after he returns Lenore to the sea.The comedy in the source novel came mostly from its satire of the tendency of mid-life crisis men to seek out unspoiled girls half their age (behavioral traits that once had significant genetic and evolutionary advantages) and land them.
Unlike the Jones' novel, the film is book-ended by Peabody's visit to his hometown psychiatrist, with his mermaid story told as a flashback story.
And the film goes out with Peabody giving Lenore's comb to his wife, signifying that his crisis has passed, he has surrendered and is moving on with his life.
There has been a roadside attraction mermaid show there since the mid-1940's; in which mermaids perform synchronized ballet moves underwater while breathing through air hoses hidden in the scenery (like the film's undersea castle).
William Powell and Anne Blythe are just wonderful, as is the entire cast.
This magical film takes you to a place where mermaids are real and childhood dreams do come true.
William Powell,plays a man in his 50's who finds a beautiful mermaid and decides to take her home with him.
You might be in for a treat.The vacationing Mr. Peabody (William Powell), struggling with middle age, takes in an enchanting young mermaid and finds himself in the middle of misunderstandings with his wife, his fellow residents, and the police.
Fully delightful performances by William Powell and Ann Blyth.I now find it came out at the same time as Miranda, another mermaid movie.
I'm not sure whether Mr. Peabody's(William Powell) tale of falling in love with a singing mermaid is simply a bizarre manifestation of a midlife crisis, or perhaps the result of a bout of schizophrenia, or maybe the result of taking a psychoactive drug.
It might have been made more palatable if Lenore(Peabody's name for Ann Blyth's mermaid) was given the capacity to talk as well sing eerily.
Incidentally, Irene Hervey , who played Polly, looked a good deal like Myrna Loy, Powell's frequent costar, as in "The Thin Man "series.
Mr. Peabody and the Mermaid is an innocent, fun, light, casual, and leisurely film.
While taking a vacation in the Caribbean, Mr Peabody (Powell) hears a strange and hauntingly beautiful singing.
Add to this, the excellent chemistry between Powell and Irene Hervey, who plays his wife Polly.
Clinton Sundberg has the best character in the film; Mike Fitzgerald is a man going through changes after seeing his quack of a doctor.
He even has his own style of speech which adds a more comedic aspect to the mix.Even though Ann Blyth has no lines in the film, she still has a presence.
She works well in the water.When I watch this film it makes the majority of today's comedy flicks appear even more infantile than they are.
While the story doesn't make a lot of sense, it is a pleasant little fantasy film..
William Powell plays a man whose wife thinks he's having a mid-life crisis and who police later think has murdered his wife!
Apparently, he was in the Caribbean with his wife and managed to catch a sexy young mermaid (Ann Blythe).
What exactly happens next you'll have to see for yourself.This is not the most distinguished film William Powell ever made.
There are lots of charming moments in Mr. Peabody and the Mermaid.
I especially enjoyed the scene in which William Powell tries to buy only the top half of a women's two-piece swim suit for the mermaid (I don't know the name of the actress who plays the salesperson, but she perfectly captures the weariness and irritation that lies behind the professional salesperson's smile and memorized patter).
Instead of turning 50, feeling old, and so chasing younger women to prove himself still virile, William Powell's Mr. Peabody turns 50 and loses himself in a little innocent romance.
Unfortunately, I can't recommend it.It sounds like a fun movie -- a man in his 50-ish life crisis meeting a mermaid...and everyone else thinking he might be loony.
Back in 1948 moviegoers who were into mermaids were spoilt for choice between Glynis Johns in Miranda (UK) and Ann Blyth as Lenore in Mr.Peabody And The Mermaid.
It's gossamer of course but with a screenplay by Nunnally Johnson and a leading man like William Powell it's Industrial strength gossamer and will reward the average viewer..
Guy and Constance Jones also wrote There Was A Little Man, filmed in the same year it was published - 1948 - as Luck of the Irish.
It's a sadly wistful little sex "comedy" of youth and old age, beautifully summed up in William Powell's line, murmured with an off-hand sadness, an almost casual regret: "Fifty - the old age of youth; the youth of old age."COMMENT: A much under-rated and misunderstood film.
Actually, the mermaid doesn't come in for thirty minutes - charmingly introduced in what would have been Irving Pichel's one really inspired piece of direction, were it not undermined by Mrs Fowler's intercutting a banal reaction shot of William Powell.
There are three female figures in this film: the wife, calm, understanding and feisty (when she thinks he's been unfaithful she walks out and flies home from their vacation in the middle of the night), a muscial comedy star who is aggressively on the make for Peabody, and the Mermaid, docile, adoring and silent-and totally dependent.
At one point Peabody says he wants a woman who "can't do much of anything", his mermaid, but when he gets her he doesn't really know what to do with her (and she almost drowns him at the end when she tries to take him to her underwater world).
A beautiful, magical film with William Powell a master. |
tt4979082 | Jai Gangaajal | Babloo Pandey (Manav Kaul), the MLA of Bankipur district and his brother Dabloo Pandey (Ninad Kamat) run a jungle raaj in their town of Lakhisarai. They are grabbing land for a power plant whose financiers are backing their party politically. The home minister, Ramakant Chowdhary (Kiran Karmarkar) appoints Abha Mathur, IPS (Priyanka Chopra) as the SP expecting her to be soft towards the criminals and supportive to him, being her mentor as well as the home minister. But she goes all out against the criminal brothers. Her subordinates get encouraged by her brave acts against corruption and slowly bringing the jungle raaj to an end. Bhola Nath Singh aka B.N. Singh (Prakash Jha) is a corrupt circle Officer (DSP) who has helped the brothers for a long time by using legal loopholes and other corrupt ways to keep them out of harm's way in return for financial favours and political support.
As the brothers feel cornered, Dabloo, out of desperation makes the mistake of kidnapping an orphaned teenage girl Sunita (Vega Tamotia), who and her younger brother Nagesh (Ayush Mahesh Khedekar) refuse to give away the land. After the kidnapping, Dabloo rapes and kills the girl and hangs her from a tree showing this as a suicide just as her father had committed suicide too under pressure of selling the land. Singh comes to his senses after seeing this brutal crime and tries to arrest Dabloo Pandey, which starts a riot in the town inducing Nagesh, the younger brother of the murdered girl to use his belt throttle Dabloo's neck and killing him, seeing which the villagers gather around some more goons and the corrupt Sarpanch and kill them and hang them on the tree claiming it to be suicides. This also starts a chain reaction where corrupt people are killed in similar manner elsewhere. Abha is frustrated and is unable to control these illegal killings. She tries her best to control the law and order. Singh is attacked by Babloo and his goons and gets injured. Babloo frantically searches for Nagesh, who has killed Dabloo and is now hidden away by Singh from Babloo. Babloo's goons locate Nagesh and take him in a gunny bag to Babloo, who wants to eliminate him by hanging. But in a final showdown, Babloo Pandey gets arrested and the reign of corruption, terror, and anarchy comes to an end. | murder | train | wikipedia | Jai Gangajal is totally a PRAKASH JHA movie, literally.
The movie is no match to its predecessor but Priyanka Chopra's honest performance as Abha Mathur does make up for all the loopholes in the story.
Much like Gangaajal the movie makes an attempt to focus on the socially relevant topics like land grabbing, farmer suicides, rape etc.
Manav Kaul is the villain of the season but you do miss the presence of Prakash Jha regulars like Mukesh Tiwari, Ayub Khan, Yashpal Sharma who really add a touch of realism to such political dramas.
Overall a good watch that could have been a great sequel to a cult movie like Gangajal..
Just to make it clear JAI GANGAJAL has nothing to do with 2003's GANGAJAL, apart from the fact that both the films had the same director, both the movies deal with cops and both have something to do with police department against vigilante justice, in the former it was vigilante cops, here it is a whole neighborhood which resorts to vigilante justice.Abha Mathur (Priyanka Chopra) arrives as the New SP of Bankipur, Bihar a kind of recommended position by a minister with whom her family has good relations.
Bhola Nath Singh (Prakash Jha) the circle inspector is on the payroll of the local MLA (Manav Kaul) and gives them ample protection from the law.
The MLA's brother Babloo Pandey(Ninad Kamat) has a terror hold on the people and right at the moment they are trying hard to acquire land for a certain power plant.
Now Abha has to control the law and order in Bankipur where the people and the politicians/goons are with an internal war with one another and the police are forced to become mere spectators.The premise is awesome, but is completely drained out because of a weak screenplay, which goes wandering in the oft repeated scenes of honest police offer, corrupt police officer, politicians etc., in the first half, and even when the twist happens, the movie again seems like we are watching the same lady cop versus corrupt politician saga.Priyanka Chopra is excellent as Abha Mathur, she carries the film well, especially in the interrogation sequences and the final showdown.It is Prakash Jha as Bholenath who actually carries the film on his shoulders, as a corrupt cop turned vigilante supporter, the role has many shades.
Rahul Bhat is wasted, nothing much to discuss about him.It is Ninad Kamat, who steals the show as Babloo Pandey, he makes the role so loathsome that you in fact cheer for the fate which awaits him.Vega Tamotia is good as the unrelenting girl showing defiance even after being aware of the fate which awaits her.
She performs ably and holds her own against Prakash Jha and Priyanka Chopra.
The rest of the cast do what is expected of them, nothing to write home about .Salim-Suleman's music is OK, not so great, just flows along with the movie.If only the screenplay had been tighter, we would had a classic, but this where Prakash Jha falters, Disappointing fare, but not a bad movie.Watch it if you are a PC fan, otherwise stay put till you get to watch it on TV..
"Jai Gangajal" is a sequel Prakash Jha's much acclaimed "Gangajal" released in 2003.
A village entirely ravaged by the fear of the goons and a ferocious lady superintendent, trying to regulate law and order against the corrupt officials form the crux of the movie, which has been seen umpteenth of times in movies.
A Prakash Jha show, where he manages an above average performance in all acting, writing and direction..
But it gains a good pace towards the end of first half and bleakly manages to create its own identity.It has been underplayed by all the actors and that is the best part of the movie.
Manav Kaul as the prime villain is also a good watch.This movie remains a Prakash Jha show where he does everything from writing, acting and directing.
This brings down the direction levels a little bit but still the goodness of the movie lies in the repeat of a wonderful direction.There's a good support of an enthralling background score.Overall, a Prakash Jha show, where he manages an above average performance in all acting, writing and direction..
Why Priyanka was promoted when maximum role was for prakash jha.
The acting presented by ajay devgan coupled with prakash jha's direction made gangajal a peace to watch many time's but that was wasted in jai gangajal.
Although the concept and story was so good audience might stay with it till the end but will be left unsatisfied after half hearted acting and an attempt to introduce jha himself.
Even if jha acted in the lead role twisting the story in a different line it could have looked better.
Writer-Director Prakash Jha explores The Actor in him, in his very own 'Jai Gangaajal'.
Jha denominates the narrative, but a stronger Screenplay would've enhanced the impact!'Jai Gangaajal' Synopsis: A newly appointed Senior Inspector (Priyanka Chopra), finds herself against very powerful goons and having people from her own department against her.'Jai Gangaajal' has an absorbing, disturbing first-hour, where our protagonist fights it out with evil within politics & her very own department.
The fight between the good & bad, including Jha's transformation from a corrupt cop to a complete hero, could've done with a sharper pace & better Writing.
Background Score merits a special mention.Performance-Wise: Priyanka Chopra is convincing as the honest & tough cop, enacting the central part emotively.
Others lend adequate support.On the whole, 'Jai Gangaajal' has its moments & Jha emerges as an actor!.
Prakash Jha is famous for his contribution to hard-hitting political drama released in 2001 "Gangajal" starring Ajay Devgan which left no stone unturned in divulging the corruption and hypocrisy that is very much predominant in our society.
Let us check it out."Jai Gangaajal" tells the story of first female SP Abha Mathur (played by Priyanka Chopra) who is appointed to Bankipur district in Bihar where she combats against the Local MLA of Bankipur (played by Manav Kaul) and gangs of Lakhisarai district.Prakash Jha is famous for his contribution to hard-hitting political dramas like "Mrityudand" , "Gangajal" , "Rajneeti" and "Satyagraha" which left no stone unturned in divulging the corruption and hypocrisy that is very much predominant in our society.
"Jai Gangaajal" starts off with a bang with initial reels showcasing the introductory fight scene where Priyanka Chopra bashes the goons.
The few scenes in the first half are engaging but the actual drama unfolds when the corrupt cop B.N.Singh (played by Prakash Jha himself) has change of heart.
The movie follows series of events which is engrossing like the confrontation scene between Priyanka Chopra and Manav Kaul, the scene where Manav Kaul beats Prakash Jha and the climax scene.
However, the screenplay falters later and you began to loose interest in this elongated tale.Direction wise Prakash Jha chooses his favorite genre of "political drama" but loses the balances tripping down the rabbit hole.
Prakash Jha lends in a good support.
Manav Kaul is good as wicked politician.Overall , "Jai Gangaajal" is a sincere attempt to portray the stinking truth of Indian politics.
Its good to see a female solo in films stand out really well.The second surprise is Jha himself!
He really stands out as the corrupt cop who gradually recovers into a good one.Overall, see this film for its fine performances and really well made characterizations.Not perfect!
The best part about 'Jai Gangaajal', director Prakash Jha's latest foray into the country's badlands, is a surprise acting turn by Jha himself: as a corrupt-cop-with-a-latent-conscience, Jha looks as if he has been doing this all his life, so comfortable is he in front of the camera.Too bad you can't say the same for the leading lady.
You can see she's trying hard, especially in some of the 'action' sequences in which she has to kick and punch and thrash, but she's far too smooth for this part.Everything else in this sequel of 'Gangaajal', which replaces the khaki-clad Ajay Devgn with Priyanka Chopra, and pouring acid in the eye with a hanging from the nearest tree/post/fan, falls strictly in the seen-before-category.
Bankipur, a village over- run by greedy politicians, 'bikey-huey-cops', and self-serving locals, could be any Jha 'gaon' from his previous films.The detailing is just a little different—an effeminate 'chamcha' (Sharma), a young girl refusing to give up her patch of land (Tamotia), a podgy baddie in colourful shirts (Kamath; nice to see him in a substantial role)—but overall, this is Jha's much-traversed universe, in which the lawless rule and the law is an ass, till the hero (or in this instance, the heroine) shows up to clean up the mess..
And yet again Prakash Jha on silver screen, this time as a full time character lacks certain expression and acting, could have been more better.
This time Priyanka did a appreciable job,but Prakash Jha failed to create a wonder..
Priyanka Chopra as the chief female protagonist is commendable and more than adequate for this role following her Mary Kom & Quantico appearances and brings that action heroine persona alive wherever needed.
Prakash Jha's movie shows the corruption that is so rampant in India.
After knowing that PC has been involved in some sleek Hollywood projects of late , it was expected to see her in a smart movie in Bollywood as well.It was with that expectation, I went to watch this movie.But 10 minutes into the movie, I could make out that it is nothing but a glorified Bhojpuri cinema without any panache, story line or substance.After watching trashes like Chakravyuha, Satyagraha,Arakshan or Rajneeti, hope was never high on Prakash Jha though.
This movie is more of a Bhojpuri street drama with loud dialogs, poor acting skills and very less common sense.I heard that Mr Jha is himself a politician of some sort.However the way scenes are depicted after the notification of Election, you rather can not stop chuckling at the immaturity and lack of knowledge of the Director.Being a civil servant myself, I was seriously irritated at the level of insensitivity of Mr.Jha. There is practically nothing to take home from a movie like this.Ms Chopra looks stunning in a scenes or two.Otherwise she is very average to say the least.The content of the movie is clichéd.In every frame there was a visible effort to recreate the magic of Gangajal, in which the director fails miserably.The movie drags unnecessarily without any substantial plot development.Character development is comical.Use of camera, a very essential ingredient for a movie like this is pathetic.
LIKE THIS PAGE : English Hindi TAMIL TELUGU Facebook : Movie Review by Yunus Irshad https://www.facebook.com/YunusIrshadsMovieReviewJai Gangaajal (U/A) Hindi ----------- my Rating: ★★★ SAME OLD POLITICAL DRAMA STRENGTHS:- * First half was awesome with crisp editing....
* Prakash Jha's performance from start till end....
it is a one time watch movie with some good performances of priyanka and prakash jha...
One thing is guarantee in Prakash jha movie, he covers 200 people in one shot.
having watched both gangajal and jai gangajal movies both have same motive but part 2 is better then part 1.
Director Mr. Prakash Jha had done better acting than direction.
Movie fantastic many people's showed the Movie, Hero's ya actor was doing Good acting.
Jai Gangaajal Review: Tough cops do not make a tough movie.
Reviewed by: Dare Devil Kid (DDK)Rating: 2.3/5 starsIt's been thirteen long years since the release of Prakash Jha's classic crime drama, the cop film Gangaajal.
Jai Gangaajal is neither a direct sequel of its predecessor nor does it pack as many gut-wrenching punches as the first film did.
Does the film live up to the lofty standards of the 2003 classic and Prakash Jha's direction in general?
Amidst all this is one of the region's main cops, B.N. Singh (Prakash Jha), who does have the guts and shrewdness of an astute policeman to set things right, but would rather pander to the miscreants for a share in the pie.Thrust into this volatile scenario is Abha Mathur (Priyanka) the district's first ever female S.P. She's as ballsy as she's sharp, and is in no mood of letting the most powerful of evildoers get away even with an inch of unlawful behavior.
How Mathur deals with these offenders; whether she is able to restore some semblance of law and order to the land; do the villagers finally get justice; and does Singh finally have a change of heart forms the rest of the film's narrative.While the above elements may seem like a step in the right direction to take Gangaajal's legacy forward – beside being something Jha is known to handle adeptly – the problems begins when Jha and his writers try to cram too many issues in the screenplay.
The outcome is a tad messy film that disappoints when so much more was expected form the combination of Jha and Chopra.Priyanaka, who's on a roll with her Hollywood projects, proves yet again why she's our most convincing actress in action scenes and while delivering tough dialogues.
If only, the proceedings on screen unfolded as evenly as their performances.Alas, Jai Gangaajal will go down as a film with some good punch- lines, few emotional moments, believable raw action, and nothing much else..
A typical cop drama, thats elevated by some good performances,and punchy dialogues.
Some topical issues of farmers committing suicide etc are highlighted in the film which makes Jai Gangaajal a very relatable, film about today times( there still is a 90s bollywood cop drama hangover feeling though).
Also the film springs a surprise in the acting department.But is JG worth your hard earned cash, well lets analyze.Story wise Bankepur is just another town in Central India that is plagued with corruption, land grabbing, rape and farmer suicides.
Will she be able to bring peace to a town that is being ravaged by its own politicians?Acting wise the newcomer/veteran director ( director of this film) Prakash Jha, is a revelation in the film.
I never knew PJ could be such a spectacular actor, the way he transforms from bad guy to good guy in the film is really surprising, his act is so nuanced for a first time actor( he is in his 60s).
Ninad Kamat is loud, and over acts at times but is passable as the MLA's land grabbing brother.Honestly I have been a huge fan of Prakash Jha, and his brand of cinema.
The film does hold ones attention, and the films topical issues like farmers committing suicide due to poverty, rape, and land grabbing make for grim riveting, realisticish watch.
And when Prakash Jha turns good and wreck havocs( when the kid takes revenge for his sister).
However JG is way over the top at times, for example people die so easily without any repercussions, and people grab land like there M&M's, the cops and Indian democratic system is not that impotent as shown in the film.
The films music is average, the background score is okay, and the production values are okay, they suit the rustic vibe of the film but there could have been more real locations rather than sets.Overall Jai Gangaajal is not a must watch, but its a one time watch for sure.
The great performances, the enjoyable political story, and punchy dialogues make for a good watch.People going in excepting a Priyanka Chopra show all the way will in for some of disappointment/surprise its a Prakash Jha film all the way acting and directing.3.25/5* 66% C+.
The situation changes when a new officer under the selection of a government officer moves into the territory, instead of bowing to the whims of the corrupt politicians and turning a blind eye to the brutality of goons she takes them on using the force of the law.The lead actress Priyanka Chopra plays SP Abha Mathur the honest Inspector who takes on MLA Babloo Pandey (Manav Kaul), chief land grabber (Ninad Kamat) and finds herself having to protect the rights of the bad guys has she tries to find out the truth about a series of brutal hangings.
The cinematography is good and this viewer could see how well it captured a dying town and a beaten people.This film uses its actors well and the characters though clichéd are good especially Prakash Jha (also the director)as the corrupt police officer, whose conscience is finally opened to what hes condoned.The only disappointment is the run of the mill ending..
More like a showreel for Prakash Jha the actor.
When GANGAAJAL was released, it was mistaken to be a normal cop drama but the film became famous and won awards, it is still remembered as Ajay's one of best performances and films.
In Jai Gangaajal, he also debuts as an actor and the film has him play an almost parallel lead to Priyanka Chopra.
The film is also too predictable and except some scenes there is nothing worthy to talk out.Direction is decent but the writing plays spoil spot Music is okay mostly playing in the background but as i said it spoils the impact.Priyanka Chopra gets to play a cop and she tries hard, she is decent but yet could've been more impactful at times, yet she gives a good performance- 7/10 Prakash Jha gets the most meatiest part(like Manoj Kumar in his heydays) and though he does a good job, giving him too much importance was not required - 6/10 The film has Ninad Kamat who played a small role in Airlift, playing a villain looking overweight he does a decent job at times he hams though - 5/10 Manav Kaul is getting typecast sadly in negative roles Murli Sharma seen mostly in Jha films does a decent job as usual Rahul Bhat has a small role and he does a good job Nitin Karmarkar is good too rest are okay. |
tt0429200 | Un fil à la patte | === Act 1 ===
Monsieur Fernand de Bois-d’Enghien, who has had a long on-off relationship with Lucette, has just returned to her after a few weeks apart. While he acts as though everything is normal, he reveals in asides to the audience that he is getting married to Viviane, daughter of the esteemed Madame Duverger. He does not know how he can break the news to Lucette, who loves him to an extreme degree and would surely be completely devastated if he left her. As the morning continues, more characters arrive at the apartment. Bouzin is a notary's clerk who dabbles in song-writing. Although he does not know Lucette, he brings along a song he's written for her.
Although he is sent off when Lucette calls his song stupid with her lunch guests, the guests later discover an anonymous bouquet and ring sent to Lucette. While the gifts had actually been sent anonymously by General Irrigua, a South American minister of war who absolutely loves her, Bouzin had sneakily planted his business card in the bouquet. When he returns for his forgotten umbrella, they surround him welcomingly, soon sending him back to his apartment to retrieve the song when they start planning changes.
Lucette tells him she is in love with someone else, he asks Bois-d'Enghien who her lover is. He realizes the General wants to kill him, so he lies and says the lover is Bouzin. Meanwhile, Lucette is meeting in another room with Madame Duverger, who is hiring her to sing at the wedding that night.
=== Act 2 ===
Talking with her mother while preparing for the guests to arrive, Viviane reveals that she has a particular fetish for men with scandalous reputations, which she thinks Bois-d'Enghien is not. Bois-d'Enghien arrives soon, and is shortly followed by De Fontanet, who also ate lunch at Lucette's apartment that morning and does not realize Bois-d'Enghien's predicament. He reveals details about Lucette which Bois-d'Enghien is forced to cover for until he can explain his situation to De Fontanet in private. While they are talking, Lucette, her sister Marceline, and De Chenneviette, who is acting as her manager, arrive. Bois-d'Enghien scrambles to hide in a wardrobe while De Fontanet covers for him. Madame Duverger shows Lucette her dressing room before leaving her alone to get ready for the night. She and Marceline soon find Bois-d'Enghien, who completes frightens and confuses them. He says he was playing a joke and pretends he is only a guest at the wedding.
While Bois-d'Enghien is able to tell his story to De Chenneviette, he spends the rest of the night telling numerous lies to hide his story from everyone else. When she comes to, she is furious at Bois-d'Enghien and, while he tries to convince her that he will not be married long, she pulls a trick on him by putting a rose down his back. When he is forced to strip down to remove it, she starts screaming with joy, beckoning everyone in the room to find the two of them in their undergarments.
=== Act 3 ===
The stage is split between part of Bois-d'Enghien's apartment and the hallway outside it, which connects to the building's main staircase. The act begins with a monologue from Jean, Bois-d'Enghien's serving man, giving a monologue and sending off a florist who was looking for a wedding taking place on the floor above Bois-d'Enghien's. Bois-d'Enghien soon arrives, complaining that he had been locked out after losing his key and had to stay in a hotel. He sends Jean out to have a new lock made.
Not long after, Bouzin, who, by chance, had been the notary's clerk at the wedding, arrives at the apartment to deliver a bill and a copy of the contract. Bois-d'Enghien tears up the contract and Bouzin is just about to leave when the General arrives. There is a grand chase scene before Bois-d'Enghien sends the General down the stairs after the wrong person. Bouzin, although unharmed, is too terrified to leave or even answer the door when Lucette comes to the door. However, she lets herself in with the key Bois-d'Enghien had lost. She tries to make up with Bois-d'Enghien but he refuses and tells her they're done for.
Bois-d'Enghien convinces the General he can have Lucette and tells him how to win her, sending him running down the stairs after her. Bouzin, who had been in a back room while Bois-d'Enghien and Lucette talked, then comes out from the apartment but fails to catch the door before it shuts and locks again. Bois-d'Enghien spots the gun and uses it to force Bouzin to give him his trousers and vest. Bouzin is then forced to flee upstairs when the concierge comes up with policemen looking for a man in his underclothes. They continue upstairs as Viviane arrives, to the surprise of Bois-d'Enghien. Having realized that Bois-d'Enghien really does have the scandalous reputation she desires, she has returned to reunite with him. Madame Duverger, who was attending the wedding upstairs, soon discovers them and gives in to Viviane's pleas for her to be married to Bois-d'Enghien. | adult comedy | train | wikipedia | null |
tt1264914 | Zift | Zift's plot unfolds non-linearly: although the main story after Moth's release from prison is told chronologically, the events leading to his imprisonment are revealed by means of numerous relatively long and not necessarily chronological flashbacks. The story is presented chronologically here.
Moth is an ordinary guy from Sofia, the capital of Bulgaria. At school, he falls in love with the beautiful Ada (Tanya Ilieva), later nicknamed "Mantis". Out of a desire for money, he agrees to work for a shady neighbour known as Slug (Vladimir Penev). The two plot the theft of a black diamond from the white émigré jeweller Vlad the Bijou's house. The robbery ends in failure as Moth is wounded by The Bijou and captured by the police; Slug manages to escape and is never charged. There is no trace of the diamond, and as Vlad is killed by Slug during the robbery, the police never get to know of its existence.
In the Sofia prison, Moth, besides working out to patriotic Soviet music, also befriends his older roommate Van Wurst the Eye (Mihail Mutafov), so nicknamed because he has been wearing an ocular prosthesis after losing one of his eyes during a robbery in Barcelona. Besides being an avid boxer and arm wrestler, Van Wurst also has his philosophical views on life, such as a theory about the destructive power of women, which he shares with Moth. Shortly before being released, Van Wurst hangs himself, claiming "there is no hope outside". While in prison, Moth is informed by Ada that his son Leonid was born and died of lockjaw while still very young.
As Moth is released from prison afterwards, he picks up his civil clothes and his year-old ball of chewing bitumen from the cloakroom and does not miss the chance to swear at an obnoxious guard, who headbutts him to unconsciousness. Outside, Moth is picked by a warrant officer and a younger soldier who drive him in a Chaika to the Baths. In the damp basement of the Baths, he is interrogated and tortured by Slug, now a locally influential member of the communist nomenklatura, who believes Moth knows the location of the black diamond. Moth denies and even doubts the diamond ever existed; he later manages to escape, but not before he consumes iridium-poisoned wine offered to him by Slug.
Wandering drunk and intoxicated around Sofia and seeking his old girlfriend Ada, Moth gets to witness the new socialist reality he had only heard about on the prison radio: the look of the city has changed with The Largo and the Georgi Dimitrov Mausoleum, but the nature of the people has remained essentially the same. The protagonist meets a variety of bizarre characters, such as drug-doing medics, weird patients and local drunks. He ends up in the Saint Nicholas Church, where he meets the priest who had baptized him (Đoko Rosić); the priest points him to Ada's current whereabouts as a performer in a nightclub under the stage name Gilda (a reference to Gilda, as Ada also performs a Bulgarian-language version of Put the Blame on Mame).
Moth finds Ada, who is now living with Slug, and has sex with her. He later reveals to Ada that he is aware of the diamond's location: in Vlad the Bijou's coffin. The two go to the graveyard, where Moth first insists to visit the grave of his son. However, he realizes that it is another Leonid's grave (his mother had been buried in the same grave very recently) and that he never actually had a son. At the same time he notices Slug standing behind him with Ada, who had apparently betrayed him. The three head to The Bijou's grave; while digging, Moth kills Slug with his pickaxe, but is fatally wounded and stunned by Ada a moment later.
Moth wakes up in the gravediggers' shed. Realizing his impending death, he asks for his bitumen in order not to die with a foul breath. Tearing the bitumen apart, Moth reveals the black diamond had been stashed within it for all those years. He swallows the diamond and dies. | neo noir | train | wikipedia | It didn't have an Oscar nomination(for the best foreign language award) this year, still Zift is a crowning and epoch making epic movie for Bulgaria and Eastern/North-Eastern Europe.
Hence, in the years ahead this movie will be mentioned often for its contemporary style, modern cinema language and creative editing.Centering on a criminal, nicknamed as "Moth", the story is taken from a novel and is adapted to screenplay from its own novelist.
Director Javor Gardev features Moth being a self-respecting and chivalrous Bulgarian, reflecting the character of his country under Communism.
Despite all of his relatives and friends leaving him alone, and his wife wounding his pride; he has never held his head down.Not only the past of his country, the writer also reflects the present and the future of Bulgaria within the same literary perspective in a dark utopia, or a neo-noir(film-noir).
On the level of artistic value, Zift has more value than its comparisons.Even though it's resembling several industrial box-office hits, the screenplay is truly original; considering that a novel writer has prepared the whole script from his own adaptation, you will see the total commitment of creating this epic by the production crew.
I remember when I first heard about "Zift" some months before it was released and I couldn't believe what I had just heard and then I watched the trailer and I couldn't believe what I saw and when I finally saw the film back in early October I remember leaving the theatre with a big grin on my face, thinking how I just saw something I thought would never happen.
Wonderful so very wonderful, I don't know if it can revive Bulgarian cinema, I think it's too far gone already, but I'll be definitely following Javor Gardev's career from this point on.
Compared to that meatwagon of stale films that get made here from time to time, Zift is revolutionary in it's visual style, narrative and plot.Opening with a reference to Quentin Tarantino's Pulp Fiction, "Zift" is the story of a man nicknamed Moth, no real name is ever mentioned.
and it's going to be one hell of a long day for Moth and that's all I'm going to say about the story.From the start "Zift" tells you how this is going to play out, I don't mean that it's predictable or anything, what I'm talking about is style.
The dialogue, the characters, the film has a quirky pitch black sense of humor, like the zift Moth likes chewing, it's not something that can appeal to everyone, and it might seem vulgar or profane or whatever, but it has it's lyrical value, it just adds up.
The film feels both distinctly western and distinctly Bulgarian, or Balkan to be more general, because it uses a storyline similar to that of the American Pulp novels (Zift itself is an adaptation of a pulp novel), film noirs and then the character stereotypes (femme fatales, anti hero protagonist) and all these elements get mixed together with Bulgarian culture and stereotypes, resulting in what I dare say, a quite original and refreshing piece of cinematic wonder.Visually speaking "Zift" is all high contrast black and white goodness, a tasty treat for anyone who values the classic two color scheme.
Essential for it's narrative structure is a series of flashbacks explaining, character relationships and background stories and depending on the flashback (a 1930s something maybe, 1940s, or modern time in the film's time frame 1960s) we get a scene shot on different film.
So for example the 1960s part of the film is shot on 35mm while the earliest on 8mm, thus giving "Zift" a substantially different look for each time segment.
I have to mention something about the acting and while I liked Zahary Bahalov as Moth, he played him with a lot of bravado, my hat goes down to the supporting cast, including the great Djoko Rosic as a priest who consoles Moth, and a whole lot of other actors who gave the film a strong energy boost.And while it does have its own share of flaws(the ending felt rushed) and it might seems as if it's going nowhere, and some scenes might seem pointless to the overall plot, Zift is, nevertheless, high quality entertainment, an example in genre film-making, stylish and sharp-edged.
Black and white noir, dark comedy with a brilliant camera work and lighting.
In a time where brutality in movies only count when you see tons of blood, sex only count when it looks like porn and the story only count when there are 20 story switches with three parallel stories in it, the Bulgarian cinema brought us a movie which have not any of this in it and although it is ten times better.I am finished five minutes ago watching this movie.
Fate and his past intervene."Zift" bows to film-noir classics like "Gilda" and "DOA", even lifting plot elements, but this little gem uses their themes only as point of departure, as it does references to "Candide": If all is best in the best possible worlds, all is worst in the worst.And Soviet-era Bulgaria director Gardev depicts is just that - filthy, casually brutal and airlessly detached.
The Best Bulgarian film ever in terms of professionalism.
All the films I have seen until this point were very disappointing and could only be compared between themselves because films outside Bulgaria had always stood above in terms of cinematography, acting,Direction, Budget etc.
The acting is more like theatrical than cinematic and the picture quality has more white spots on it than mount Everest, not to even mention the Sound.
I was blown away, for the first time in my life I was so excited about seeing a Bulgarian film.
Yes It did took me a while since I live in the UK but I did saw it yesterday.After seeing it I felt depressed and had mixed feelings about it.I am going to analyse the film in positives and negatives.
- Very Good acting, especially from the Zahary Baharov and Djoko Rosic - First Bulgarian film to use cgi, I know this could be a negative but in this case it is used very well.
- Many unnecessary scenes involving downgrade humanity and dialogue which focus on 'toilet humour' - Too much nudity, this is something which all Bulgarian films suffer from but this one takes it on another level.(This may not be a negative to all but I generally do not like too much nudity, I believe there is different films for that purpose.)Overall I believe the positives overcome the negatives and In conclusion I must say I liked Zift even though by no means its a masterpiece.
Really liked the black and white photography and had high hopes after a nice opening.
I think Gardev has definitely borrowed from other films and directors.
I found the little stories and anecdotes from minor characters to be intrusive and tiresome after a while and I don't know if the voice-over was that effective.Thought the acting was fine and there were some amusing moments but overall I can't work out if this was supposed to be a thriller or black comedy, heist flick, noir potboiler or a bit of all of these..
This movie has given back to me the hope that Bulgarian cinema is going upward!
And just because a movie is tragic, strange, original and twisted doesn't mean it's good.
This is the top of the Bulgarian film industry,I think.Not forever,but for the past 25-30 years.This is the Bulgarian movie,that has the biggest chance of winning ANY award worldwide.It's about the drama,the innovative story told by it,and the acting.The old school Bulgarian actors like Djoko Rosich for example,along with the younger actors,made a great masterpiece of the already brilliant script.
Some people say "it is the worst movie ever" and give it 1 star, some say it is "the best Bulgarian movie" and give it 8-10 stars.
(I hate that "this movie is horrible" people say "too much profanity"...
This movie is FAR LESS profane than ANY meeting in Bulgaria, where men are present...)-The acting...
Besides, all characters speak in PERFECT Bulgarian, which makes them totally frigid and unrealistic (imagine a movie about a ghetto, where all black guys talk like Barrack Obama).
The movie is nicely shot, from my point of view- this is the big +.
Yes, the dialogue, story, acting weren't insanely bad, they weren't Epic/Disaster movie bad, they just weren't any good.
I feel like watching Zift again....
I saw the trailer first and thought it's great but it surely wasn't the reason took me to the cinema.I know Yavor Gardev is absolutely brilliant theater director and just couldn't wait to see his film debut.
I like the movie is black and white, it's different from the usual American commercial rubbish.
The film is not perfect but it's a sign someone is trying to create something really good and competitive.I go to the cinema once in a blue moon but this time I went to see Zift for a special reason- to support the Bulgarian cinematography.
And I'd like to do it again....sure I will and expecting a new film from Yavor Gardev /I'm really proud with his success in Russia/.Regards :).
" Zift" is not a film just a horrible cliché .
As a SWF I was literally taken into watching this movie by a friend and I truly regret every minute of it.
Since I hate plagiarism, I'll post it:HOW TO STEAL ZIFTFirst: We steal the plot from the movie "Crank" with Jason Statham (2006)!Second: We steal style from the soundtrack of Kill BillThird: We steal a dozen of a military jokes !Fourth: We steal Felini's characters!Fifth: We steal Kusturitsa's background!Sixth: We steal the Phillip Marlowe's monologues, created decades earlier from the great writer Raymond Chandler!Seventh: We steal episodes from about at least 10-12 worldwide known movies, I don't have spare time enough to count the details!.....
It is just that every minute of this movie you're guessing what exactly movie you were watching the same thing in and you try to guess the title :((( We have good level of actor's play, that's only positive thing, WITH THE EXCEPTION of Tanya Ilieva, who pushes lines with the power of expression of the green euglene in the non-fertile age.
He shows as a mockery with mustache, obviously made out of plastic tape.What we have at the end of the long run: that the "Modern Bulgarian Cinema" is not Modern, is not Bulgarian and is not cinema at all :((( Not to mention that chewing asphalt in the years when chewing gum Ideal was becoming cult, is true perversion!I don't like this movie!.
I haven't counted how many times the word 'sh*t' is used but its kinda the most used word in the movie.Characters 1/10 Erm...
OST 3/10 There was only 1 good thing in Zift - The opening song called Smuglyanka Moldavanka performed by the Red Army Choir.Enjoyment 0/10 No commentI have just 1 wish: Please, pretty please, stop making use of the communist regime as an excuse for making crap movies.
Watching this innovative black and white noir thriller, I kept thinking that Frank Miller must have written it, so perfectly does it fit the sensibility of his Sin City comic book series.
My wife said that the film was rich in allusions to Bulgarian life and culture which went right past me.
She is definitely not a genre fan but she really liked this movie.
Certainly the best Bulgarian movie I've seen since the magically-realistic anti-communist fable The Well..
I actually prefer not making movies than watching something like this.
Unrelated boring scenes - trying to add a color in the black and white movie.
The overshooting with bed scenes is completely embarrassing, much full nudity to compensate the lack of scenario and good acting, but even if someone feel the need to make a movie full with unnecessary naked scenes why not try to make them a little more erotic.
People who liked this movie are just pseudo-patriots to me.
I am a real patriot and I want to see a good movie once in 50 years than this crap, and it is a real crap - the whole predictable story is about crap.
What you see in it is a true insult for any Bulgarian people, and those, who comment positive, are just more brainwashed people who do not care about their own heritage.The plot of this "movie" is weak, performance of the actors is at best mediocre, camera work is bad.
It is true, that it gets close to western civilisation criteria for a good movie, cause of all the violence, brutality, and barbarism, but this is not who we Bulgarians are.I believe i read in another post that Bulgarian cinematography is dead since 20 years, and well, after watching this pile of crap, i have to agree..
Black and white picture and trash talking do NOT make an Neo-Noir movie.
Black and white picture and trash talking do NOT make an Neo-Noir movie
We can guess the director's ideas or the story morals.
The story is full of flows from the neat looking fascist time prison with snow white sweat shirts on all of the prisoners, trough kidnapping of the main character with an Russian limousine (impossible situation) garnished with bath full of women (let it be flesh
).
A young girl that does not age with 20 years, a jeweler that likes to keep a black diamond
well you know where, while he exercise
.
All I got is foul language, trash picture and one more convincing example that the new Bulgarian Cinema is in the same "zift" as the movie title.
The Black and White movie later transferred to the big screen by Vladislav Todorov was superbly directed by director Javor Gardev.
The gut wrenching story develops in an isolated dank, dark, brutal, Bulgarian Prison where our hero " Zift " (Zahary Baharov) otherwise known as 'The Moth' has just been granted early Parole.
The movie depicts his early years, which includes his school, girlfriend, Ada (Tanya Ilieva) and a short-lived life of crime.
The stark, bloody, black and white images, along with the director's ability to scatter mayhem and death through the dark rainy streets of Bulgaria offers a realistic movie which is direct, honest and as for this reviewer, a magnificent Classic of the first magnitude.
But visually this is a (black/white) treat.It's just a shame, that the story doesn't get that much attention.
So while not a bad movie at all, there is still quite a few things to improve with this one..
There were a lot of funny stories throughout the film.The film moves from there to a prison where Moth (Zahary Baharov) is about to be released after serving time for a crime he did not commit.
He enters a world he doesn't know as the Communists are now in power.The film is brilliant in a sharp black and white, which is perfect as it is neo-noir.
The shower scene in the prison was particularly funny.It was confusing when he is released from prison and ends up in another one immediately, but in flashbacks we see Moth with his wife Ada (Tanya Ilieva) and partner-in-crime Slug (Vladimir Penev), who is now an official in the new prison, and is looking for a diamond they stole years earlier.He escapes, but not before he is poisoned.
one of the great Bulgarian films.
How to make a (good) bad movie which is still trash.
First of all, I really truly madly deeply wanted to like this movie.
It starts with showing feces, stupidity, foul language, genitals and unusual sex scenes like some B-movie from the 80's.
The script is inevitably bad, even for a post soc Bulgarian movie, with plot holes larger than black hole in the Universe and wooden and totally meaningless lines filled with pretentious philosophical stereotypes.
All in all, I must say that using a foul language coupled with totally unbelievable, grotesque and inane characters does NOT a great movie made.
Besides, the actor's play was bad to mediocre, with the only two noticeable exceptions - the main character Moth and Djoko Rossich, who is well known cinema professional.
This is something most new Bulgarian movies suffer with - no one of the good theatrical actors have any experience with cinema, and I am constantly under impression I am watching TV version of the theatrical play.
I know that the movie has to have some double or hidden meaning, but the people in the audience doesn't seem to have caught it.
BTW, from about 50 people in the theater I was one of the dozen ones to watch the movie till the end.
This is soctrash movie with no value so I don't recommend anyone watching it..
It was a damn month where everybody in Bulgaria were saying "hey, did you watch Zift?!
That's the best thing in this movie.
You know, all the Bulgarian movies have it.So better go and watch some stupid low-budget Hollywood movie instead of this crap.
And yes, I can see that clearly.And hell yes, I paid $2 for that crap but I wouldn't even give 2 stotinki (around 1 cent) to watch this wannabe-a-good-Bulgarian-movie.
Although some Bulgarian pseudo-patriots (this means almost all Bulgarians) might like it.In the end, the good thing.
Slightly twisted, black-and-white Bulgarian film..
The film starts with Lev (Moth) in prison for murder.
Lel is released from prison but immediately falls into the hands of some uniformed men who want to know the location of a diamond that Moth supposedly stole.The name "Zift" apparently comes from an Arabic word meaning asphalt that was once a popular chewing-gum like substance in Sofia, the capital of Bulgaria.
Zift is a love story mixed with murder and betrayal, in all I have to say that Zift is a strong entry into the noir genre.Highly recommended for the fans of black comedy and drama. |
tt1985019 | Austenland | Jane Hayes (Russell) is a single 30-something American woman obsessed with Jane Austen, especially Colin Firth's portrayal of Mr. Darcy in the 1995 BBC version of Pride and Prejudice who wishes for a nice Englishman of her own. After yet another failed relationship, Jane decides to blow her entire savings on a once-in-a-lifetime trip to a Jane Austen–themed resort in England.
The resort seems like the perfect escape from 21st-century life. The guests at Austenland, which is run by the prickly Mrs. Wattlesbrook (Seymour), are assigned pseudonyms, dress in period costume, and conduct themselves like ladies of the Regency era. They live without modern conveniences (though the plumbing is modern). Activities offered at the resort include needlepoint, riding, reading, shooting, and entertaining the other guests through musical performances or theatrics. At the conclusion of each guest's stay, a ball is held ... romance guaranteed! The highlight of the resort is the score of attractive young gentlemen actors who attend to the female guests--though no touching is allowed.
Upon her arrival, Jane realizes that, while she could only afford the cheapest "copper" package, the other guests—including Ms. "Elizabeth Charming" (Coolidge), an absurd and extremely wealthy American woman who has never read any of Jane Austen's books—have all purchased the most expensive "platinum" option. Although she quickly befriends Martin, the resort's chauffeur, Jane is treated with disrespect and disdain by Mrs. Wattlesbrook, who prefers the resort's wealthier guests despite their ridiculousness. While the other guests are given a wide choice of elaborate costumes and shown to luxurious rooms, Jane is given a plain dress and a sparsely-decorated chamber in the "creepy tower" of the servants' quarters.
At dinner on their first night, Jane and Elizabeth are introduced to the gentlemen of the house: Colonel Andrews (Callis), a silly and obsequious character who seems to love his job, and Mr. Henry Nobley (Feild), Mrs. Wattlesbrook's sternly handsome—albeit unenthusiastic—nephew. They are also introduced to another platinum level, long-term guest, who has been given the name Lady Amelia Hartwright (King). Amelia and Elizabeth flirt openly with Nobley throughout dinner, while Jane finds him rather disagreeable. Their argument mirrors the one had by Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcy upon their first meeting in Pride and Prejudice. Ultimately, Jane is humiliated by Mrs. Wattlesbrook and leaves the table.
Throughout her experience at Austenland, Jane becomes somewhat disenchanted with the Regency era. She is self-conscious of her costume and treatment, bored without technology, and her modern independence is often at odds with expected behavior. The silliness of the guests and actors also acts as a mirror to her own formerly-obsessive behavior.
Jane again feels left out the following morning during a walk around the grounds. After leaving the group to seek solace with a book in the stables, she is discovered by Martin (McKenzie). Martin flirts with her, but the two are interrupted by Elizabeth, Nobley, and Colonel Andrews, who arrive with news of an upcoming hunt. Martin's attentions to Jane during the pheasant shooting incites Nobley's jealousy; Jane's surprising skill in turn incites Amelia's. When Jane is forced to walk back to the house in the rain, she is rescued by Nobley. That evening, Jane becomes bored of the group's card games and leaves the house for a walk around the grounds. She runs into Martin; after flirting and witnessing the birth of a foal in the stables, they kiss. The following afternoon, Jane convinces Martin to break the rules: they take a rowboat out on the canal and spend the afternoon together.
The following day, the party is disrupted by the sudden arrival of another actor, the handsome and flashy Captain East. Everyone except Nobley is impressed by the Captain, who in turn seems taken with Jane. Martin witnesses the Captain making a pass at Jane from a distance. When Jane comes to visit him in the stables, he rebuffs her for "parading around" with the actors. When she asks if he is breaking up with her, he replies that they were never "going steady." Jane is left alone, angry and confused.
The next day finds the actors and staff relaxing by the staff swimming pool, where Nobley's dislike of the self-absorbed George ("Captain East") is evident. Martin nonchalantly asks the other men's opinion of "that girl Jane," indicating that he likes her despite their argument.
Later that day, in the retiring room, Mrs. Wattlesbrook demands that Jane play the piano for the group. Frustrated by Mrs. Wattlesbrook's behavior, Jane defiantly chooses to play and sing the only song she knows -- "Hot in Herre"—before leaving the room. On her way to find Martin in the stables, Jane is stopped by Nobley, who knows about her dalliance with Martin and who insists upon the impropriety of a lady being alone at night, "let alone cavorting with the servants." His attitude frustrates Jane and leads to an argument. Back at the house, Jane is accosted by a drunken Mr. Wattlesbrook. She fights off his attempted assault, which draws the attention of Nobley and Captain Andrews.
Frustrated, Jane decides to take her "story" into her own hands and make her trip a growing experience. She asks Elizabeth for help and the two of them steal some of Amelia's extensive wardrobe of costumes. Jane wows the group with her charm and new-found boldness, but her stay at Austenland is threatened when Mrs. Wattlesbrook discovers her cell phone, which Jane had smuggled into her room at the start of her stay. Just when Mrs. Wattlesbrook is ready to evict Jane, Amelia surprises everyone and steps in to save her. In exchange, Amelia blackmails Jane into creating situations in which she and Captain East can be alone together.
Jane pairs with Nobley for the final play to allow Amelia time with Captain East. During rehearsals Jane and Nobley discover their mutual honest affection for the Austen era, for which Jane now has a healthier level of appreciation. The pair genuinely enjoy working with each other during the disastrous play (during which Elizabeth accidentally injures Amelia's eye), after the conclusion of which, Jane and Nobley sneak off to Jane's room, where Nobley confesses that he feels something for her and requests a dance during the final ball.
At the ball, Nobley draws Jane to a private balcony where he confesses his love for her. Disillusioned with "the game" after watching the other actors fulfill their guests' fantasies with elaborate (fake) proclamations of love and proposals of marriage during the ball, Jane decides she would rather have something "real" over the perfect Darcy fantasy with which she's finally been presented and leaves Nobley to spend the rest of the evening with Martin.
As their Austen experience has come to a close, Elizabeth decides to extend her trip to make sure the next batch of ladies knows Colonel Andrews is now hers. Jane is reluctant to tell her that Andrews is a gay actor, and not actually in love with Elizabeth. Jane and Amelia leave the house together. Upon departing, Jane is amazed to discover that Amelia is, in fact, an American, who visits Austenland yearly to distract herself from her marriage to a wealthy old man, and that Nobley is the one who had asked Amelia to pretend Jane's phone was hers to prevent Jane being sent away. As Jane leaves, Mrs. Wattlesbrook informs Jane that Nobley was not "assigned" to her—Martin was. Martin was actually an actor, meaning that his romance with Jane was fully scripted. Angry at being duped and suspecting that she is not the first guest to be assaulted by Mr. Wattlesbrook, Jane threatens to sue Mrs. Wattlesbrook and shut down Austenland.
Martin is sent to the airport on Mrs. Wattlesbrook's orders in an attempt to smooth things over. As Jane dismisses Martin's scripted claims of love, Nobley appears and pleads with Jane to believe that his own affections for her were genuine, but she doesn't believe him either. When the two start fighting in the middle of the airport, Jane dismisses them both, triumphantly declaring herself to be "over it all." When Nobley tries once more to express his feelings, Jane thanks him for being "perfect" and leaves in good spirits.
Back home, Jane clears out the remains of her Darcy collection (including photos, stuffed animals, and life-sized cardboard cutouts).
Nobley shocks Jane by appearing at the front door of her apartment, having traveled all the way across the Atlantic to return her sketchpad and profess his feelings once more. Jane, dubious of his intentions, tells him he needn't have come all that way—she wasn't going to press charges against his aunt. He explains that his name truly is Henry Nobley, that he is a history professor, and that he only agreed to work for his aunt as a favor to her so he could experience the Austen era, a time when love and life were simple. Jane finally believes him and they kiss.
In the post-credits scene, it is revealed that Elizabeth has bought Austenland and turned it into a theme park. Jane and Nobley are among the guests, obviously very much in love. Mr. Wattlesbrook now works as a garbage picker, Captain East does a strip show of which Amelia is a keen fan, and Elizabeth is living the dream, surrounded by handsome footmen, as well as keeping Colonel Andrews as her co-host/companion. Martin is seen attempting to pick up women as he drives a buggy around the grounds, but they all snub him. | romantic, entertaining, stupid | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0060728 | Murderers' Row | The film begins with a shot of the United States Capitol being destroyed. It is actually a scale model being used in the demonstration of a heliobeam weapon in the headquarters of the Bureau of International Government and Order ("BIG O"). BIG O is a secret organization with the goal of world domination that previously appeared in The Silencers.
With the aid of a mole, BIG O conducts a worldwide assassination campaign against various secret agents working for ICE (Intelligence Counter Espionage). Matt Helm (Dean Martin) fakes his own death in preparation for investigating the scheme undetected.
Helm meets his boss, Mac (James Gregory), for a mission briefing. Helm is to track down the missing Dr. Solaris (Richard Eastham), who has developed the powerful heliobeam weapon, a device that uses the concentrated power of sunlight for mass destruction. Helm is told if he can not rescue Solaris he is to kill him, and if captured to kill himself, lest BIG O brainwash him.
Posing as a Chicago gangster named Jim Peters, an alias of "Lash" Petroni, Helm travels to the French Riviera to follow his only lead, Solaris's daughter, Suzie (Ann-Margret). Concerned about her father's disappearance, Suzie helps Matt infiltrate the island lair of the diabolical Julian Wall (Karl Malden), blow it up, and thereby save Washington, D.C. from being destroyed. | good versus evil, cult, violence | train | wikipedia | This is film pretty much fits the formula of the other "Matt Helm" films; lavish locations, fun weapons, beautiful girls and booze.
When this movie was shot in 1966 , the second unit took the different scenes located in France between Cannes, Villefranche sur mer and Monte Carlo.
This scene is shown to Matt in the car when his mission is explained to him at the beginning of the movie.I was 25 at the time, had a very common car which could take only 4 passengers plus the driver.
We were short of extras so it was decided that all those of the unit available would act as people of the crowd waiting for passengers of the Panam flight (minute 19:22).If you look carefully at 19'47"you see Matt Helm arriving from the plane before taking his car; in the foreground before the shot changes to the close up of Matt opening the door of the car, when he crosses the double white line on the tarmac, the second guy from the right besides an auburn haired women, is me!
From afar the guy standing in for Dean Martin could be easily mistaken for him!The scenes shot in the night club were made at the Club de Valbonne in a village which is above Juan Les Pins, not far from Vallauris which is famous for its pottery but also for being the place where Napoleon arrived in France when he returned from the Elbe Island on March 1st 1815.
Dean Martin's son was one of the band musicians in the scenes shot there.At the same time two other important movies were shot in the region, Richard Fleischer's Fantastic voyage for which some special effects were done in the Studio de la Victorine of Nice (those studios still exist), and John Frankenheimer's Grand Prix starring the French actor and singer Yves Montand.I hope these souvenirs may interest some of the viewers here.
Matt spews of his usual lighthearted, spoof lines, surrounded by his coterie of lovely women, but this one is less interesting than others in the series, altho Karl Malden does OK as villain Julian Wall.
He is trying to dominate Dr. Solaris, the secret weapon (laser) scientist, who is the father of Suzie, played by leading lady Anne Margret.
MURDERER'S ROW is the second Matt Helm movie and just as sloppy and ill-conceived as THE SILENCERS.
The film, directed by Henry Levin, could just as easily have been named "LONG SHOTS and STUNT MEN" when you consider how few close-ups Martin has during the action sequences..
This second entry of the Matt Helms (Dean Martin) spy-spoof series is no better or worse than the Silencers or The Ambushers, but is a notch above the final entry, The Wrecking Crew.
After "The Silencers," there was no where to go but with more fun in the sun with Matt Helm - poking fun, that is, at the James Bond spy genre.
Dino Martin is as lackadaisical as ever as Helm, the part-time super agent, barely awake in some scenes and ready with the cute quips in, well, every line of dialog.
The villains are again the evil organization Big-O(oh), who target all the major secret agents as the film starts, including Helm.
Helm searches for a scientist who is providing Big-O (led by Karl Malden) with the final formulas for a super heat ray.The action slows down at the mid-point, especially with the seemingly endless scenes of young folks shaking their bodies to sixties tunes.
Ann-Margret plays the daughter of the missing scientist and she's always great, no matter what she's doing, but she even gets quite involved in some strenuous action towards the end.
Leonard Maltin lists "Murderer's Row" as a BOMB, but personally I liked it more than the first Matt Helm outing, "The Silencers".
Don't get me wrong, it's not a great movie, the pacing could have been snappier, the special effects could have been better, etc., but it surpasses the original in most categories: for one thing, it is funnier - it actually made me laugh out loud once or twice; for another thing, the French Riviera provides far more attractive locations than Phoenix, Arizona; for yet another, this film, unlike the first, actually has a proper, Oddjob-like henchman; and perhaps most importantly of all, Karl Malden is an immeasurably better villain than Victor Buono.
Ann-Margret gives an energetic performance and proves to be a most helpful assistant to Matt Helm (though their 20+ years of age difference does make them kind of awkward as a romantic couple).
Murderers Row seems to be about 50% second unit shooting (with doubles) but is still more enjoyable then any recent Bond film.
It could have been improved if the score had been better, too many scenes, especially the car chase, are under scored and the movie does sag a bit in the middle, but overall it is undemanding entertainment if you are in the right mood..
"Murderer's Row" (19669), like all four of Deano's Matt Helmers, is so bad it's good.It always appeared as though Dino never read the scripts beforehand, never cared about the plots...just plain never cared.
And his right-hand man, Tom Reese (Sgt. Velie on one of the great TV series ever, "Ellery Queen") has a cool chrome steel plate atop his head - nifty gimmick.Deano's four Matt Helm flicks, made in between taping his TV show and partying between 1966-69 were all the Andre Champagne of spy flicks compared with Bond as the Dom Perignon.Why is it that I will ALWAYS watch them whenever they're on TV?
Murderers' Row, the second of the Matt Helm films that starred Dean Martin has the distinction of being the one that actually gave old Dino a hit record.
I'm Not The Marrying Kind was the only written for a Matt Helm feature that he's heard singing over the action, especially during the final scene.Fans of the books that James Bond and Matt Helm were taken from have always said that Hollywood ruined the character.
It's probably more true for Matt Helm because Dino doesn't play it for anything other than laughs.
James Bond would never talk about sexual escapades, but with Dino as Matt Helm, you know this is all locker room fodder.Dr. Richard Eastham has invented a solar ray which evil master criminal Karl Malden wants to subvert for his own use.
Both Martin and Eastham's daughter Ann-Margret are searching for Eastham, reputed to be with Malden on his private island off the Riviera where with mistress Carmilla Sparv, Malden's planning all kinds of dastardly deeds.Dino who also produced the Helm series, gave a guest shot to Dino, Desi, and Billy who were a bubblegum band sensation around that time.Malden looks like he's having a good old blast overacting outrageously as the master criminal.
Dino as he is in all the Matt Helm is just Dean Martin as a secret agent.
The Matt Helm series worth to see for all girls who enchating an adorning the scenes, Dean Martin always plays an unfashionable old guy that believes that all girls falling in love for him desperately on first look, drunk bad washed face fills to fine model of an outdated actor, Karl Malden made an average villain without bright, this picture is a carbon copy of 007's movies even the bad guy is a fac simile them, nevertheless all gourgeous girls overcame all this low profile series, as bad it's became funny and has some good moments, another quality is not allowed the leading character sing along the picture, if had will be a total joke!!!Resume:First watch: 1993 / How many: 2 / Source: TV-DVD / Rating: 6.
The group makes a brief appearance in a discotheque scene in which the elder Martin (then 49) dances (sort of) with Ann-Margret, and their song, the title of which escapes me, doesn't sound half bad.
As for ol' Dino, many of his screen performances have been dismissed by critics as sleepwalking, but most sleepwalkers probably couldn't light a cigarette or hold a glass of bourbon (which Helm doesn't drink but that's a plot device not worth exploring here) with the steadiness Martin displays throughout the Henry Levin directed film.
It rang all right, loud enough for Matt Helm to ride again in two more movies, but not even Dino could sing such a weary tune that long..
This is only the second entry in the Matt Helm spy-series and already star Dean Martin looks tired, beleaguered and in need of a good belt of gin.
Having managed to acquire this one soon after THE SILENCERS (1966) and THE WRECKING CREW (1969), I can say that, while a definite comedown from those two Matt Helm adventures directed by Phil Karlson, it’s fairly enjoyable in itself and far from the “uncontrolled disaster area” the late eminent critic Leslie Halliwell took the sequels to be (though I haven’t been able to get my hands yet on THE AMBUSHERS [1967], considered the worst in the series).Things start off nicely enough with the elimination of all the top I.C.E. agents: Helm’s photo has him taken from the back – thus making his undercover activity later within the enemy ranks seem more plausible – but, amusingly, amply displaying his fondness for booze and broads.
The villain this time around is played by Karl Malden, while Helm’s women include Ann-Margret (as the daughter of an inventor of a deadly ray being held captive by Malden) and the latter’s assistant Camilla Sparv; the girls both look good but aren’t given a lot to do – besides, Ann-Margret relies too much on the energetic dancing style she had displayed in the Elvis Presley vehicle VIVA LAS VEGAS (1964)…though this does result in a funny scene inside a nightclub where Martin has a hard time trying to ape (and keep up with) her irrepressible moves!
The film also features an imposing henchman fitted with an iron plate over his bald head – appropriately dubbed “Metalhead” – who may or may not have inspired the “Jaws” character from a couple of much-later James Bond adventures; the hovercraft chase (starting at sea, continuing on dry land, and ending in a crowded street) also anticipates the one from the 007 flick MOONRAKER (1979).
Martin, of course, gets to sing as well – and there’s another jibe at Frank Sinatra; however, a rather blatant goof went unnoticed by the film-makers: Martin and Ann-Margret flee a scene in the latter’s car (with the top uncovered) but, somewhere down the line, the vehicle turns into that usually driven by Martin (complete with specially-fitted equipment to thwart the pursuers)!
Ann-Margaret and Dean Martin encounter Bad Guys and Gal in haphazard fashion.
A plot, oh yes, there is a plot; But no vehicle upon which to expand that plot into an actual movie.Columbia Pictures has done the public a favor by packaging the two best Matt Helm films (The Silencers and The Wrecking Crew) in one package and the worst (Murderer's Row) with the somewhat mediocre The Ambushers..
This movie is a step up in most ways, having better direction, a more coherent plot (Which is to say it has a plot, something the former film mostly lacked), and more interesting locations and subject matter.
Certainly it's a far more 'watchable' film than the first one in the series, but as with all the Matt Helm flicks, it kind of falls apart in the middle.Ann Margaret is drop-dead gorgeous in this movie, and very energetic, however the scenes of her dancing in a disco just go on way the hell too long, and the producers seem undecided as to whether they want her to be the love interest for Dean/Helm or if they want her to be a poor, innocent lamb that he rescues.
Oddly, Helm has fairly few romantic interludes with women in this film, and aside from Ann, none of them really make much of an impression.
Number 11 at the Box Office in 1966 and Number 2 in Dean Martin's Matt Helm Spy Spoof Series of 4.One's Enjoyment of These Things is Determined by How Much You Like Dino's Boozing and Womanizing.
The Movies were Fluff and Barely Qualify as Nothing More than Eye Candy at Best and Disjointed, Jumbled Junk at Worst.They Were Popular Paycheck Producers for Talents Like Ann Margaret and Karl Malden and a Few Talented Filmmakers but the Movies Really Didn't Have Much to Offer Accept as Time Wasters and Ogleathons.
Here Ann Margaret's Dances in the Discotech Go On Ad Nauseam and Seem Overly Energetic Even for Ann, Malden's Villain is a Bore that Likes to Talk Into Microphones A Lot, and the Supporting Cast Mostly Stand Around Waiting for Something to Happen.The Action is Stunt Double Heavy and Back Screened Without Much Effort.
You have to suspend belief to watch Dean Martin play the world's best secret agent.
It's pretty much the same experience you might get if you watched Gary Busey play the Pope.Karl Malden adds nothing to the movie, either.
Yes. Ann Margaret, a woman we see far too seldom in the movies, plays the daughter of a scientist and, like the daughter of a scientist, she dances a lot; in fact, the five minutes during which the woman dances are the most enjoyable in the entire movie.I don't hold anything against Dean Martin...loved his television show; however, his scattered concentration doesn't play well in a ninety minute movie.Watch this movie only if it will get your name entered in a car raffle....
This is the second of four Matt Helm movies starring Dean Martin as the super-spy.
The books were tough and gritty, whereas these films essentially have Martin playing himself and making various smarmy and sexist jokes along the way...most of which aren't particularly funny.This episode is reminscent of Bond's "You Only Live Twice" as Agent Helm is seemingly murdered but this is only a ruse to allow him to investigate without undue attention.
As usual, the film is filled with smarmy jokes, gorgeous semi-dressed women and Dean Martin essentially playing the off-screen persona cultivated during the Ratpack years.
Matt Helm (Dean Martin) escapes an attempt by a beautiful assassin.
His only lead is a material called X-4 and Solaris' daughter Suzie (Ann-Margret).It's the second in the Matt Helm franchise.
Bungler's Row. It takes special talent to take the acting talent of Karl Malden, the charm of Dean Martin and the sex appeal of Ann-Margret and turn it into this boring, bungled mess.
James Bond fans have complained down the years about the films either straying too far from the source material or being too comedic but it seems to me that Matt Helm fans have had greater cause for complaint.
'The Silencers', starring Dean Martin as agent 'Matt Helm', was one of 1966's biggest hits.
BIG O villain Julian Wall ( Karl Malden ) intends using the beam to destroy Washington D.C.As a comedy, 'Murderers' Row' just about makes the grade, but as an action movie it is poor.
Karl Malden acts like he's in a different film, Camilla Sparv is woefully under-used, while Ann-Margret is too young to be Matt's love interest ( her disco scenes go on forever ).
Actually it's not that bad, just blandly mediocre, and not the worst of the series (that title going to The Ambushers hands down).Karl Malden does give a delightfully over the top performance, Dean is his usually breezy self and Carmilla Sparv makes for a sexy femme fatale.
Her character just comes off as silly, like she's still in an Elvis movie.The setting on the French Rivera creates a cool atmosphere and the plot about a kidnapped scientist had the potential to be interesting if not for that nonsensical helio beam angle.
Dean Martin's back for a second spin as Matt Helm in Murderers' Row. In this one, Helm sets out to track down a missing scientist being held captive by the evil (and hysterical) Julian Wall (Karl Malden) – a man bent on world domination.
His plan is to use the scientist's ray (I can't remember what kind of ray, but does it really matter?) to destroy Washington D.C. Helping Helm is the scientist's swinging daughter, Suzie (Ann-Margaret).Almost everything I wrote in my comment for The Silencers applies to Murderers' Row. The bit about the plot not mattering – even more so in this case.
Dino surrounded by beautiful women - Ann-Margaret is a knock-out in Murderers' Row. The booze, the jokes, the gadgets, etc.
The best bits include: watching Dino try to keep up with the over-the-top dancing of Ann-Margaret, Karl Malden (his performance as the villain is the one thing about Murderers' Row that is actually better than The Silencers), Ann-Margaret's groovy wardrobe, and Helm's freeze and delayed firing guns.
My advice – if you plan to sit down and check out Murderers' Row (or any of the Matt Helm films for that matter), remember to take things about as seriously as the people who made the movie did (and that's not at all) and you just might enjoy it..
The second of four Matt Helm spy spoofs starring Martin, this one has precious little to offer (though a third one was in the making already when this was released!)aside from some pretty scenery and some attractive women.
Martin stars as the boozing, womanizing secret agent who poses as a photographer by day and tries to prevent world domination by night (in between snuggles with various voluptuous females.) Malden is the villain this time out.
Martin looks tired, bored and lazy through much of the film, though he's Shakespearean compared to his appearances in the Matt Helm promotional trailers.
A new villain by the name of "Julian Wall" (Karl Malden) is planning to destroy Washington D.C. on behalf of the secret criminal organization known as the "Big O".
At the same time, Julian gives orders to kill the world's top agents and Matt Helm (Dean Martin) is on that list. |
tt0110307 | The Last Outlaw | When the war ends, the cavalry unit commanded by Graff makes the decision to stay together, and turn outlaw. They begin committing bank robberies, and are successful due to their experience and tactics. Local citizens and lawmen are no match for them. However, when a robbery goes horribly wrong, resulting in the unit being shot up badly, with Loomis (Quinn) badly wounded, they find themselves pursued by Marshal Sharp, who is respected and feared, as well as being diligent and honest and extremely capable.
Graff makes the command decision to kill the injured Loomis so that he won't delay their escape. Eustis objects, and when Graff slaps Eustis then moves to shoot Loomis, Eustis instead shoots Graff. Graff falls out of his saddle and rolls down a hillside, and thinking he is dead, Eustis now takes command and leads the band toward Mexico, with the posse still in pursuit. Potts (Levine) initially challenges Eustis as a commander, but Eustis beats him in a fist fight.
Marshal Sharp and his posse come upon the slightly wounded Graff, and take him prisoner. With Graff in chains, the posse continues their pursuit. Eustis sets up an ambush and several posse members are killed. During the chaos Graff kills Marshal Sharp. Now leaderless, the posse decides to return home, but banker McClintock demands they continue the chase. Graff makes the posse members an offer of part of the loot taken by his former gang, if they help him track them down. They accept this more generous offer. With Graff now leading the posse, the posse sets up an ambush. Graff shoots and kills Philo (Buscemi) and wounds Loomis, then shoots parts of Loomis' body off, until Eustis shoots and kills Loomis to put him out of his misery.
When posse members attempt to cut off Philo's trigger finger as a trophy, Graff tells them he will kill them if they do, as Philo was one of "his men", showing that he respected and cared for his former soldiers. Later, Graff encounters members of the gang, almost like a ghost, keeping them nervous and frightened. Wills (McGinley) steals the stolen money and leaves it in front of the posse, hoping they will stop the chase. Graff kills McClintock, throwing his body and the money off a cliff. He stages a shootout with the outlaws, and tells the posse it had been a trap.
Wills loses his horse, and Eustis decides it is necessary to leave him behind. On foot, Wills waits for the posse, killing a couple of them before being killed.
Lovecraft encounters Graff, who gives him extra ammunition and tells him he'll be spared if he kills Eustis. When Eustis gives Lovecraft ammunition to fill his pistol, he finds that Lovecraft already has a full chamber. Eustis, knowing that Lovecraft did not have a full six rounds left, realizes that Lovecraft has betrayed him. However, when Eustis presses for Lovecraft to do what Graff sent him to do, Lovecraft is overwhelmed with fear and guilt, and commits suicide.
There are only two gang members left, Eustis and Potts. They make for the Rio Grande, but Potts is shot through the gut by Graff. With Potts dead, Eustis, now alone, makes a final stand against the posse. He kills all of them except for Graff. The two draw, and Eustis is faster, but his gun is empty. As Graff approaches, Eustis shoots him with a pocket derringer, which Graff hadn't counted on. Eustis crosses into Mexico, the last outlaw. | revenge, violence | train | wikipedia | For a modern Western movie this is very decent, considering we're talking a TV movie here this is very much above average.
I really have a hard time understanding why this movie's rating isn't much higher as 5,7.
Sure, this is no 'Unforgiven' or 'The Good, the Bad and the Ugly', but i don't think it pretends to be.
This is just a fast-paced, violent action flick, which 'borrows' some elements from famous westerns and well, it works!
I've seen this movie more then once, and it caught my full attention each and every time.
As mentioned in a lot of these reviews Mickey Rourke is really great here.
But the character I like most in this movie is Potts, played by Ted Levine.
If you want to see a fun adventurous western movie i really recommend this one..
The Last Outlaw might have seemed like a throw-away effort back in those days as many of us were still mesmerized by the character-driven epic Unforgiven.
The films these men are associated with often rely on action and violence to get their message through.
A posse of desperadoes, this one led by Mickey Rourke, rides brazenly into a small town with the intent of robbing a bank.
And just like in The Wild Bunch, there is a group of men ready and waiting for them.
Tensions between leader Rourke and his lieutenant Dermot Mulroney quickly boil over about leaving a wounded man behind.
The rest of the film details the remaining gang members' attempt to flee to Mexico with a posse from the town hot on their trail.
Dozens of gunshot victims from both sides are soon strewn across the New Mexico countryside.The film has a lot going for it.
The cast is uncommonly talented for such a film simply made for cable.
Mulroney has never impressed me as an actor, but he sure looks like real a cowboy.Great support from Ted Levine, John C.
This angle is likely inspired from Eastwood's Josey Wales character, though it is common knowledge that many of the Confederacy's more violent types headed west after the war since there was nothing left for them back home.The film has some flaws, as it is not a true classic of the genre.
Mickey Rourke's character is menacing in an almost mystical way.
What is not so good is that one must suspend disbelief, when the posse makes Mickey Rourke their new leader, when men seem to take endless bloody gunshots with little effect, and the distracting, out of place use of four letter words.
I consider "The Last Outlaw" to be a slightly above average western.
The Last OutlawI don't think they could have got a better cast if they tried, you just have to look at the stars in this film to show that, Mickey Rourke, Steve Buscemi, Ted Levine, Keith David, John C.
McKinley and the wasted Dermot Mulrony who a lot of western fans will remember him for one of his early roles as Dirty Steve in Young Guns.
I saw this when it came out on video in the mid nineties and films that went straight to video back in the nineties were great like Surviving the Game, Harley Davidson and the Marlboro Man etc and the Last outlaw was the same.
The beginning of the film is a blatantly obvious homage to the beginning of Sam Peckinpah's The Wild Bunch where they rob the bank and the town's sheriff and his men are waiting for them to have a huge gun battle.
But the film really starts when Dermot Mulrony shoot's the leader of the pack Graff (Mickey Rourke) for trying to execute one of there men and that's when the films suddenly becomes a revenge story.
Of course Graff survives and is picked up by the posse hunting them down and instead and giving himself up he ends up offering the posse to actually be there leader and hunt down his own men for leaving his for dead.
From there it's like a cat and mouse western which doesn't stop till the end credits and it really delves into the story of leadership.
You have fine performances here from Mickey Rourke as the sadistic Graff but the films goes to Dermot Mulrony as the desperate Eustos who battles with thought of whether what he did was right as his men are picked off one by one.
This film ain't no Good the Bad and the Ugly but it definitely bests any John Wayne film ever made (I'm an obvious John Wayne Hater)..
The film is worth watching..
The only thing I can say if you like this movie it'll become one of your most favorite films.
If you don't like this movie you'll consider it to be one of the worst films in the world and you'll find fault with it.
Another points of view don't exist.As for me I think the main in `The Last Outlaw' is the glorious play of Mickey Rourke as colonel Graff.
I like to watch his play between life and death, I like to look at his face and dark eyes and learn to control the events as he, though I disapprove his choice of murderous way.I wish those of you who hasn't watched this movie yet to see it without fail.
And I wish those of you who's already watched this movie but hasn't understood it to see it time and again.
This is absolutely one of my favorit western movies.
In the lead role you'll find Mickey Rourke as Graff,and he was like made for this kind of movie.He is the perfect bad guy.
The movie has also other famous actors like John C.
McGinley and Steve Buscemi,but no one can match the incredible Mickey Rourke.The story is about a gang of bank robbers in the wild west and after a while the gang starts to get tired of their leader Graff and decides to shot him after a job and leave him to die.Unnfortunantly for them Graff survives and are forced by the sherif and his menn to help to hunt down the gang.But no one knows that Graff has a plan of his own,to kill everybody and take off with the money.This movie has a real western feel to it and all the actors play their role great..
When I first saw this movie I thought "what is Mickey Rourke doing making himself look slightly homosexual as a cowboy outlaw"!!?
As I watched the movie though, it didn't matter how he looked, he was deadly.
I thought that the entire cast was great in their own parts, but once again, as with every movie he is in, Mickey Rourke stood out.
It was back in the day, when I chanced upon watching "Rumble Fish", with Matt Dillon, Dennis Hopper, and (my then personal favorite), William Smith, that I noticed the Motorcycle Boy. He stole that movie, no problem.
From then on out, it was because of Mickey Rourke that I watched any movie he was listed in.
Hidden Gem. Having never been the biggest Mickey Rourke fan and not entirely entirely familiar with Dermot Mulroney's work, i was skeptical about watching this movie.
The only complaint I have about this movie was Mickey Rourke's mustache (damn!
what where they thinking?) The tension never really lets up throughout the movie.
After a daring bank robbery the gang turns on their leader (rourke) and heads for Mexico, never quite sure if the posse is on their trail or not, and not quite sure of their new leader (mulroney.) To call this movie a "thriller" would go to far but if there was ever a "western-thriller-type-movie" then this is it.
The whole movie has a very dark overcast, very well put together, and very well written.P.S. anybody seen THE WILD BUNCH lately?.
Enjoyed the movie but was distracted everytime Mickey Rourke was on the screen.
Not to be insulting but his character in this movie resembled 1980s pop music performers from androgynous pop and rock music bands.
Mickey Rourke phones in a role as a cartoonish villain with distracting eyeliner.
What's with Mickey Rourke?
This movie had so much potential with the great character actors in it.
The movie has quite enough action, but the story is excellent.
How the leader of the gang, chasing his men killing 'em one by each, without a regret.
For role to be better, that's why Mickey Rourke is here, and the other outlaws are played by quite good and known actors, and music is well cared off.
In this movie I saw at least 10 actors whom I've seen in other movies, (6 of whom I also knew by name) and my memories of most of them were pretty good..
when I read the cast-list for this movie I thought: "WOW, MAN!...this ROCKS!" - so I decided to see this so-called "Exciting Western"...
a handful of cliché-lines, and a bullet in the head (or some other place where blood can spurt out in a ghastly way).Well, Mickey Rourke did a nice enough job...he portrayed this heinous criminal very well, and did all he could do with this ridiculous script..Dermot Mulroney did a much better job in "Young Guns", but was somewhat believable in this role too...very sympathetic guy.
Keith David, a cool guy, but not such a lovely character....I didn't understand what the hell happened to him...
McGinley, I've always liked this guy...but he doesn't make sense in this movie either..
the sheriff, the banker, the possé, EVERYONE gets it...except...well, you figure it out for yourself.But in some sense, I still liked it, because of the great locations, and some good scenes (where people die, of course)...
They probably won't make a sequel to this, but a PREQUEL would certainly kick more ass than this did!..a movie where the gang of these intriguing characters go berserk and raid banks and stuff, and how we get to see their development, etc.I give this 5/10, because....well, because I liked the cast, and gore is always somewhat entertaining..
It's a bad film I've ever seen !!!!!!!What happened with Mickey ?
And I think Mickey is a real Devil & Dermot Mulroney is not a leader,I want to say he did the wrong thing.
If he's good leader,people should 100% trust him,but some of them want to kill him for living.
Best made-for-TV movie ever?.
For a long time - since I first saw it way back when - I thought Steven Spielberg's "Duel" the best made-for-TV movie ever.
But it is well supported by a generally tight and able script and direction and great performances by all the actors involved.This is a taught "thriller" Western, rather than a rehash of old conventions.
The film opens with nods of respect to "The Wild Bunch" and Hill's "The Long Riders," but then establishes itself as its own study in the demoralization of men of violence.
There is no right or wrong in this story, in the last analysis, only the struggle for survival, and a final contest between two strong men.A brutal yet thoughtful presentation of such a struggle, leaving some questions to the audience for answer; but again, the highest marks go to the cinematography, and the editing that enhances it.
This film is not too bad, but the most annoying things about it are:Mickey Rourke's makeup and wardrobe.
Still, Rourke and Mulroney are good in their roles and fun to watch.
Let's face it....Rourke is the quintessential bad guy!.
Not having seen a western for some years (except of course John Wayne)I found this to be a refreshing change from the white and black stetsons.
Great Western Movie.
This movie was excellent not for it's historical accuracy but for an entertaining experience with good acting by all.
The film established itself as its own study in the demoralization of men of violence.
There is no right or wrong in this story, in the last analysis, only the struggle for survival, and a final contest between two strong men.
This is a gorgeous film, visually, despite its troubling content.This movie is Enjoyable and i would encourage others to watch it too..
The Last Outlaw is a revenge themed western written by Eric Red, and if you're at all familiar with his other works (he also penned The Hitcher and Near Dark), you'll have some idea of how bloody and intense it is.
The film opens with a daring bank robbery, executed by former civil war Colonel Graff (Mickey Rourke), and his brutal gang.
Rourke is an implosive, grade A dickhead as Graff, a man less concerned with the fruits of his labor and more driven by the desire to exact violent retribution.
The supporting cast is just epic, with work from Steve Buscemi, Ted Levine, Paul Ben Victor, Richard Fancy, John C.
One of my all time favorite western movie..
The Last Outlaw, definitely one of my all time favorite western movie.
This great production was make possible by the filmmaker of the original The Hitcher.It's was those day when HBO make incredible TV movies with amazing cast members.
In this case with Mickey Rourke the star of The Wrestler and Dermot Mulroney who work on My Best Friend's Wedding (Special Edition).
The story is really good with a great memorable villain play by Mickey Rourke how steals show from the fist minute he is on screen.What's make this western movie different from others movies?
I describe it as a western movie mix with a strategy war game chess and a lot psychological twist.
It's definitive a must see and one of the best HBO Films..
Great Movie.
I'm not even a particular fan of westerns, but this movie -- I have watched a dozen times, and still enjoy it.Can't figure out what is so special about this movie, but it is a good one.Rourke's portrayal as Graff creates a strong love-hate connection with the viewer.
You relate to his pain.Dermot Mulroney's portrayal of Eustis ("Useless") an outlaw with some principles left -- and a sense of right and wrong -- was superb.All of the actors portrayal of their parts -- was right on.
You can feel Keith David's (Lovecraft's) superstitious fear.What an excellent movie.
Competent but otherwise not so original western about a bunch of outlaws who made a great assault and afterward started to struggle between themselves for the money.
Violent and taut script goes on well and Rourke, as the sadistic but brave chief of the bandits, looking for revenge, gives a solid and convincing performance.
A good option for western fans, especially those who liked spaghetti western because this movie has some elements of the genre and resembles some Italian entries, like, for instance, "Black Jack" and "Django" (the first of the series, with Franco Nero in the title role).
ago, this movie has been recommended to me as a cool, exciting Western, by the guy from a video store, a rental store (instead, it's trite and boring).
Instead of the Leone movie, he got this valueless role as a bastard and mean officer.And suddenly, there's his Asian, striking, outlandish, mean, undeserved look, as if he was playing an alien warlord, with his newfound burnout ugliness and pulp thug menace.
From now on, there's no more about hijacking scripts, but about Rourke doing movies on his own, having it his own way, irrespective of what everyone else on the set is doing.
His role here could as well fit into one of the cheap fantasy movies of the '80s, like 'The Beastmaster' by Coscarelli, or others.Otherwise, 'The Last Outlaw' is worthless rubbish, with an annoying lead; I had already seen Dermot Mulroney in 'Bad Girls', and didn't like him.Costner, Willis, Gibson, Gere, Hackman, Crowe, Depp did images of broadly Western types, from various epochs, in the '90s; Cruise didn't..
Which way should we go?" "How many bullets did you say we had?" "Lets stop again since we are being chased." Yes, I am making fun of this movie.
Watching this film, you search for an reason what so ever when you ask yourself why they are doing what they end up doing.
The biggest question is why the law didn't kill Graff once they came upon the men at the hill?
They kept Graff alive for the main reason of finding the men.
I feel bad since the only good acting in the movie came from Steve Buscemi and he is the first one to get it by Graff.
It's actually the best TV western I have ever seen.
That doesn't mean that there are not other films like this anywhere, but I have never seen an acceptable TV western, from the sixties, seventies or even nineties.
But this feature remains worth watching: good action sequences, interesting characters, bloody violence too.
Of course, any western buff could point tout that Eric Red, the screen writer, may have been "inspired" by films such as WILD BUNCH, LONG RIDERS or even HUNTING PARTY - no one has talked about this film, concerning LAST OUTLAW.
Anyway, yes, I recommend it for any one interested in westerns who could get bored with all the TV movies shown these last decades.
Mickey Rourke gives here a awesome performance..
Crazed ex-Confederate Micky Rourke is shot in the back by his own men and left for dead.
He soon manipulates the situation until he's firmly in charge (!) and proceeds to exact brutal vengeance on his old gang.The Last Outlaw is made exciting and memorable by an odd, amusing performance by Rourke, who looks almost feminine with his pencil-thin eyebrows, along with loads of familiar character actors, including Dermot Mulroney, Ted Levine, John C.
McGinley, Keith David and a nasty little script by Eric Red (The Hitcher).This is definitely worth checking out.
The scene where Steve Buscemi bites it, might be the goriest gunshot in western film history!One flaw: jet exhaust can be clearly spotted in the sky in one scene. |
tt0102655 | The Perfect Weapon | Jeff Sanders (Jeff Speakman) leads a double life: by day, he is a simple, unassuming construction worker, and by night, an expert Kenpo student and master of his craft.
When Jeff lost his mother as a teenager, he became an outcast and frequently lashed out at his family and society in an attempt to assuage his anger. His father, Captain Sanders (Beau Starr), gained the idea from a mutual friend, Kim (Mako), to enroll Jeff in a Kenpō school to better manage his rage and feelings. However, he got into a fight with a bully who beat up his younger brother, and severely injured him with his martial arts. Displeased with his lack of self-control, Jeff's father forced him to move out of home. Jeff, now estranged from his family and living alone, continued with his courses in Kenpo and eventually gained Kim as a mentor and father figure.
Jeff decides to return to his old neighborhood and visit his mentor Kim when he detects that Kim is in danger. Jeff discovers that Kim is having trouble with local Korean mafia families, due to his refusal to pay them off and use his antique store to peddle drugs. Jeff helps out Kim by beating up the people who attacked his store which leads to Kim being murdered in his bed by hit-man Tanaka (Professor Tanaka).
Jeff vows to avenge Kim's death and is determined to find out who ordered Kim's murder. He remembers a boy named Jimmy (Dante Basco) who lived with Kim, and tries to find him to ask if he knows about the murder. However, Jeff's estranged younger brother Adam (John Dye), now also a cop, is investigating the case, and warns Jeff against trying to settle matters in his own hands. In his hunt to exact revenge, Jeff is approached by a mafia boss named Yung (James Hong) who claims to be Kim's friend and knew of a possible lead to Kim's killer. Jeff is directed to Sam, one of the mafia bosses in Korea town, who was believed to be the one who ordered Kim's death. However, upon breaking into Sam's residence and attempting to kill him, Jimmy appears to reveal that Sam was Kim's friend and was the one who took him in for protection. Jimmy also explains that Yung is the one responsible for Kim's death, and he was merely attempting to use Jeff as a weapon to kill his rival boss Sam.
Jeff now plans to kill Yung, but Jimmy warns him that Yung is always protected by his hit-man Tanaka. In order to eliminate Tanaka, Jeff asks Jimmy to falsely testify (to Adam) that he witnessed Tanaka murdering Kim. The plan is have Adam arrest Tanaka so that Jeff can get Yung alone to kill him. Adam and the police eventually capture Tanaka after a long car chase, but to Jeff's dismay Yung was not in the car with him. Tanaka is attacked with a taser, but later manages to escape from the police by severely injuring Adam and breaking out of the police car.
Jimmy overhears that Yung plans to escape the country by boat, and tells Jeff about Yung's drug factory. Now further fueled for vengeance, Jeff sets out to attack Yung's drug factory, using his martial art skills and various weapons to defeat guards and hitmen protecting Yung. He eventually subdues Yung, but is attacked by Tanaka. Although Tanaka gains the upper hand during their fight, Jeff manages to kill Tanaka by setting fire to a gas tank he was standing next to. Despite initially wanting to kill Yung, in the end Jeff decides to capture him alive (showing he has learned self-control) and turns Yung in to his father, Captain Sanders.
The film ends with Jeff entering the kenpo dojo to visit his former master. | cult, revenge, murder, violence, flashback | train | wikipedia | And what is even more impressive is the way the film portrays how Kenpo works when compared to different styles (like Tae Kwon Do).So despite some minor inadequacies it's pretty awesome in many other respects.
When his family friend Kim is harassed then murdered by the Korean crime syndicate, Jeff Speakman beats up many bad guys on his mission for justice.
The support cast is great with Mako, James Hong, Professor Toru Tanaka, James Lew as well as many Asian Hollywood regulars that worked during this period.If you like the Van Damme and Segal movies of the late 80's/early 90's you will most likely dig The Perfect Weapon.
It is too bad Jeff Speakman did'nt make many films with a decent budget.
Jeff Speakman(The master of kempo) made his debut in The Perfect Weapon, in this he plays Jeff Sanders a construction worker/drifter who brings vengeance to the Korean mobsters responsible for his mentor(Mako)'s death, his cop brother Adam(John Dye) keeps trying to tell Jeff that there are proper procedures but Jeff proceeds to hunt and pulverize anybody who gets in his way.
Speakman should have had a bigger career at least on the basis of this, The Perfect Weapon features everything you would expect from a martial arts action flick but also has a stronger narrative and a sharper pace.
That being said there are a couple of slow moments but Speakman is always there to kick life into the movie and on this level The Perfect Weapon works as a great guilty pleasure.
The fight scenes are choreographed perfectly and make Speakman out to be a good fighter, but not invincible(he does get hit a few times, quite nastily I might add).
Fantastic action, fantastic martial arts choreography make this a 10/10 movie.
Of the various martial arts movies Speakman did,l this is by the far the best, although Lord knows it is no masterpiece.
Many familiar faces (Mako, James Hong, Toru Tanaka) are on hand to support Speakman, who is about as good an actor as Segal, which is to say not particularly good.
He's a new hero in Los Angeles , an avenger who woos to revenge against the murderers.Jeff naturally takes on multiple opponents , cleaning up nasties Koreans and he beats, punch, knocks, kicks and defies the gravity with bounds and leaps.The film packs lots of violence,action-filled,thrills, and fierce combats with spectacular fighting.The story leave no cliché untouched, and the struggles are well staged.The movie is starred by Jeff Speakman, he's 6th degree blackbelt in American Kenpo Karate .
He's director of American Kenpo , an International Kenpo Karate organization with more than 50 schools.This is his greatest hit but his career failed in ¨C grade¨ movies(Hot Boyz, Deadly outbreak,Memorial day), becoming himself a failed star.Secondary cast is formed by habitual oriental good guys: Mako,Clyde Kusatsu and bad guys played by ominous villainous with offensive racial stereotypes, such as Cary Hiroyuky Tagawa, James Hong and Professor Tanaka.
There appears then, to be a subtle not so subtle match up between Kenpo Karate and Tae Kwon Do. The climax of this tension comes as Speakman confronts Leo Lee (Bandana) in the gym, looking for a guy who is 'good in Tae Kwon Do.' Does the ensuing three on one fight symbolize the clash of fighting styles?
Anyone with a decent amount of martial arts experience will note that in the final warehouse scene, the knife attacks are undoubtedly more akin to training exercises than to real street techniques, but then again that may have been purposely done.
The plot is easy to follow, which makes it good for non-martial arts viewers like me.
The opening scene is memorable as Jeff shows us some of his martial arts moves in full condition, and has a good opening song.
Jeff Speakman was on the road to martial arts super-stardom since being a master of the Kenpo style of fighting; a fighting style that was new to Western audiences.
Some of the fight scenes are impressive and the fact that Speakman gets beaten up and vulnerable(this could've lent Seagal more credibility) as well as the final fight between Speakman and the big guy was one of the only good things out of this film.
my favorite martial arts movie the best off Jeff Speakman he ever did.
The Perfect Weapon is my all time favorite martial arts 90's movie and it is the best off Jeff Speakman he ever did.
This is the only movie I like the rest of the films Jeff Speakman did were just pure garbage.
It is my favorite martial arts karate action movie.
It is a style of one man army with no guns but with his bare hands using Kenpo karate martial arts skills to fight the evil on the streets.
It is a bit underrated martial arts action film and my opinion and it is a good film.
6 years later a teen Jeff (Tom Hermann) becomes one of the best students and a martial arts expert in six degree black belt.
Now he goes on his own brand of justice for the killer with his martial arts skills without any back up or weapons he's "The Perfect Weapon." This movie has everything it has a heart it has martial arts likable one man army martial arts expert Jeff Speakman.
It has full contact it has memorial bad guys James Hong and Professor Tanaka great fighting skills, great soundtrack and you can easily root for the good guy hero.
Watch the final fight with Jeff and Professor Tanaka on the end of the movie one of the best fighting scenes in the intier movie ever!!!This movie is one of the reasons that I have signed in the Karate school training karate for 2 years and I have earn orange belt In the Shotokan karate.
The Perfect Weapon get's by me a score B 7/10 a good underrated martial arts action movie.
The Perfect Weapon is a 1991 martial arts action film directed by Mark DiSalle and starring Jeff Speakman, Mako Iwamatsu, James Hong, and Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa.7/10 Grade: B Studio: Paramount Pictures Starring: Jeff Speakman, John Dye, Mako, James Hong, Mariska Hargitay, Dante Basco, Professor Tanaka Director: Mark DiSalle Producers: Pierre David, Mark DiSalle Writter: David C.
An excellent Jeff Speakman film--certainly his best..
By far Jeff Speakman's best movie, this film demonstrates his martial arts expertise.
If you like fast-paced martial arts battles, this is definitely the movie for you!.
His movements are quick and precise and the fight scenes are well made.It's a movie that features his growth in the martial art of Kenpo, a type of Karate that specializes in quick strikes to precise areas of the human body.
This is demonstrated in several of the films fight scenes.The movie is populated by a pretty forgettable supporting cast, but the action scenes more than make up for it.
The stage curtains open ...At the height of martial arts action flicks during the early 90's (ie: Steven Seagal, Jean-Claude Van Damme, and Dolph Lundgren), we have this solid entry by Jeff Speakman - a black belt in American Kenpo.
While he is there, his mentor and friend, Kim (played by Mako) is murdered and all trails lead to a Korean Mafia head.As Jeff endeavors to avenge his fallen friend, he fights his way through barriers, both on the home front and on the streets to bring Kim's killer down and justice to the forces behind it.
This is one of the best martial arts movie I've ever seen.
R.I.P. John Dye, Mako, and Professor Toru Tanaka you guys will always be remembered for your roles in this perfectly Supreme movie, from my childhood.
This is a perfect little action flick starring Jeff Speakman as a young delinquent Jeff Sanders, who was enrolled in a kenpo school.
Years later, Jeff would put his kenpo moves into good use as he takes on a mafia gang to avenge his mentor's death.
Caught in the mix is his detective brother, played by Touched by an Angel actor John Dye.This is a fast-paced movie with a simple, but compelling revenge plot, with plenty of martial arts and gun-totting action.
I particularly enjoyed seeing John Dye in an out-of-character role as the no-nonsense, gun-totting detective, versus his more tender and heavenly role in Touched by an Angel and fatherly roles in later made-for-TV movies.Overall, it is not a bad action flick.
I have never heard of Jeff Speakman before, but I remember that I saw TV program and there was a martial art film "The Perfect Weapon", I missed it
but, thanks to internet today
I cached it.
It's one of those good, old low budget action films, where you don't need to pay attention to absolutely nothing, just turn off your brain and enjoy some good early 90s action films.Well, ladies and gentleman
may I present you Jeff Speakman, a master in American Kenpo and Goju-Ryu Karate.
And we also got Mariska Hargitay as a
well not directly, but as a somewhat potential love interest to Jeff.Overall, it's a good action film, I recommend it.
after viewing this movie,one thing that really sticks out in my minds is the spectacular fight sequences.and there are a few of them.this guy really lives up to his title.as far as his acting ability goes,it's not half bad.this is after all,his film debut,and there are a lot worse actors out there.he does have some good lines,and his delivery is pretty good.the story is nothing groundbreaking or original,but at least it moves the film forward.the running time is short(only 85 minutes,and could have been lengthened,but at least it's not one of those movies that goes on for far too long.for me,The Perfect Weapon is a 7/10.
Note (to Seagal, Van Damme, et al): Once your character uses a firearm prevalently, it's no longer a martial arts movie.
Jeff Speakman's "Perfect Weapon" stands the test, rises to the level of Li's - and now Tony Jaa's - standard of representing true martial arts ability on film.
The first time in a long time that anyone brings some good, well choreographed fight scenes to the movies.We need more Kenpo experts to bring some more original movies to Hollywood.
I mean c'mon enough with the helicopter kick LOL.I think this movie really illustrates the deep content of the Kenpo system and removes it from the watered down "martial arts" of "Take My Do" that gives everybody and their sister a worthless black belt.This movie develops the plot well, has the necessary elements of a good story; captivates both males and females...Great movie!
ANYway, the movie is not bad at all, a little twist in the plot about using Jeff as a weapon for the Korean mafia to use against a rival gang.
This may not be the best martial arts movie in the world (that honor belongs to "Enter the Dragon") or even the worst (undoubtedly "Gymkata"), but it at least makes a game attempt at making a star out of a man who at least has some charisma and can kick and chop with the best of them.In "The Perfect Weapon", Jeff Speakman plays the weapon in question, a man whose talent at kenpo is put to the test when a local crime lord puts the squeeze on a business ran by a man (Mako) who is Speakman's oldest friend.
And once said friend is killed, our favorite Weapon uses hands, feet, sticks and drop-kicks to get revenge the good old-fashioned way: the highest body count wins.As I said before, Speakman has some charisma and is able to use his martial arts in a conceivably realistic manner.
In fact, there are at least one or two good scenes for him (the fight in the antiques shop, the back alley attack by a group of thugs)and just about everybody involved including Mako, Hong, Dye, Tanaka and Kusatsu (except, maybe, for Hargitay, who gets little to do here and considerably less screen time).In the end, it's a good effort but for all the other Seagals, VanDammes, Schwarzeneggers and Stallones out there, Speakman is just another seven-foot center who can make the three-point shot, so to speak.Five stars for "The Perfect Weapon" - maybe not "Perfect", but indeed passable entertainment..
A good Martial Arts film.
I enjoyed this film and would recommend it to anyone, especially Martial Arts fans.
It's one of my all-time favorites, and I think it's one of Mr. Speakman's best movies.
This violent and braindead action romp sees Speakman in his first starring role, playing stubble-faced beefcake Jeff equipped with Kempo-Karate skills and a keen sense to avenge the murder of his friend at the hands of some evil Korean Mafioso.
Speakman's vehicle is a good showcase (he's great with sticks), but this isn't going to break any records: with all its spirit and muscle, TPW makes for fun, unintelligent B-movie madness that requires nothing more than a brief flirting..
The martial art practised by Jeff Speakman's character in the movie is Ed Parker's American Kenpo.
The plot of this movie is pretty predictable (for a martial arts movie) but the fight scenes are very good.
In the Perfect weapon, the star, Jeff Speakman has a high degree black belt in kempo.
Jeff Speakman stars as Jeff Sanders a drifter who vows revenge after the Korean Mafia kill his mentor (Mako) In this emptyheaded and overall dull chop-socky actioner.
Jeff Speakman may have a few good moves up his sleeve but his acting ability leaves a lot to be desired..
Bad plot (though good for a B-movie), good fast-paced fight scenes, at most a 5 out of 10.
The plot is predictable, the fights were fair and Jeff acts about as well as the sofa he beats with some sort of weapon in one scene..
The Perfect Weapon is the best Jeff Speakman movie we've seen to date..
Jeff Sanders (Speakman) has been training in Kenpo since he was a young boy.
Along his quest, he must utilize the help of his brother, a cop named Adam Sandler...er...Sanders, and a young punk kid named Jimmy (Fist of the North Star (1995) and Blood and Bone (2009)'s Basco) but it's going to take all of Jeff's Kenpo skills to fight off Yung (Hong), Kai (Tagawa) and the intimidating Tanaka (played, unsurprisingly, by Professor Toru Tanaka).
Find out today...The Perfect Weapon is the best Jeff Speakman movie we've seen to date...and why wouldn't it be: it was his first starring role, as well as being a major studio release tailor-made to showcase his Kenpo talents to the world.
Anyway, The Perfect Weapon, despite a few flaws, would prove to be the last theater-released movie from the action boom of the day.
The good thing is that the action is effective, with Speakman delivering the goods in a great many fight scenes.
(The movie is dedicated to the legendary Ed Parker and the "spirit of Kenpo".) Director Mark DiSalle ("Kickboxer") does a decent job, telling a tight little story that clocks in at a respectable 85 minute run time.
A supporting cast full of familiar faces also helps matters a lot.Speakman plays a guy named Jeff, a loner estranged from his family who decides to give his old mentor and friend Kim (Mako) a call.
When Kim is murdered, Jeff's ripe for revenge, although he will have to deal with the presence of his younger brother Adam (John Dye), who's now a police detective.You do know you're in for some fun with a group of actors that includes James Hong, Beau Starr, Professor Toru Tanaka, Clyde Kusatsu, and Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa.
Speakman is typical as a martial arts actor, largely wooden but getting by on his skills alone and watching him fight dozens of bad guys dynamically is great stuff.Filling out the one-dimensional roles are plenty of notable faces.
As the film takes place in a Korean district and is made in America, all of the staple Asian actors show their faces in various roles: Mako as the Kempo teacher, James Hong as the slimy villain, Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa as a henchman and my personal favourite, Professor Toru Tanaka.
Jeff Speakman, John Dye, Mako, Toru "Professor" Tanaka and James Hong star in this 1991 action film.
Jeff Sanders (Speakman) is a martial artist/drifter who returns home to visit his long-time family friend and mentor, Kim (Mako).
I've always liked this film and Speakman is good in it.
Strictly by-the-numbers American-made martial arts revenge outing that's a product of the times, which sees Jeff Speakman (in attempt to make him somewhat an action star) as a Kenpo karate expert (there's no acting there - as watch the concentration in the hypnotic intro backed by the tune "I Got the Power") who returns home and goes about avenging the death of a family friend that was killed by the Korean mafia.
Watch as Speakman remembers the good times, but also the bad.
Vowing revenge, Jeff takes on all of the families, using his martial arts skills to find the man who killed his friend......Released in a time where you dint need any acting skills to garner a major release, just a martial arts, The Perfect Weapon is another one of those revenge movies that showcase the leads skills.
Song, and then the rest of the film we follow him in the worlds tightest jeans so he can find out who poured Ketchup all over Makos face.There are a few fight scenes, and one is particularly impressive, but after that, the film focuses more on Sub-Zero, and he becomes the Jaws of the movie, and the star, the person who has been given the chance to showcase his skills, is resorted to hit a sofa with his Kenpo weapons.It all ends up with a big explosion and Jeffs dad nodding in approval.It's a shame no one else did, the man had potential to be up there with Seagal and Van Damme.Instead, he ended up worse off than David Bradley. |
tt2785390 | America: Imagine the World Without Her | Setting the stage for a presentation of their views, D'Souza and Sullivan provide counterfactual histories in which George Washington is killed during the Revolutionary War, or the country is divided following civil war, creating a world without America that would be vastly worse off. D'Souza identifies himself as an Indian immigrant who chose America, and has been impressed with what a unique force for good it is, something Americans have traditionally agreed with. He claims modern leftists are “telling a new story”, however, contradicting traditional veneration for America in order to “convince a nation to author its own destruction” and “unmake the America that is here now.” He then challenges several "indictments" made against the country and American exceptionalism, including sociology professor and activist Michael Eric Dyson's claim that “Thievery" was the “critical element” for “American empire” and historian and activist Ward Churchill's assertion that the US is the world's new evil empire, and says that 1960s Chicago radical Saul Alinsky, historian Howard Zinn, and others have promoted guilt and resentment regarding wealth inequality that has helped shape the political careers of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
D'Souza argues that America's wealth has been created, not stolen. He says the $700 used to purchase colonial Manhattan from American Indians could buy many desolate parcels globally today, but that individual industry has made New York real estate worth billions. He states that in Europe, India, and elsewhere most countries have been founded on conquest, and observes that the American pattern of wealth creation hasn't been the universal norm. He cites examples like Arab historian Ibn Khaldun preferring looting to trade and says that merchants form Hinduism’s second-lowest social caste.
The film argues that American Indians exhibited this "conquest ethic" among themselves, and that most of the American Indian depopulation that occurred during European colonization resulted from the accidental transmission of plagues (which had earlier devastated Europe), not from an intent to wipe out a people. The film argues that modern American Indians have little interest in returning to their hunter-gatherer past. In an interview, Senator Ted Cruz compares the Texas Revolution to the American Revolution. Professor and Reconquista advocate Charles Truxillo is contrasted with an interviewed American of Mexican descent who says he has no desire to return to a poverty and crime ridden Mexico and instead wants to live the "American Dream".
D'Souza says that slavery impeded American development, rather than boosting it. The film argues that slavery was an omnipresent phenomenon for most of human history, but that its abolition was "uniquely Western", noting the rarity of a "great war fought to end slavery" like the American Civil War. According to the film the Declaration of Independence essentially says “liberty is the solution to injustice,” a “promissory note” cashed throughout history by Americans such as Martin Luther King, Jr.. C.J. Walker, the black entrepreneur and daughter of slaves who is regarded as America's first self made female millionaire, is cited as an example of the type of individual success story the American system allows that is ignored by historians like Zinn because it undermines their leftist narrative. Columbia University economist Jagdish Bhagwati is shown saying that the “world is embracing the free market,” for which there is “no reason for us to be apologetic.” The film attempts to outline how somewhat free enterprise and consumer "choice" rather than "coercion", have possibly raised living standards by making existing goods cheaper and creating new ones. | historical | train | wikipedia | And I mean conservatives not just cons in prisons like D'Souza.Otherwise very disappointed that IMDB calls this collection of anti America elitist lies a "documentary"!
I wonder if there is an effort by the enemies of the West to release crap like this so people are tricked and become hateful and the country is divided.This film was just in-your-face insulting rubbish..
In what sort of a country can anyone put a bunch of lies financed by the elites on film and call it a documentary?Inbreds, Fox News followers, Sinclair viewers and the elite will love it.
then I am Peter Pan and my wife is a leggy supermodel and Donald Trump is a leader and he cares for the poor and there is such a thing as clean coal and Trump is draining the swamp by hiring all the standard insiders, generals, CEO and millionaires to his staff and cabinet and his wife didn't do softcore porn when she came here and worked as an illegal alien and those Made In China tags on his merchandise are just jokes like a gag and he actually manufactures them here and right-wingers believe in freedom of speech and government staying out of people's business except when a football player wants to speak his mind etc etc etc.Conservatives and just that.
Dinesh tries his best to manipulate the narrative to show that Leftists are only plain wrong, but he forgets to explain how the new deal, unions, taxes and comraderie built America and its great middle class.
This is the worst misleading piece of fiction that I have ever seen (and I watch Fox News' rage machine) and one of the most lying movies of my long life, because Dinesh's refutation of a kind and cooperative America is a stunning middle finger to all that is good and beautiful about America!.
Maybe it was a movie after all and just a work of fiction.It fails in many ways to recognise there are many ways to be imperialist and that just because you do it in a new and different way, that does not make it excusable.If you are a red, white and blue, stars and stripes died in the wool American or lover of all things American, you'll probably get the warm and fuzzies watching this.
This film shows you the true history of the United States of America (D'Souza the director is oing his best to grow close to real Americans here through this good work) and why liberal communist socialist diversity PC feminist haters are wrong.
Revisionist Garbage marketed as being correcting revisionist history Anyone with a semblance of understanding of philosophy, history and logic can tell you the garbage this video puts forth.It uses logical fallacies such as confirmation bias, circular reasoning, ad hominem attacks, begging the question,equivocation, false dilemma choice etc.It regularly suggests there is only two options two possible outcomes, either what happened or a horrible second alternative, when in truth there are myriads of 3rd, 4th, 5th and multiple other sequences of events that could have happened or actions been done by America.It regularly uses the argument everyone else was doping this evil, therefore this wasn't evil.
the liberal argument is not that America is worse than say Nazi Germany, USSR, British Colonialism, just that it is our modern present day remaining Colonialist Imperialist nation.Throughout history there has always been one, committing horrible crimes on the weaker nations to devour their resources and increase its own imperial agendas.
So America leads the way, and the other nations follow like the sidekicks of criminals.Sadly this program seems mind opening with its flash marketing skills, and the verbosity of its words, and deliverance, but when it comes to the staple of its argument it is deficient.
Much like modern American junk food, nutritiously non-existent, artificial, chemically laced, poisonous, and laced with hyper fat, hyper sugar, hyper stimulants, addictive agents and feel good compounds.keep on a diet such as this and you will end up suffering from its consequences.or you can wake up, and realise what this tripe is for what it is, accept the truth and improve your body, your nation.Or leave it as it is, and let America the nation die of obesity, diabetes, hearth disease, liver failure and every other metaphorical example you can think of..
It opens early on with a scene in which George Washington is shot and killed in a battle, and then never discusses how history would have changed.It goes beyond mere revisionist history, declaring that Howard Zinn is not a historian, and then using Sen. Ted Cruz as a supposedly historical expert to provide the most simplistic and revisionary version of the basis for the Texas Revolution (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Revolution); claims that Sol Alinski was trained by Frank Nitti (one of Al Capone's strongmen), that everything America has done is right, Hillary Clinton was corrupted by Sol Alinski in her youth, and America is in dire trouble if someone of the producer's status can be arrested for violating it's laws.If I am going to be subjected to propaganda, I would at least expect to be saved paying the admission fee and being lied to about what I am getting..
Save your money and buy yourself a real history book and a clue.The film spirals out of control after laughable "reasoning" for how the film maker tries to connect Obama and Hillary Clinton to learning everything they know from Chicago mob bosses.At the end of the day "America" isn't really about history or narratives, it's about arguing that any change in economic policy favoring the poor can only be traced back to people hating the United States of America..
(Saw it last night because I wanted to go see a movie and this was the one that worked for my time-frame.)It's incredibly sad that the producer of "Schindler's List" is now working with a criminal to make films that are little better than Nazi propaganda.
Being in the film & television Industry, I have to walk a fine line of how I reveal my morals, my values, my principles and my beliefs...but I'm afraid to.I've seen some of the most detestable acts of anti-Americanism you could possibly imagine in Hollywood, by people who THINK they know better...
The other, is to create victimization, so that they can take hard working people's money, by flapping their gums and claiming all sorts of victimization.I love our country and I wish people would see this inspiring film..
Bravo Mr. D'Souza, for revealing the truth of History in such a factual and articulate manner...and God Bless you for your passion for our country.Having earned a Masters is History from Oxford University in Great Britain, I've learned and seen first hand what's happening to America right now.
There are anti-American people that will want to alter or pervert the history of a country to support their version of why they are motivated to act or speak about their country the way they need to.Specifically regarding this film, I knew that most Indians (80-85%) in America died of diseases carried over from Europe and other countries.
I also knew that there were thousands of Black Slave Owners before the Civil War. I also know, that Americans have died around the world, while attempting to aid the oppressed in other "Freedom Seeking," lands.People that would believe otherwise, have an subversive agenda..
Dinesh D'Souza hit another homerun with his new political documentary America.
100 years ago my Irish Grandparents made the sail across the Atlantic Ocean to come to this great country...and our eyes filled with tears several times during the negative comments from the people that hate her.We knew that America was a special land because of everyone that had arrived before us and told us how beautifully rich the land was and about all the opportunity and freedoms abound.This movie exemplifies and echoes the reasons and passionate feelings we still have today.
"America: Imagine the World Without Her" is a slickly produced and entertaining documentary that attempts to fill a need in the US for a counter to hegemonic anti-American voices on the left in academia and media.
Dinesh D'Souza is back, and sounding the alarm with his new documentary, "America: Imagine the World Without Her," based on his best selling book of the same name.
He includes some particularly disturbing statements, and rarely seen video from 'star of the left' Saul Alinsky, whose book "Rules for Radicals" was required reading for young political students like Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama.
If the future of America is to be a battle for minds and hearts, this film speaks with a force that may prove helpful for those who wish to remain proud of the founding fathers, our history of freedom and enterprise, and hope for a future in which America, as we know it, will flourish and continue to exist.Even if you remain unconvinced by Mr. D'Souza's thesis, you will come away with a greater knowledge of America's past, and a little brain food to chew on before you engage in your next political discussion..
Even though I consider myself to be fairly well-read on US History, I learned some things from this film.It was nice to see that at least some people in this country are not afraid to speak their minds about history and take controversial issues head-on.
This film Ina's the ability to really bring to light many misperceptions about issues like slavery, capitalism, Columbus and the Native American people.
Dinesh Disouza has done us all a great service by explaining the prevailing leftist (Marxist inspired) view of American history which is everywhere on college campuses and even many high schools.
But the left chooses to overlook this for the sake of their own genocide agenda to discredit this nation's history and those who built it, and yet, to these critics, it's the worst movie out of over 40 listed and currently in theaters.
The important distinction is that the European deaths are not declared to be "genocide" by the Left, while the Native American deaths are.The first half of the film is a generous presentation of America-damning arguments made by the Left.
Like the picturesque aerial footage shown in a memorable section of the film (as Dinesh flies over parts of our county), the mental tour he takes of America's world-view landscape is a wild ride.
And, I am tired of having to apologize to these people on the Left when I say they are not Patriotic – well, this film is (using Obamas words) really a line in the sand - if you hate this movie you cannot be a Patriot.
The movie has its technical issues, but the overall GOOD message about our country strikes deeply at the heart of the Left's New History of America.
This is the great new "idea" of America that Bono speaks of in the film, in a very moving speech.
I truly hope that this film can be the start of a new era in historically accurate education in American history - tho it may be too late.
Dinesh D'Souza's "America" should be titled "I Can't Imagine A World Without Her." From start to finish this is an exemplary work, a masterpiece.
America, the movie brings to light that fact and why we need to relearn our history.
The film "America" brought tears to my eyes, and that says a lot (I'm not a partisan sycophant that indemnifies America for the wrongs that the country IS responsible for - But I am an independent thinker that can appreciate the inordinately more awe-inspiring acts and contributions the country is also responsible for).The film did such an excellent job of addressing the misinformation about America's history (some of which I believed until this movie provided some very interesting facts missing from the conventional school curriculum), and elucidating what makes this country so great.It's like the iPhone - You don't know how much it has to offer until you've experienced it..
This is an excellent film that shows how history really unfolded and the way we learned as a patriotic nation.
The film transitions (rather abruptly) about two-thirds of the way through from a historical retelling of America to a political thrust against those who have weaponized the American Shame narrative, namely Saul Alinsky and his disciples.
I spent a good portion of the movie with tears running down my face because it taps into the pride which I feel in having been part of this great country.I have one question for the America HATERS who will try to silence this film: If America is such an evil country - WHY ARE SO MANY PEOPLE CLAMORING TO COME HERE?
Voting for the infantile Marxist despot a second time, however, is far more sinister, because you have to be actively not paying attention.But at this late stage, after this despicable, loathsome pretender to the throne has laid waste to our economy, our churches, our traditions, and used the very organs of government power AGAINST the people, to still support Obama means either a) one is too stupid to understand what it means, b) one is so indoctrinated and saturated by the relentlessly liberal broadcast media that they can't tell what is true and what is false, or c) agrees with the blackguard's devious agenda of destroying America's underpinnings and relegating us to third-world status, as "payback" for his laundry list of imaginary offenses..
This movie then takes their revisionist history , point by point and not only destroys them but shows America as the great gift to the world it really has been.
While it does point out that there have been dark periods in our history, it also uses scenario after scenario to demonstrate how much positive change America (and the American ideal) has instigated the world.
A movie like this which is worth seeing BY EVERY American is only shown in one small theater in one small town on Long Island in New York,the whole of New York.THE TRUTH,or how an impartial person watching it and able to make their own decisions]is being censored.YES CENSORED IN America!.
As Dinesh points out, America is the only country that fought a war to end slavery and today Americans lead the fight to end slavery (sexual and otherwise) throughout the world.
D'Souza definitely makes a case against the simplistic view that America is all bad.One of his first targets is author Howard Zinn whose "People's History of the United States" is here characterized as an exercise in cherry-picking.
Americans live up to that ideal as often and perhaps more often than they don't.For example, D'Souza, who narrates the movie from beginning to end, says that every other continent had slavery before America (by which he always means the U.S.) existed.
This is arguably a bad way to go about things from America's own point of view: why does this country keep liberating other countries—at great cost in blood and treasure—only to set them free?
D'Souza does spend a good deal of the movie dealing with the charge that America conquered land from Native Americans and Mexico.
Top this off with grand military battles and you have a film destined for greatness, but the arbitrators of all that is good seem to already have their minds made up with a bunch of empty-headed reasons and have casted "America" (2014) away like trash.
Only let us look back ten years to another documentary that was far less grand: "Fahrenheit 9/11" (2004) and read the comments of a gushing review, "Extremely one-sided in its indictment of the Bush administration, but worth watching for the humor and the debates it'll stir." That film got 83 percent on Rotten Tomatoes whereas "America" (2014) gets 12 percent.
America, movie by Dinesh D'Souza: The melting pot...
America has now migrated to a system, process and people that leave us questioning whether our Constitution is under attack, with the perception that individual rights are removed on a daily basis by many who, through the guilt of shame, want to make us feel that America is a nation built on lies, deception and theft of natural resources at the detriment of others.Nothing is further from the truth, Dinesh D'Souza takes viewers through historical facts that left us bewildered because these details were not part of our historical lessons of the past.
I am so appreciative for Dinesh D'Souza's work and dedication here.I want to learn American history now!
One of the best reasons to see "America" is for the historical facts Dinesh D'Souza presents that have been expunged from history books and classes in the 21st Century.
This man is proud to be American (a LEGAL immigrant) and loves the 'idea' of America so much, he takes many personal risks to share his patriotism, passion and fears with the movie-going public.
Well, that is not what the director of this atrocity believes!The film makes many stupid arguments, and eventually turns into Dinesh D'Souza going on about how this country is apparently flawless and such, while it clearly isn't.
'America The Movie' Dinesh D'Souza - 5***** Review, Trailer and Tickets Here >>> http://roadtosuccess.us/?p=2144D'Souza gives time to both sides, even bringing in a number of Sixties radicals and presents a difficult subject well without laying all the blame on the President.
A few turn of events like Hitler with the Atom bomb could have changed everything...and still can today more than ever.We believe D'Souza well lays out his real message that the Obama government is trying to change the country from its captitalistic roots of free enterprise to a socialistic one where government is a stronger force in America while less respected as the world leader it has always been..
I would like to have seen the movie that the trailer leads us to believe America is about.
Dinesh D'Souza's America: Imagine the World Without Her was compelling enough even with his biased view on the current presidential administration. |
tt0083803 | Deadly Games | The first episode introduces the protagonist, Dr. Gus Lloyd, an Antimatter physicist, engineer and video game designer who has created a live-action game in his spare time to exert his indignant feelings about people in his life who have all made his life hell on Earth (his father, his ex-wife's mother, his ex-wife's divorce lawyer, his ex-girlfriend, his former employer, a high school football-Quarterback bully, his old camp counselor, etc.); the villains of the game are modeled after all these people. The master villain is Jackal, who is a combination of the devil and Gus' father. The Jackal wears a Vanilla white Ice Cream suit and drives a Chrysler convertible to match.
The hero is "The Cold-Steel Kid," a warrior trying to save the dying world, dons commando wear, and is naturally modeled after Gus himself, and the sometime helplessly captive, sometime active heroine ingenue The Kid is always trying to rescue — "The Girl" — is based on Lauren Ashborne, Gus' ex-wife (wearing the kind of dress of a "Damsel in distress").
In an accident involving an experimental laboratory project, Jackal and the villains step out of the game and into the real world to cause the apocalyptic carnage and domination they were programmed to for the game.
Each week, one of the villains tries to carry out an evil plot according to the rules of the video game, and Gus, Lauren, and Gus' friend Peter Rucker try to defeat and destroy said villain. Almost indestructible and superhumanly strong, each villain is programmed with specific weapons and weaknesses based on that villain's "theme"; e.g., "Killshot's" Achilles' Heel was being sprayed with water, The Boss would "fire" people with exploding pink slips and his weak link was red ink, The Evil Shirley's was dirt and she would be wiped out by having a house fall on her, The Camp Counselor would get burned by being hit with charcoal and would be killed-off by an arrow shot right through his own bulls-eye, The Practical Joker could only be defeated by his master prank being foiled, The Divorce Attorney was a being that sucked up electricity and distributed it in the form of lightning bolts, The Motivational Speaker literally ate bologna and killed people with a gun that ejected audiocassettes and would reduce them to nothing but his audiotape, and he could only be destroyed by eating his own words. He could be slowed down with shots from a paintball gun.
Another weekly bad guy was a corrupted car mechanic that tasered people with a calculator and would be destroyed by seeing his own reflection. And of course, The Garbage Man was damaged by cleaning products and The Orthodontist (as well as his assistant) had an aversion to sugar. All the henchmen were instantly obliterated—going up in smoke and blue light when the Jackal's evil weekly master scheme was foiled. The Jackal's own vice was being hit with a baseball—the very one autographed by Bobby Mercer that Gus got from the only baseball game he ever went to with his own father. Jackal is present in every episode, commanding the other villains and vexing the heroes, usually with a glass of champagne in hand. | murder | train | wikipedia | Not all Bad. Not as bad as some reviewers will have you believe, but this isn't Don't Look in the Basement or Re-Animator either.
This film centers on a plucky gal named Keegan (Jo Ann Harris) whose sister is murdered in the opening scene.
She returns home to solve the case with help from Vietnam vet sheriff Sam Groom who is one of two suspects.
One of the main flaws is that throughout the film, we, the viewers, know that the killer can either be one of two Vietnam vets: the surly, ladiesman sheriff who screws everything in site or his battle buddy Steve Railsback who operates the local theater.
Needless to say, the suspense was lacking.
The viewer has two suspects.
Which Vietnam vet is killing off all the pretty things in town?
VIOLENCE: $$$ (This won't disappoint gore hounds but what will disappoint them is the time between death scenes.
There is far too much filler in the script--displayed as characterization--that will assuredly lead the less entranced viewer reaching for the fastforward button.
The opening scene has Alexandra Morgan strangled.
Later Colleen Camp gets hers in a pool, but it is a poorly filmed scene.
Denise Galik gets throttled after a romp in bed.
Other dames get attacked also).STORY: $$$ (The story starts off very promising: a sexy woman gets pushed out a window to her death.
Shortly thereafter we are introduced to a unique character, Keegan, that isn't your ordinary screaming head but a wise acre.
Keegan is fun for about half an hour, but once the story starts to sputter, Keegan's antics become less eccentric and more annoying.
Also, the story deals with a board game but the screenwriter failed to mix that subplot into the story effectively).ACTING: $$ (Jo Ann Harris, although interestingly plucky at the beginning, will indeed get on your nerves.
A character like that needs to be a co-star at best and they had that in the acid tongued waitress that Denise Galik masterfully played.
The lead needn't be that off-putting.
Sam Groom was alright as the sheriff but fans of Steve Railsback and Colleen Camp need not apply.
Colleen has about ten minutes screen time and when she gets killed in the pool, you can hardly tell--given the poor lighting--that it was Colleen who even entered the water).SEXUALITY: $$$$$ (Here you won't be let down, unless this isn't your thing.
The lovely Alexandra Morgan (I believe that's her name) has a lengthy topless scene in the opening scene of the film.
She is well put together if you know what I mean.
Jo Ann Harris has a brief topless scene before entering the shower and the heavenly Denise Galik goes threads free in bed with Sam Groom)..
Totally worthless....
Much more frightening than the actual movies themselves is the fact that one continues to discover slasher movies that were released in the 1980's!
This decade truly is an inexhaustible source for low-budgeted and inane horror pictures that often ended up in oblivion shortly after coming out.
"Deadly Games" is such a prototype example of the righteously forgotten 80's slasher!
The plot and characters are derivative, the killings are unimaginative and the attempts to insert humor are downright pitiable.
Tension apparently was an unavailable option as well.
The plot drags slowly and spends way too much time focusing on bimbos and losers cheating on each other.
Past halfway in the film I still hadn't figured out which characters are sleeping together whilst they aren't supposed to, and who the hell cares about that anyway?
The strange murder of a voluptuous town girl (sadly, the hottest chick dies first) reunites a group of old friends and makes them speculate together about what could have happened.
One of them is a copper though not a very convincing one investigating the case, one girl is the wannabe cynical sister of the first victim and all the rest are dispensable dorks.
There are plenty of bone-headed who are waiting, no
BEGGING to get slaughtered but nothing happens.
At a certain point, the ultimate low point of the film, you're actually watching at how three of the characters (one of them being the copper) sit in a theater and see a film
for several long minutes!
What's the freaking point?!?
And why can't that chick stop talking to herself or at least realize her jokes and one-liners are totally not funny?
If the theater scene wasn't painfully dire enough yet, they carry on playing a board game and football whilst the most abysmal 80's song can be heard.
How is this relevant?
And you, you stupid cop, shouldn't you be looking for the killer?
In case you haven't noticed yet, "Deadly Games" is one of the worst and most redundant slashers of the entire 80's, and that's saying something, since we mentioned the inexhaustible offer before.
It doesn't even deserve to be called a slasher, as the slashing is next to none!
This is a pile of steaming rubbish about a bunch of losers struggling with midlife crises whilst still in their early thirties.
Avoid like the plague..
"You Lose".
This is a pretty messy movie.
I saw it on cable when I was young and new slashers appeared every week on cable.
It appealed to me at the time because the character who played "Keegan" was spunky and interesting, and the premise was, if I understand it correctly (somehow hinging on a gay subtext...?) unique for its time.
There was also little else to watch back then.The story, such that it is, involves the murders of young women in a town, and the solving of those murders by the spirited Keegan, who has just moved there, and at least starts OUT as a character that isn't an empty-headed cliché.But who can tell what's going on?
This movie just flaps along, presenting one disjointed scene after another, and characters you're never encouraged to care about in scenes that fall flat and look drab and ugly.
The presence of the dynamic and almost always insanely fun Steve Railsback (soon to appear in "The Devil's Rejects") is barely noticed.
It all becomes dull as a white color crayon very quickly with no gore, no tension, no logic and no story to speak of.
This is why God invented the fast forward button.
Or better yet, the "Stop" button.
Put in another movie--any other movie--and enjoy a good evening's entertainment.I have a feeling this was cobbled together from the remains of several other movies somehow, like how Roger Corman's "Hollywood Blvd," which this resembles in a weird way, was assembled.
I hadn't seen this for years, saw it for a buck on VHS and promptly recorded Scooby-Doo cartoons over it so it would have SOME value anyway....
Deadly boredom..
After the death of a young lady in a quiet town, Keegan the sister of the victim shows up and gets tangled in the daily life of the town inhabitants.
Soon there's another victim, and Keegan takes upon herself to figure out who the killer is while wooing with the cop who's on the case.Aggravating!
Here's another case where the video artwork does a good enough job selling what is a generically spineless and tedious slasher fare of the 80s, where it deserves to languish in obscurity.
It's a mystery story at heart, but director Scott Mansfield looks like he was influenced by the slasher craze (with certain set-pieces) that formulated in this period to deliver an indistinguishable feature of too many spontaneous changes in its patchwork direction.
This would go on to devoid the structure of tension.What starts off amusingly decent (some lady stripping and fondling her breasts in the front doorway of her house?!), transcends in to a sluggish (if peculiar) melodrama of redundant sequences involving endless interactions (like a playing a board game, while sharing the good times with a trite sounding song accompanying) and vacant characters, only to be broken up by some tame and non-suspenseful killings.
The two elements never entirely gel together.
The premise is cluttered with predictable and perplexing details, which only made me yawn and look at the clock.
The mystery/or the slasher side of the story is half-baked that when it comes to the reveal of our ski-masked, glove wearing killer it's quite unsatisfactory.
That's if you've made it that far, but the ending is an unusual choice.Not helping the slight story and turgid script, was that the visuals were poorly lit and cinematography looked dusky (however there are moments like the pointless football game that's extremely well shot).
I thought maybe it was the video, but the lighting in certain scenes was non-existent, which leads to the assumption that it was due to the production's low-budget.
Was this the case of trying to rally up mood and atmosphere?
If that was so, it didn't always work despite the best efforts by director Mansfield.
Were it seemed to pay off was the choice of some eerie, high-pitched sound effects and music score.
These were well executed.The performances are somewhat acceptable with leading actress Jo Ann Harris making head-way with her quick-witted attitude and sincere appeal, even with that somewhat squeaky voice.
Colleen Camp is fine, Sam Groom is laughably unconvincing in his role and a disinterested Steven Railsback is pretty much wasted.This mundane and diluted effort can only roll up a 2 on this dice and leaves you thinking maybe it should have discarded it's slasher strokes..
These "Games" are no fun....
I somehow thought this movie would turn out to be an undiscovered treasure, but no such luck!
Visually murky and poorly plotted, this is basically an oh-so-familiar retread of "Halloween", though the director shows some talent and tries to surpass the limitations of the script.
The lousy ending does not help.
Deadly Games.
The film starts off as any proper slasher film should - with an opening scene murder.
The quality of the VHS I have is poor, so I couldn't see everything that happened during it, but it was a good attempt at creating intensity.
After the first kill, we get introduced to the police investigating the crime as well as the victim's sister Keegan (a reporter) who had left the town years prior.
A lot of the middle portion of the film is Keegan seeing some old friends who still live in town and reconnecting with them.
There are some scenes with a creepy theatre manager named Billy mixed in as well to create suspicion.
The town's main police officer is also a suspect, and some of the movie is spent showing the female lead (Keegan) falling for him despite the fact that he is married.
A few of the other women in the town are killed off leading to Keegan facing off against the murderer.Deadly Games could have been so much better.
It has some great things going for it; a killer wearing a black ski mask, cool movie title, decent plot...
but the makers of "Deadly Games" add so much unnecessary filler that it becomes quite a bore.
We get scenes of the character's playing sports and having a party, which are really pointless by the end of it all.
There is also one strange choice by the director of "Deadly Games", for some reason he has Keegan act as if she doesn't even care that her sister died.
She just comes back to town and is all cheery with her friends and mother.
Oh, there is this strange two minute musical montage of Keegan and the two suspects playing a board game, pretty much the only connection the film has to it's title next to the fact that we see the killer playing around with the board game on one or two occasions.
They could have done so much more with it, but they didn't.Acting wasn't that bad, I like that the Keegan character is different from your regular/ordinary slasher film heroine.
The ending was ridiculous and insulting in a way.
You spend the whole hour and a half watching it for..
Anyways, I'd recommend this strictly to horror completests.
It drags on way too much, and because of that you lose focus and lose interest.4/10.
If you watch Deadly Games, you lose..
1982 slasher Deadly Games (not to be confused with the similarly titled '84 slasher Fatal Games) begins promisingly enough, getting its first scene of gratuitous female nudity in well before the opening credits have finished—that's got to be some kind of record.
The topless beauty is then chased through her very dark house by a killer dressed in black (including regulation ski mask and gloves), before the woman falls through a window to her death on some rocks.
So far so good.Sadly, after this encouraging start, it's all downhill.
The victim's sister, Keegan (Jo Ann Harris), turns up at the scene of the crime, and a more irritating character it would be hard to imagine: within minutes you'll be wishing it was her who took the face plant onto the rocks, the woman's goofy mannerisms and constant, supposedly amusing quips proving irritating in the extreme.
And she is the main character for the next eighty minutes or so.
Not so great.The remainder of the film primarily consists of Keegan developing a relationship with married cop Roger Lane (Sam Groom) and a friendship with Roger's best buddy, oddball theatre owner Billy Owens (Steve Railsback), one of whom is obviously the killer.
This leads to such exciting scenes as the threesome going to the park for a football game, watching an old movie at the theatre, and playing a board game (part of a montage that is accompanied by a lousy song), all of which has sod all to do with the plot.After lots of pointless waffle, interspersed by a couple of random jump scares, a spot more nudity (during the obligatory sex scene), and a couple of bloodless murders, the film ends with a predictable chase through the darkened theatre, after which Keegan conveniently finds a gun and shoots the killer dead.
Normally this would signal the end credits, but writer Scott Mansfield has another surprise up his sleeve, one that'll leave you wondering what the heck you just watched..
Nothing special.
"Deadly Games" a.k.a Who Fell Asleep, which to be honest I did as it just dragged mostly for me.
It started off well with a young woman getting disturbing phone calls and then getting attacked by a man in a ski mask, which was quite tense and exciting, but the outcome was rather tame.The aspect that I did like about it was the characters, especially the core female cast which I did find rather interesting and blossoming romance between the female lead and the cop, which was actually kind of sweet and they had decent chemistry together.
But after a while it did get rather tedious, like for a start none of the other murders had any real spark or tension to them.
But the lead actress Jo Ann Harris was rather likable as the female lead, and quite refreshing to have someone real and plucky in the role.It's just everything else in this movie just lacks, for a start the killer was just too easy to figure out and when it came down to the final scenes, it was just well dull and total lack of proper motive, just made everything that came before it rather disappointing.All in all there are glimmers here and there of a decent slasher movie, but sadly not enough of anything special with a mystery element that just doesn't work, despite good performances, this movie was just way too boring to keep me that interested..
Not too memorable....
While not a bad movie, the only memorable parts were the deaths and the ending.
The bright spot, however, was Colleen Camp's performance.
While not the best ever, it was nice to see that she was acting as well as she was.
Unfortunately, the movie was confusing and a lot of it made no sense for a while and even until the end...
that's what I get for falling asleep through it, huh?
It was pretty boring... |
tt0097135 | Curfew | The Movieweb website provides a terse synopsis: "Two escaped brothers track down the people who sentenced them to death row, including a doctor and the judge. But when they get to the D.A. and his family they have an especially lengthy revenge plot in mind for them."
John Bush of Rovi also provides a recap in The New York Times: "After late-night carousing on too many weekends and having her parents impose a curfew upon her, a teen-age girl (Kyle Richards) speeds home to keep from winding up in hot water again but finds when she gets home that two escaped convicts (Wendell Wellman, John Putch) have taken her family hostage."
Keith Bailey of the Unknown Movies website provides a lengthier synopsis:
The movie concerns what happens one night to a family called the Davenports. Man of the house Walter (Frank Miller) is the town's successful district attorney, and he is married to a woman named Megan (Jean Brooks). Both are parents to a teenage girl named Stephanie (Richards, Halloween). One night, Stephanie leaves the house in order to go on a date with the high school quarterback, and is told by her parents that she must follow a curfew and be home by 10:00 PM. While she is out, her parents get a rude reminder from the past. Some time earlier, Walter had successfully prosecuted the Perkins brothers, Ray Don (Wellman, The Klansman) and Bobby Joe (Putch, Chain Of Command), and got the judge to sentence them to death. But both brothers have escaped from prison, and are dead set on getting even with the people responsible for sending them to death row. After first dealing with other people at the trial (including the judge), they now set their sights on district attorney Walter and his family. While Stephanie is out, the Perkins brothers make their way into the Davenport home and quickly take Walter and Megan captive, and start their long and torture-filled plan of revenge. Of course, when Stephanie eventually has to come home, she too is taken hostage, and soon the question that comes up is if the Perkins will kill Stephanie and her parents before help arrives - if ever, that is. | insanity | train | wikipedia | The Perkins brothers, Ray and Bobby were sent to prison seven years ago for the brutal rape/murder of a sixteen year old girl.
They manage to escape death row, and head back to the town to exact revenge on the psychiatrist, Judge and DA who sent 'em there.
During the night, the DA's daughter Stephanie arrives home to meet her curfew, to only find that she and her parents have unwelcome guests wanting to make their night a living hell.Nasty, quite often sleazy and sometimes effective little low-budget film, without showing a whole lot of explicit images to brew up its sadistic edge.
Its formula is a typical psychotic madmen wanting revenge in the most deranged way.
In saying that the concept has its moments, like the way the captors are slowly tortured and humiliated for basic kicks.
The script takes itself rather seriously, although are moments of dark mocking humour or the occasional unintentional slip-up of just trying too hard.
Director Gary Winick goes about things in a mechanical fashion and can't seem to sustain much suspense, however there's a steady pace throughout and the heartless attacks/killings (some off screen) have a random touch to them.
Wendell Wellman plays the dominating older brother Ray with plenty of grunt, while John Putch is the dim-witted younger brother Bobby.
They weren't bad, but still there were scenes, which are quite laughable.
Kyle Richards looks stunning, but also manages to provide a savvy and intelligent heroine out of Stephanie.
Frank Millar and Jean Brooks were engaging in their strongly fine performances as Stephanie's parents.
I bought this film as part of a '5 movies on 2 discs' pack, and was fully expecting it to be bottom-of-the-barrel stinker (my expectations were set way low having recently watched Bachelor Party Massacre and The Choke, two other awful efforts in the same set); I am happy to report, however, that although this late-80s home-invasion flick might not be the most offensive or sleazy movie in the genre (see 70s classic Fight For Your Life or Ruggero Deodato's House On The Edge of The Park for more extreme examples), it does provide enough dubious fun to warrant a watch.Kyle Richards plays Stephanie Davenport, the big-haired, big breasted (but not really that attractive) teenage daughter of a district attorney.
After a night out fending off the amorous advances of her high-school quarterback boyfriend, young Steph returns home to find that her parents have been taken hostage by two violent escaped convicts, Ray Perkins and his younger brother Bob (played by Wendell Wellman and John Putch), who are seeking revenge on those responsible for putting them behind bars.
Having already murdered the judge and psychiatrist involved in their case, the vicious psychos now intend to dish out their own brand of justice to the Davenports.After humiliating and torturing the family (including spraying the mother with paint and forcing the father to walk on broken glass), the two thugs decide to execute their prisoners; however, the appearance of Stephanie's drunk school pals, and the unexpected arrival of a policeman makes finishing the job harder than they expected.A pretty tasteless film packed with assorted moments of gratuitous nastiness (and a little bit of nudity for good measure), Curfew might not be to everyone's taste, but if you like exploitation, then you could certainly do a lot worse.
Admittedly, the story is occasionally too clichéd (Stephanie working her womanly charms on younger brother Bob was very predictable) and some moments are rather questionable (the victims are locked in a cellar full of tools, yet fail to arm themselves), but as low-budget trash goes, this one's really not that bad..
This is a perfect example of a really bad movie.
It's boring, almost nothing happens, the acting is wooden, a woman is in bath with her bra on, the score is cheap, dead bodies you can easily see them breathing, being shot and falling down remembering to thrown the gun away, ...so many reasons not to watch it but, if you are a fan of Kyle Richards, then you must see it, we know her from The Car, Eaten Alive and Halloween.
It's about two brothers coming out of jail going for revenge.
Sadly, there's too much talking and the revenge scene's are so lame.
Low budget trash.
Hope for a curfew so you don't are able to find it in your local rental shop....Why this was banned by BBFC is for me an enigma..
If you're into obscure slashers then this may be worth a passing interest, but there isn't much reason to.
Very low budget effort from the tail end of the 80's slasher scene.
Very low budget effort from the tail end of the 80's slasher scene.
If you're into obscure slashers then this may be worth a passing interest, but there isn't much reason to recommend it beyond that..
Really bad but I have seen worse.
I heard nothing but really bad stuff about this movie, the only reason I watch this was.
cease I was curious , how bad it was ( the only reason I got this movie is because it had mirror mirror (1990) On the other side , which I think is a great movie ) It a shame I can't say the same thing about this movie, I thought had really strong plot For low budget .I thought first 30 minutes if the movie was so -what entertaining and not boring for that part.Even the movie flowed really well However there are times were the scripts is so bad in places , that makes the acting Look even more worse then It already was.
My god the acting in this movie was woodenI have ever see.
From some if cast.I did not think it was all that bad (not saying it a good movie at all) but I have see.
Much worse then this ( you may think that hard to believe but it's true )I give 4 out 10.
Passable low budget shocker.
This film was apparently banned until 2002 but watching it now it's pretty hard to see why.
Although plenty of nasty and sadistic stuff happens it's nearly all off screen and implied.
There is a strange lack of tension which even the low budget shouldn't explain.
Saying that although the acting is not of a high level the two brothers (Wendall Wellman and Jon Putch) do at least try hard to inject some horror to the situation even if they don't always succeed.
The one thing I did find amusing about the film was that Deputy Dewey from the Scream movies seems almost an exact copy of the young policeman in this film.You shouldn't and probably won't watch this with anything but the lowest expectations and as long as you do that then this isn't the worst trashy movie to while away an hour and a half..
Pretty stupid and totally insignificant no-budget thriller that looks an awful lot like a typical late 80's slasher...
Oh sure, high-school jocks and slutty girls are getting killed but that's just pointless padding to increase the body count and sleaze-level.
The actual story handles about two criminal brothers that travel towards a little community with the intention to kill everybody that was jointly responsible for their prison sentence: the judge who spoke the verdict, the psychiatrist who declared them mentally sane and of course the prosecutor who said all those nasty things about them being evil and such.
The prosecutor, along with his wife and yummy Demi Moore look-alike daughter are held hostage and their only chance to survive is for the young girl to set the murdering siblings against each other.
The script contains one or two creative ideas, but "Curfew" is overall tedious and without suspense.
Actors John Putch and especially Wendell Wellman try incredibly hard to look like genuine bad boys, but they really don't convince and they often evoke unintentional laughs.
There's a lot of killing going on, but we're only served a glimpse of the action and all the rest happens off screen.
Admirers of the slasher genre, Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer, or Michael Haneke's Funny Games might get some pleasure from this very low budget thriller.
Then again, they might find it severely wanting in technical proficiency, quality of screenplay, acting, and music.
Kyle Richards stars as teen good girl Stephanie, whose short denim skirt scandalizes the locals as she's on her way to meet the big man on campus for a hot date.
After returning home early (in order to make curfew, naturally), Stephanie finds her home has been invaded by two brothers (John Putch and Wendell Wellman, who, believe it or not, is not related to William Wellman) who have gone on a bloody rampage to avenge the time they spent in jail thanks to Judge Collins (Douglas Robinson) and D.A. Davenport (Frank Miller).
Curfew may be many things, but it is definitely NOT boring, and if you can overlook all the aforementioned shortcomings (including a really awful synthesizer-based score), you'll probably enjoy it.
However, it's reputation as a video nasty is NOT deserved, and the film is relatively sedate, at least in comparison with today's 'torture porn' epics..
I wasn't expecting to but I actually quite liked it..
The Perkin brothers Ray Don (Wendell Wellman) and his younger sibling Bobby Joe (John Putch) have been in prison for seven years having been accused and convicted of murder.
Somehow they escape, it's not actually shown on screen as they just appear walking around free.
They head for a psychiatrist named Dr. Franklin (Guy Remsen) who testified against Ray and Bobby at their trial.
Next it's Judge Collins (Douglas Robinson) who sent them down, and his wife Mrs. Collins (Marla Rix).
Then it's off to see the D.A., Walter Davenport (Frank Miller) and his family, his wife Megan (Jean Brooks) and their teenage daughter Stephanie (Kyle Richards).
Stephanie is out with her friend Monica (Nori Morgan) her boyfriend Pete (Niels Mueller) and a member of the school football team and a real jock named John (Peter Nelson) who wants to have sex with Stephanie.
After a bit of dull exposition Stephanie suddenly realises she's late since her parents have set a curfew of 10 O'Clock.
Once she arrives home she finds the housekeeper Mrs. Mary Cox (Peggy Rea) dead and her parents being held hostage by Ray and Bobby.
And so starts a nightmare for Stephanie and her parents as the Perkins brothers most definitely hold a grudge!Directed by Gary Winick I actually rather liked this nasty little exploitation film, the film feeds on our fear of being attacked and violated in our own homes which we all like to consider as a safe place.
The script by Kevin Kennedy plays the entire film straight and there isn't any comic relief among all the nastiness, for which I applaud him.
I liked the shot at the end as Stephanie walked over to Ray's body which is lying face down on the floor and stands in front of him looking down as his face is a few inches away from her high heels, it seemed like a nice role reversal with him now being at her mercy at her feet.
There aren't any long scenes of character exposition that we don't want or need, except maybe Stephanie and her friends at the start but this is only a couple of sequences.
There are some nice and sleazy scenes in here too, people are made to walk over broken glass, sprayed with paint, threatened, humiliated, killed and generally abused.
I liked Wendell Wellman's villainous character Ray more than Bobby.
He isn't a particularly good actor but I started to really dislike Ray by the end so Wellman must have been doing something right.
John Putch as Bobby is more goofy and silly as he watches Porky Pig cartoons on T.V. and falls in love with Stephanie and is convinced to let her go just because she ask's him to.
There isn't much graphic gore but it's still quite a nasty film, for example a partially sighted man (Burt Remsen) is beaten with his own walking cane!
The film generally has low production values, but it isn't too bad to look at and I've seen worse.
I enjoyed watching this a lot more than I originally thought I would, it ain't no masterpiece but as pure sleazy exploitation entertainment you could do a lot worse than try to track a copy down which unfortunately probably isn't that easy.
if you're home late!!.
I hadn't heard of this low-budget home invasion horror before i bought it (cheaply, i may add, in a 5 films for 1 boxset), and i read that it had been banned in the UK since 1988 or so, and never released on video in the UK.
This of course led me to set my expectations of hardcore sleaze quite high: was was this some lost gem that had passed me by?
It certainly isn't anywhere near the same league as those movies, but then i've certainly spent an hour and a half sitting through a lot worse.In short, two brothers convicted of rape and murder escape from prison to take revenge on the authority figures they blame for their imprisonment.
they take out the judge and his wife, and set out to invade the home of the prosecuting District Attorney to torture and kill his family.
The DA's teenage daughter arrives home later than the 10 o'clock curfew she's been given, to find her home and her parents in thrall to these escaped maniacs.
Kyle Richards, as lead girl Stephanie, is cute enough in an 80s big hair kind of way and manages to hold the audience's sympathy throughout despite being surrounded early on by the most clichéd "teenage frat kids played by actors in their 20s or 30s" stereotypes going.Some nicely nasty sequences (i believe tiresome bores these days refer to it as "torture porn") ensue as Steph's father is forced to walk on broken glass, and her mother is raped and spraypainted (strangely) by the interlopers.
The most perplexing thing i found about the movie was the sequence early on chides Stephanie for her supposedly risqué outfit, asking her if she needs to borrow a pair of pants.
I was quite happy when his head was stoved in with his own gavel.Not exactly an award-winning piece of filmmaking, then; but "Curfew" transcends its obvious limitations of budget by offering up a few good scares and intense scenes.
Anyone with a liking for seeing overly conservative authority figures or teeth-grindingly inept jocks get their comeuppance will have an amusingly diverting 90 minutes..
it's difficult to conceive of a way in which this film doesn't fail, be it the writing, the acting, the direction, the lead girl's lisp and eyebrows or the music.
My God, especially the music.Strangely banned in the UK until 2002, I picked this up in a bargain bin for £1 after thinking it looked dreadful and fancied a night of junk viewing.
Far from being shocking or distressing, it's merely flaccid and irrelevant.In many ways Curfew is like a "Funny Games" with all the wit, talent and inspiration taken out.
However, the exploitative elements lack any real meaning and are showcased in a generic, derivative plot.
This very 80s movie really is the bottom of the heap and completely devoid of any merit, other than the fact that it ends..
Thank GOD, I was given a cheap copy of this movie and saved a precious few dollars.This movie is complete garbage and at times I found myself fast forwarding several parts.
I never thought that a movie where nearly everybody gets killed, can be so utterly boring.
Why this was banned is anyone's guess.The premise is a relatively simple one of misguided revenge.
After being declared mentally competent to stand trial, 2 brothers were then put away for murdering a young girl, and that's pretty much it.
We're not talking Shakespeare here, so you'd think that with such a straight forward plot, there'd be no chance of stuffing it up; yet somehow they managed to do just that, and with this abomination, stuff up royally!Somehow these 2 idiots manage to escape from prison after 7 years and set off back to the town to exact their revenge.
Inexplicably everybody who was ever involved in their incarceration still seemingly lives or works only a few doors from each other and given that this was in the days before the Internet, how they were able to locate everybody's exact home address and place of business after that length of time is anyone's guess.
Without a working brain between the 2 of them, you can't work out why these morons aren't caught within the first 5 minutes, yet when you see the towns only police officer, it's just dog of a movie that ends up chasing it's own tail.
Aside from the fact that this is supposed to be a slasher movie, you don't really see anything.
Almost all of the violence happens off camera and the editing is so poor, it feels as though entire scenes are simply missing.
A typically brainless scene has the brothers entering the office of their former psychiatrist, and after killing the receptionist, (which again you don't see), one brother says to a patient already there that her session is over.
Did I blink?The movie meanders from one pointless random act of unseen violence to another, and mixed in with all that is incessant talking about how they were so hard done by and that they wanted to be found criminally insane and let off.
The way this all plays out doesn't make a great deal of sense and despite the low budget & 80's formulaic approach, there are way too many plot holes and moments of mind-numbing stupidity to make this worth watching.
There are way better low budget slashers out there, see one of them. |
tt0104346 | Gladiator | In AD 180, Hispano-Roman General Maximus Decimus Meridius leads the Roman army to victory against the Germanic tribes near Vindobona on the Limes Germanicus. Now weary of battle, Maximus only desires to retire to his estate. But Emperor Marcus Aurelius tells him that his own son and heir, Commodus, is unfit to rule and that he will appoint Maximus as regent to help save Rome from corruption. When the Emperor reveals his plan to his son, Commodus murders him in a fit of rage.
Commodus announces he is the new Emperor and asks Maximus for his loyalty. When the general refuses, he is arrested by his officers and is sentenced to death at dawn. Maximus kills his captors and rides for his farm. He arrives too late, and finds it destroyed and his family murdered, by Commodus' orders. Maximus buries his wife and son, and then collapses from his wounds and grief. He is found by slavers who take him to Zucchabar in the North African province of Mauretania Caesariensis, where he is sold to a gladiator trainer named Proximo.
Although reluctant at first, Maximus fights in local tournaments and makes friends with two other gladiators: Juba, a Numidian who holds onto Maximus's figurines of his wife and child, and Hagen, a German. As he wins every match because of his military skills and indifference to death, he gains fame and recognition. But Proximo, who reveals that he himself was once a gladiator who fought well enough to be given his freedom, advises Maximus that being a good killer is not enough; a good gladiator is one who can "win the crowd". Proximo encourages Maximus to go to Rome and fight in the Colosseum, because Commodus has organized 150 days of games. He could then use the power he commands in the arena as leverage against the Emperor.
Maximus' first gladiatorial combat in the Colosseum is a re-enactment of the Roman victory over Carthage at the Battle of Zama. Although the gladiators (portraying the Carthaginians) are expected to be massacred, Maximus leads them to victory over the legionaries of Scipio Africanus. This prompts a surprised and delighted Commodus to enter the arena to offer his personal congratulations. When the emperor's young nephew, Lucius, also joins them, Maximus decides not to kill Commodus. Instead he reveals himself and vows to have vengeance. The Praetorian Guard is ordered to attack but this angers the crowd. Under pressure to keep the mob of Rome happy, Commodus angrily relents.
Maximus' next fight is a victory against a large undefeated gladiator. Despite Commodus's orders to kill the loser, Maximus spares his opponent's life. This defiance earns him the nickname "Maximus the Merciful" and more cheers of adulation. Angered at this outcome, Commodus enters the arena to taunt Maximus about his family's death. But the gladiator turns his back and walks away, another defiant act that is making him more popular than the Emperor.
Maximus discovers from Cicero, his ex-orderly, that his former legions remain loyal. Lucilla, Commodus' sister, and Gracchus, from the Senate, meet secretly with Maximus. He obtains their promise to help him escape Rome, rejoin his soldiers, topple Commodus by force, and hand power back to the Roman Senate. However, Commodus learns of the plot from Lucilla by threatening her son Lucius. The Praetorian Guard arrest Gracchus while others are sent to the gladiators' barracks. Maximus escapes after Proximo and his men (including Hagen) sacrifice themselves. But at the rendezvous point, Maximus is captured and Cicero is killed.
To win the crowd back, Commodus challenges Maximus to a duel in the Colosseum. However, he secretly stabs Maximus in the side before the match to gain an advantage. Nevertheless, Maximus disarms Commodus during their duel. When his Praetorian Guards refuse to give him another sword, the emperor tricks Maximus into disarming and produces a hidden knife, but Maximus drives the blade back into Commodus's throat. Maximus succumbs to his wounds shortly thereafter.
Maximus's last words are to ask for political reforms, for his gladiator allies to be freed, and for Senator Gracchus to be reinstated. While the body of Commodus is left unceremoniously on the floor of the arena, Maximus is solemnly carried away by his friends and allies to be given an honorable funeral as a "soldier of Rome". The crowd stands as a sign of respect as Maximus is carried out.
Later, a now-free Juba revisits the Colosseum at night. He buries the figurines of Maximus' wife and son at the spot where he died. He says he is now going back to his own family and promises to see Maximus again, "but not yet". | good versus evil, inspiring | train | wikipedia | The movie has a great soundtrack and a noticeable visual style that stays constant throughout the film.Horn (the bad guy) played by Brian Dennehy and his sidekick Pappy Jack played by Robert Loggia are a great combination of nastiness.
It was nice to see the relationships between all of the characters, especially between Cuba Gooding Jr. and his best friend, and their relationship with the boxing promoter.
James Marshall (A Few Good Men, Twin Peaks) stars as a young man who is forced to move to a poor neighborhood and fend for himself while his dad travels to find work and pay off his gambling debts.
He signs up with a former fighter, perfectly played by Brian Dennehey (Tommy Boy, F/X), soon he begins to form a friendship with the top boxer in the league, well-played by Cuba Gooding Jr.
After a while, the crooked boxing and an upcoming fight against a possibly brain-damaged Gooding Jr. makes Marshall re-evaluate what he's doing.
The performances of James Marshall and Brian Denehy are brilliant as are those by supporting actors Cuba Gooding Jr. and Robert Loggia.
Out of all the movies I've seen him in, this was his 2nd best (behind Jerry Maguire.) The rest of the cast also delivered good performances.
Any movie with Ossie Davis, Robert Loggia, and Brian Dennehy is going to be watchable, and Gladiator is no exception.
Unfortunately, this tale of two friends in the underground world of extreme boxing can't quite overcome either its poorly constructed screenplay or the weakness of leading men James Marshall and Cuba Gooding Jr. Of the two, Gooding is better, but Marshall is uniformly poor in the dramatic scenes, though perfectly fine in the action sequences.
When Gladiator concentrates on fight scenes--or when Davis, Loggia, and Dennehy are on screen--it's a more than adequate, though predictable, boxing drama.
i'm not sure why this movie has such a low rating(5.6/10),but it doesn't deserve it.by the way,this is not the Ridley Scott directed epic starring Russel Crowe.it's something entirely different.this movie is vastly entertaining.it's more than just a boxing movie.it's about heart and determination and beating the odds.and the power of friendship.usually theses kinds of movies are schmaltzy and sappy,with that rah ,rah,rah attitude.you know,we can all succeed and everything is hunky dory.but somehow,this movie avoids that clichéd feel and succeeds.maybe because there's also some realism within it.there is a heartbreaking scene in the movie which brings some sobriety to the picture.the fight scenes are well done and quite brutal at times.the movie also has a good soundtrack,with some great songs,which really elevate the emotional aspect of the movie,but it's not overdone.overall,i liked it a lot.for me "Gladiator" is a terrific film.I give it a 10/10.
If you watch it now you would compare it to the likes of Rocky and 8 Mile because of it's background set around a dead less town with nobody but dead weights.I think James Marshall is playing his best [performance of his career which isn't didn't last that long.
Tommy Riley played by Marshall is a loner and keeps himself to himself but because of this he attracts trouble on his first day in school since moving with his father who is an addictive drunk and gambler who is sorting his life out.
Punches are thrown and Tommy comes better off but they are interrupted by Pappy Jack played by Robert Loggia who scouts and looks for would be Boxer hopefuls to put them into the ring in illegal boxing.
Greed has an obvious big part to play in the film but what is great to see is how all the young characters bond well as they are into the same mess as each other but know there is no other way out to make money for their families and to get by.
Films like this are not made these days so appreciate this for what it did in the nineties and also probably helped some careers especially Cuba Gooding who starred in this not much longer after Boyz N The Hood.
If you get the chance then watch this as it has a story than it strong enough to better the likes of 8 Mile and has better performances and memorable characters and a the same time will make you feel good about yourself which is why gladiator is the important film that I will always remember..
If you are a fan of pugilistic big-screen experiences, this is one that at the very least will keep you entertained.For a basic plot summary, "Gladiator" tells the story of Tommy Riley (James Marshall), a white teenage youngster who (via parental circumstances) is moved into an all-black school and neighborhood.
After having enough of the constant bullying and needing money badly, Tommy is recruited into a shady boxing circuit by Pappy Jack (Robert Loggia).
After befriending similar hard-luck case Lincoln Haines (Cuba Gooding Jr.), Tommy runs headlong into "big boss" Jimmy Horn (Brian Dennehy) when a huge conflict of interest rises between them."Gladiator", in terms of themes, is about as simple a movie as ever was made.
Along the way, though, I noticed great performances from Gooding Jr. and Ossie Davis as well.If you are not a fan of boxing movies, I would say you can probably skip this one, as without an appreciate of the boxing-related themes the rest of the narrative will be a bit too simplistic to hold your interest.
I am NOT or have Never Been a (*SEAL*) Fan but his Song (*KILLER*) in This Movie is Classic along with a Couple Other Great Songs on The Soundtrack & The Plot is Simple But ENTERTAINING & You have your Good Guy Character & a Couple of Bad Guy Characters.
Sometimes this can be the best way to experience a film and occasionally you discover a cinema gem, like this one.The film is about Tommy Riley (James Marshall), a teenager who is forced to move with his father from Bridgeport to a run down, troubled part of Chicago.
He is then drawn into a world of underground boxing to pay his father's debt.The boxing scenes are well shot and choreographed, the cast including James Marshall, Cara Buono, Cuba Gooding Jr., Robert Loggia, Ossie Davis, John Heard & Brian Dennehy really make the movie.
Robert Loggia & Brian Dennehy are great if a little over the top, but the over the top performances work in this film.
Making less that $10 million at the box office upon its release in 1992, it was not a hit, and is now grossly overshadowed by a certain Russell Crowe feature of the same name which you may have seen.Regardless, despite occasionally wandering into hackneyed sports movie territory and having the same name of an Academy Award winner for Best Picture, "Gladiator" is still worth checking out.
Every boxing scene is exciting and very well shot, the acting is good from everyone involved, and the final fight is actually so unpredictable, yet plausible, that it makes one of the most memorable climaxes in sports movie history.In this movie, Tommy Riley (James Marshall, best known as playing Laura Palmer's rebel motorcycling ex-boyfriend James Hurley on TV's "Twin Peaks") finds himself attending a public high school on Chicago's rough South Side.
The only thing that's clear about his background is that his father is struggling to get back on his feet after battling crippling gambling debts.With Tommy's family owing $1250 to pestering loan sharks, Tommy finds his way into an underground amateur boxing league through bookie Pappy Jack (classic modern tough guy Robert Loggia).
Jack works for the equally corrupt boxing promoter Jimmy Horn (Brian Dennehy).Yet despite the fact that the league is technically illegal, as it is made up primarily of high school students (albeit most of the actors playing them were actually around 25), the fights draw huge crowds and lots of money.
Pappy Jack definitely knows Noah, but doesn't seem to catch on that Noah's not one of the corrupt ones, or maybe that's precisely why Noah's working under him.Tommy also manages to find two friends in this boxing world who also attend the same high school: Cuban-American Romano (Jon Seda), and African-American Abraham Lincoln Haines (Cuba Gooding, Jr.).
In fact, the black bullies with whom Tommy has to deal, the aptly named Spits (T.E. Russell) and Shortcut (Lance Slaughter), made surprisingly complex characters.I even liked the scene when Marshall aids Gooding's Haines after his being cornered in a fight with the two and their gang, the "Stormtroopers".
He laments about being "rescued by the Great White Hope", and it's funny.So while this film is not perfect, it makes a great boxing movie.
It's fight scenes are worth watching, but they actually insert some boxing technique into the film, and incorporate it into the plot.
The meaning of the film title Gladiator means strong in body and mind ans it portrays its central character and hero Tommy Riley.Always fight for truth and justice, and to stick to your true friends is the theme of this film.
Tommy Riley (James Marshall) and his father have just moved in an attempt to start a new life.
This decision to fight will change his life forever...Outstanding acting by James Marshall (as Tommy Riley), Cuba Gooding Jr.
(as Abraham "Lincoln" Haines), veteran actors Brian Dennehy (as Jimmy Horn) and Robbert Loggia (as Pappy Jack) not to mention the incredible performance by Jon Seda (as Romano) and Ossie Davis (as Noah).P.S. Mr Sylvester Stallone, please see this film.
Wooden-faced James Marshall stars in GLADIATOR as a deprived youth caught up in the world of underground boxing.
He must make good on some debts of his father's (William Heard), the paper on which is being held by fight promoter and all-around bad guy Brian Dennehy.
Marshall makes friends with fellow boxer Cuba Gooding and philosophical corner man Ossie Davis.
The young Cuba Gooding outacts everyone else in this early '90s boxing flick, although Dennehy is in full, frothing-at-the-mouth mode as a man interested only in making money, even at the expense of lives..
This is a pretty average film with a good performance from Robert Loggia.
At this point in his career, Gooding JR was still in his early stages, but comes through like a champ in this interesting and gritty underground pugilism movie.There are lots of montages, plenty of boxing set to cheesy motivational 80s songs.
The finale is quite ludicrous but inevitable in these types of flicks, and good triumphs over evil as it tends to do in movies if not real life.It will never be known as a classic but is in the same vein as some of Van Damme's best
If you love boxing and are a fan of the ridiculous, GLADIATOR is for you.
Tommy Riley (James Marshall) is new in an inner city Chicago school and gets in trouble with some of the black students called the Storm Troopers led by Shortcut.
Underground boxing promoter Pappy Jack (Robert Loggia) hooks him into a fight run by Jimmy Horn (Brian Dennehy).
Jimmy buys out Tommy's father's gambling debts.Firstly, the fights look ugly.
The pinnacle of this genre – which will likely never be bested – is Rocky, but every couple of years another film comes out that seeks to capitalise on the strength of the formula and build its own niche nestled snugly on Sylvester Stallone's bosom.Rather than go into the usual rigmarole of "a guy walks into a boxing ring" let's tick the boxes required to satisfy a formula film.The Guy Tommy Riley (James Marsden in chiseled glory).
Pappy Jack desperately needs a pretty face to sell to the gamblers and spectators and sees Tommy as his "Great White Hope".The Friendly Corner-Man who just Hopes no-one gets Hurt Ossie Davis is Noah, he teaches Tommy the tricks of the trade and makes sure he has an idea of what he is up against.
Lincoln must fight Tommy to break into the big league, Tommy doesn't want to fight Lincoln as he has a condition where a solid blow to the head might kill him
which necessitates.The REAL BIG BAD GUY Brian Dennehy is Mr Horne, an ex-boxer turned promoter who runs the whole operation and plays the boxers like puppets o satisfy his own ends and desires.
Of course the finale pits a wounded Tommy against a crafty, devious and dirty Horne man to man.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: I think we can safely tick all the boxes above.There are lots of montages, plenty of boxing set to cheesy motivational 80s songs, and plenty of cheap shots – and frankly – nut shots, to make the guys say "owwww".The finale is quite ludicrous but inevitable in these types of flicks, and good triumphs over evil as it tends to do in movies if not real life.Final Rating – 6 / 10.
Tommy Riley (James Marshall), a tough white Irish kid from Bridgeport, moves with his down-and-out father to Chicago's south side.
After defending himself using his Golden Gloves honed boxing skills against a local street gang called the Stormtroopers outside of a diner where he works as a dishwasher, Pappy Jack (Robert Loggia), a recruiter for an underground boxing competition, convinces Tommy to fight an unregulated amateur boxing match.
Tommy enters the world of underground boxing run by sleazy promoter and former light heavyweight contender, Mr. Horne (Brian Dennehy).
He's also not above manipulating his young fighters like Tommy's friends, Romano (John Seda) and Lincoln (Cuba Gooding, Jr.), for a quick profit.
Must be a bug in the IMDb rating calculation system.Anyway - this is a solid and entertaining movie with a tight and fast paced script, good acting, action, a little romance, and a realistic atmosphere and depiction of the gritty underground boxing game.
Gladiator (1992) Columbia DTV 101m Director: Rowdy Harrington Stars: James Marshall, Cuba Gooding Jr., Robert Loggia, Brian DennehyTommy Riley is a new transfer to the slums of Chicago.
No, it wasn't the excitement of the coliseum, but the excitement in the ring was just as good.Now, I like Cuba Gooding, Jr. and I thought he did a really good job here, especially his relationship with Tommy Riley (James Marshall).Lots of good actors here: Robert Loggia, Brian Dennehy, and Ossie Davis.Addicted fathers, greedy promoters, toughs on the street, it had it all except a justification for the "R" rating, and a realistic ending.
After tossing hands with a couple of young punks, Tommy catches the eye of a promoter (Brian Dennehy) of an underground boxing circuit.
A new school to get used to & gangster hoods preying on himself & his father John for gambling debts, Tommy takes a job as a dishwasher at new found friend Dawn's family diner.
One faithful night after pounding members of a local street gang in front their fearless leader Short Cut, Tommy is realized by & impressed with by onlooker Pappy Jack (Robert Loggia), a slick boxing scout.
After some coaxing, Pappy Jack gets Tommy to fight in an illegal underground boxing circuit for one fight.
What Tommy does not see coming is the evil & cunning of Pappy Jack's boss, Mr. Jimmy Horn (Brian Dennehey), former Lt. Hvywt.
Fellow boxers Romano Assadro(Jon Seda) & Abraham Lincoln Haynes (Cuba Gooding, Jr.), girlfriend Dawn (Cara Buono), & wise corner man Noah (the late Ozzie Davis).
With lust for money & the quest for his new "White Gladiator", Horn buys John Riley's gambling debts, which forces Tommy to fight for him exclusively.
He suffers profound brain trauma & is hospitalized in a county facility for the " poor & indigent." Angered by his friend's savage beating, Tommy takes on Short Cut in a big money fight & wins.
Tommy used Horn's own philosophy against him which was," When you're weak, you act strong & when you're strong, you pretend to be weak." The ending shows Tommy & Lincoln shaking hands to cement their friendship, which is probably the only sentimental & touching moment of the whole film.Gladiator proves that with an adequate cast & superb fight scene quality by Tak Fujimoto, even a lower quality movie can surprise.
"Gladiator" (1991) tells of a young down-on-his-luck student (Marshall) who takes up underground boxing to pay off his father's gambling debts.
Great location shooting is one of the movie's strong points; the streets of Chicago look truly mean and cold, and the school that Tommy Riley has to attend looks more like a prison.
Director Rowdy Herrington creates a world that is threatening, from the school gangs, to the nasty loan sharks who are after Tommy's father, and the brutal world of illegal boxing, which is a scene that has little to do with the legitimate sport of boxing.
James Marshall plays a troubled boy in a film that reflects a one mans struggle who gets wrapped up in a dangerous world of underground illegal boxing.Tommy Reilly has recently moved to chicago.
Pappy Jack likes what he see's and offers Tommy money to fight one night.
The boss of the underground boxing like's what he saw and offers Tommy more monet to fight.
During his time boxing he makes two good friends.
gladiator was a very good movie.
Tommy is not only a survivor, but also a loyal friend to fellow boxers played by Cuba Gooding, Jr. and Jon Seda, and to his new girlfriend (Cara Buono).**** Mild Spoilers Ahead ******"Gladiator" is a gritty but touching movie.
James Marshall was terrific as Tommy and the rest of the cast was very good.
In other words, yes, I believe this particular boxing promoter (Brian Dennehy) would have gotten in the ring to fight Tommy.For the above reasons I give "Gladiator" the match and a score of 89/100.
Is it a bad movie, well I didn't think so as it isn't that complicated to follow, and it isn't that far fetched, it tells us a story of two young men living in the slums who find themselves trapped in the dark world of illegal unlicensed boxing, one who wants a better life and the other who has been forced into fighting to pay off his fathers gambling debts. |
tt1315216 | Jesse Stone: No Remorse | The film begins with the shooting murder of a young man at night as he opens his car door in a parking garage. Jesse Stone is introduced who, after his suspension as chief of police, has sunk into seclusion and alcoholism. Ordered not to communicate with his former subordinates while on suspension, he has been out of touch with everyone. Eventually his colleague Rose, an officer, becomes concerned and asks Stone's friend Captain Healy, the State Police Homicide Commander, to check in on him. Healy is recovering from gunshot wounds and supposed to be on medical leave but, as he tells Stone, he’s taking his leave at his office. Healy finds Stone disheveled, drunk, and despondent. Shortly after Healy arrives, Stone receives a phone call from his ex-wife Jenn, so Healy leaves. Jenn tells Jesse that she needs to talk because she and Elliot had a fight. Angered, Jesse tells Jenn that they shouldn’t speak anymore, and rips out the phone. Later he buys a cell phone, which Rose helps him program. He gives the number only to her and a few others. Jesse and Rose are becoming close.
After a second murder in a parking garage, Healy asks Jesse to work as a private consultant to the Boston police department on the investigation. He does this partly to help his friend, but he also needs Stone's experience. Jesse soon learns that the first victim had ties to Boston mob boss, Gino Fish. When Stone questions Fish about the man, he denies knowing him, as does his secretary Alan. After a third murder, Jesse questions Fish again, who admits that he knew the first victim, but that he hadn't seen him for a couple of days before the murder. Alan confirms this. Later Stone meets with Sister Mary John, taking her to dinner. He asks if Alan or Gino had been trying to recruit young girls, but she hints that the men are gay. He learns that Milly’s, where the first victim had been on the night he was killed, was a gay bar, and a favorite destination of Alan and Gino. He suspects that Alan saw Gino and the first victim together there.
With thought, Stone begins to think that Alan may have murdered the first victim out of jealousy. To prevent the personal connection being discovered, he murdered two more men to make the events appear to be related and due to a serial killer. Stone confronts Gino, and later Alan with his conclusions. Stone calls Alan and sets up a meeting at Milly's. Alan retrieves the murder weapon and throws it in the ocean before meeting Stone. At Milly's Stone sees Alan being killed in a hit and run. Stone and Healy later speculate that Gino ordered the hit, fearing that any confession by Alan would reveal that the crime boss was gay and endanger his underworld reputation. | murder | train | wikipedia | Intelligent Television Movie for Intelligent Viewers.
I have read all the novels and have seen all the movies with Tom Selleck.
He will always be remembered as Magnum P.I., but Jesse Stone is his very best work.
It has excellent characters, very smart dialog and great performances.
Tom Selleck's Jesse is flawed, human and holding on for dear life.
The supporting case is first rate, William Devane, Saul Rubinek (whose character is very much wounded like Jesse), Stephen McHattie as the State Homicide Captain, Kathy Baker as Rose and Kohn Sudduth as Luther are all excellent, nothing blazing, but the perfect touch by each in support of Tom Selleck.
Another under rated performance is William Saddler as Gino Fish, his cat and mouse game with Jesse is always interesting to watch.
In No Remorse, Gino lets his his guard down ever so slightly to Jesse, SLIGHTLY, their scenes together are superb.
I look forward to Tom Selleck's Jesse Stone, is in many ways the movies characterizations are superior to the novels.
In No Remorse Jesse is still suspended as Paradise Police Chief, he is drinking heavily.
There is a crime wave in town and Luther and Rose are prohibited from talking to Jesse.
Capt Healy calls on Jesse for help with apparent serial killer in Boston.
The dialog and performances are excellent and my only disappointment was the ending.
Of course the ending is the set up for the next Jesse Stone movie Innocents Lost.
My understanding is that production is complete and another movie is being readied for filming..
You'll have no remorse for choosing this movie.
Jesse Stone: No Remorse is a movie that chooses substance over style.
The movie stays away from tons of action scenes, impressive camera angles and CGI.
The movie is labeled as a crime/mystery but personally I would label it more as a drama centering around burned out detective Stone's life and his interactions with other interesting characters in his small town, and a subplot about the solving of a couple of murder cases and robberies.
I haven't seen the previous installments of the Jesse Stone series but I can say that in the way this movie was presented I was able to follow the plot.
I must say this movie did raise my curiosity, so I might watch the other Jesse Stone movies.
I was very surprised to see how good this movie is.
I found this to be better than a lot of movies I watched in the cinema recently.
The intriguing dialogue and good acting makes this charming little film a worthwhile experience.
It has been a long time since I watched a series with such a delight.
The Jesse Stone series is surely going into TV-History.
Tom Selleck is an icon of the 80's, but I'm sure he will be remembered for these wonderful movies.
Tom is playing with minimalism, but every word, look, and breath is telling more than any short handed written hip cop series can say.The pictures and the music are leading you into the small town world perfectly.
The best Jesse Stone So Far. We thought that Jesse Stone No Remorse was excellent.
Tom Selleck is at his best playing Jesse and he is as handsome as ever!!!
Jesse is very methodical in looking at crime scene videos and he is very adept at recreating the actual crime scenes.
Hopefully, at the hearing, Jesse, Rose and Luthor will be reinstated.
I remember him from Die Hard 2 but in Jesse Stone he is perfect in the part.
Can't wait for the next Jesse Stone..
Jesse Stone, No Remorse Aims for Greatness and Hits the Mark.
No Remorse, the latest installment of the magnificent Jesse Stone series is only for those who love good character driven drama performed by some of today's greatest character actors.
The multiple story lines keep it moving, some stories meandering through the work like a brook through the salt meadows, still others rushing with the force of a North Atlantic tide.
like stories do in real life.
And as in real life, Jesse's flawed character remains but we can forgive him.
Out of the force, Jesse still manages to do his usual job..
I am already on the sixth film in the Jesse Stone series.
Once again the film was not based on any book, but original characters from Robert B.
Yes, it is different from the previous ones, since Jesse's role slightly changed after what happened in the last film.
Also a better film after the recent downfall, still not that great, but anyway, Jesse Stone fans will enjoy it.There's a murder in the opening which was shown to us, but who was behind it remains a mystery, because that's the story of this film to reveal.
So the one murder becomes two and followed by another, Jesse, who is now not in the force gets a chance to involve on it indirectly.
Besides, the film not to focus on just one case, but multiple like the usual and that's the Jesse Stone series' special.
With those layers, how it was developed and ended was smartly done.Jesse's old boss is out of the prison and he lends some help on something to him.
I'm also happy for mentioning the Reggie in the film, so far he was unnoticed, but gets a slight recognition here.
Besides, Jesse got a cell phone and there's a series of jokes regarding sharing the number, only minor ones."Jealousy's a powerful thing."Still the same director, and he did a good job.
Besides appearing in the lead, Tom Selleck also penned the story for this with another writer.
Parker's unexpected death during before this film came out.
So there's a mention at the end of the film with respect.
His contribution must be appreciated, now there are many Jesse Stone fans out there after this series came out and I hope it continues for another decade.
Since the Jesse's absent in the force, his colleagues had taken some serious steps to fight the crime in Paradise.
Particularly Luther has taken the charge of the force, and with Rose, only they two are the ones left in the station.
On the other hand, they're facing a threat from the town council that they might be disbanded if their work or the result does not meet the target.
So that's why this tale becomes so exciting, because they try their best to keep their jobs, but only the follow-up film would disclose about how it all shapes up.Regarding the murders, the suspense was good, but also gives some hints for the viewers to have their opinion on the suspect.
Particularly, I'm eager to know Jesse's journey, whether he returns to Paradise or set to work for his boss at the Boston.Anyway, this film was a turning point for sure; many unexpected things might going to happen in the remaining films.
In the those remaining three films, I expect at least one of it would end as the best in the series.
So can't wait for those ones to watch and let me meet you with the next review in a couple of days.7/10.
I've enjoyed many of the other Jessie Stone movies but I found this one to be lacking in a lot of substance.
The plot does not get resolved in any satisfying way, and many of the characters lack depth.
It feels like a lot of different parts put loosely together - his past relationship with his ex-wife, his co-workers marital problem, an unrelated string of brutal convenience store robberies, and the towns impending plan for the police department - none of these ideas felt resolved at the end.
(except for the convenience store robberies, but this was dealt with in such a straightforward way and the bad guys were never heard from again.
I enjoy all of the Jesse Stone series with Tom Selleck.
Great photography, Selleck rocks, but terrible awful clichés and predictable plot.
Jesse Stone: No Remorse (2010)If it weren't for Tom Selleck I'd never have made it twenty minutes through this cliché laden over-sized made for TV movie.
It feels like any routine t.v. episode cop and detective movie stretched into two hours, and yet it's missing even the cool twists that the best t.v. shows use to keep each week interesting.
Two, I thought with each passing scene it couldn't continue as badly as it started.Okay, three actually, Selleck himself is fun to watch in his grumpy, steady, intuitive way.
And filmed well throughout.If you have seen other Jesse Stone movies you might have other reasons to put up with some of the additions here because they might have given more backstory.
I haven't and so (for example) the scene toward the beginning where the hotty woman tells Selleck she just wants uncomplicated sex with him and she's wearing no underwear, and where he says no thanks and grumpy as ever leaves and walks home, is totally stupid.
(Or female fantasy if you like an aging Selleck very very much?) And it has zero bearing on the movie.
If by good fortune you don't actually see all these various character traits as clichés you won't be as annoyed or bored as I was.
That comes from what movies (and t.v. shows) you've seen before.
Selleck plays a characteristic older cop on the skids.
He drinks, he's been kicked off the police force, he befriends a sweet ordinary young girl like a daughter, he figures out the crime by just being experienced and intuitive, he is single and lonely, he's obsessed, and so on and so on.
If it wasn't for Selleck having screen presence it wouldn't hold an ounce of water.The supporting cast is reasonable, if again filling predictable niches in this kind of movie.
I like cop and detective movies.
I was open to liking this a lot.
I'm even a Detroit guy (like Selleck) and was predisposed favorably.
I watched this movie out of curiosity to see what else could Tom Selleck do beside the old Hawaii Private Eye series of the past decades.
I set through the boring dialogs and watched many meaningless streams of small events that were somehow tie up the story, but I failed to see any of them!
My recommendation is for you to try another boring movie with more action and meaningless dialogs that might make you feel better than this one made me feel for wasting my money on the rental, plus the time I wasted watching this crap production!
Tom Selleck is perfect as Jesse.
The ongoing theme of Jesse showing Reggie, the dog, no affection .......is bullshit.
What the hell is wrong with whoever decided this was a good change from Parker's writing?
The movie does Mr. Parker a disservice and the franchise should be ashamed..
Jesse Stone our dour detective with a fondness for drink and seeing his shrink is back.
So more long stares, more slow jazz music and every other cliché to remind the audience that this is not the high adrenaline Magnum but Tom Selleck the actor.
However talking slowly and looking miserable does not make you an acting great.Jesse Stone is suspended by Paradise town council itself looking like a rather corrupt bunch.
The state homicide boss, Captain Healy hires him as a consultant in the hunt for a suspected serial killer who as it turns out may be the secretary of the local boxing promoter and gangster Gino Fish played by William Sandler and maybe the more interesting character in the cast.You can tell Stone is a great detective because he follows Fish's secretary and suddenly discovers that he has ended up in the gay area of town.
It looks like its the first time he has ever realised there is a gay quarter!Talking about sloppy writing I never did figure out how they managed to solve the general store subplot so conveniently..
"Jesse Stone: No Remorse" is a 2010 movie based on the character created by Robert B.
Parker.I like a lot of things about these movies, one of which is how incidental characters are carried through to the next story, for instance, Emily Bishop, now working in a convenience store; and Hasty, now out of prison and still in love with his ex-wife.In this film, Jesse has been suspended by the town council and isn't supposed to be talking to Suitcase or to Rose.
And now he has a cell phone and Rose has the number, if he could only figure out how to work it.Healy (Steven McHattie) hires Jesse as a consultant to look into a series of murders.
Jesse gets the word that everyone on the police force is going to be fired, and the council plans on using these unsolved murders as an excuse.
So Jesse points out it would behoove everyone involved to get them solved.My problem with these movies, though I think the stories are good, is Tom Selleck.
If a more complex actor were playing this role it would help the movies.I read a story from a woman who gave EST-type courses to actors, in which she promised them a result - not stardom, but something.
You have no talent.Now, the actor was very upset, but the teacher pointed out to him that now, he didn't have to worry - all he had to do was use his charm and his winning personality to sell the role and not worry about the other stuff.She ends her chapter in this book by saying the actor became a household name.
Given that this was written at the time that Magnum was so big, I have always suspected the actor was Selleck.Whether it was or not, this role does not play to his strong points.
Pretty lousy go nowhere waste of time movie.
I bought this DVD 2 years ago and today I finally got around to watch it.I re-installed my operating system and had to try out my DVD machine to see how it plays.I dropped this movie in as the rest of the operating system was updating.Wow...was this a total bore.
Nothing leads anywhere and there is no suspense, action, mystery, romance, comedy or anything else.This is like watching water drip slowly out of a tap.
Tom Selleck in No Remorse, another film in his Jesse Stone series has shown his range as a player.
No two detectives could be more different than the flip and cool Thomas Magnum of Magnum, PI and the grim and determined Jesse Stone, a man with issues, but who still gets his job done.Whether he has a job is a question though.
From the last film Selleck has been left on suspension pending a hearing from his job as chief of the small Paradise, Massachusetts police force.
Colleagues Kathy Baker and Kohl Sudduth are trying to carry on as best they can with a string of convenience store robberies plaguing the town.In addition the homicide chief of the Massachusetts State Police, Stephen McHattie has asked Selleck to help very unofficially with a homicide that involves a connected fight promoter William Sadler and his personal assistant Todd Hoffey.
It has to be unofficial because of Selleck's suspension, but Tom even with the suspension cramping his style he gets results in both cases.Todd Hoffey in addition to Selleck walks off the acting honors here.
One should also make note of William Devane as a psychiatrist treating Selleck.The Jesse Stone films are well made and I look forward to seeing the next one when it debuts on television..
I suppose that they will wait until the next installment to resolve the conflict between Stone and the town council.
I find it really impressive that Mr. Selleck can bring wit and humor to a character which at the best of times can be best described as melancholy.Two thumbs up!!.
This time around Stone, suspended from his job as chief of police by a vindictive councilman, is tapped by Commander Healey to help the Boston force solve what appears to be random shootings by a serial killer.
Meanwhile Rose and Suitcase - now comprising the entire Paradise police force - are doing their best to track down the perp who is not afraid to beat up the staff of convenience stores.
This remains one of the finest of the television 'cop' shows and scores in its hard core of supporting players, Suitcase, Rose, Hasty, Gino Fish, Healey etc.
Jesse Stone-Have Remorse on Us *.
The movie is a bad one because the major premise of a series of murders is sidetracked by too many sidebar stories.
We really have a promising story here as the killings unfold; unfortunately, too many other stories get in the way.Tom Selleck, who should definitely stick with the far superior Blood Brothers, is a suspended cop now working as a consultant.
His theory on the murders is way out despite the fact that he is proved correct.Kathy Baker, looking much older and in some scenes like Hillary Clinton, plays a lady police officer with plenty of problems of her own.
Alright, another Jesse Stone movie!
Tom Selleck seems to actually live this character.
Jesse Stone is the suspended without pay police chief of the small Massachusetts town of Paradise.
The town council weenies didn't like how he ran the town's small police force.
The state homicide chief hires him as a consultant in an apparent serial killer case.
Now the killer is not a serial killer but a soon to be let go lover and secretary of a local drug dealer named Gino Fish.
The guy goes on to kill two more at random to make it look like a serial killer.
Going to Fish Jesse relays some info to him and guess what?
She keeps coming on to Jesse but he turns her down every time.
Suitcase has been made temporary police chief and while he is a very good cop he does not have the experience to handle the chief's job at this time.
As usual in the Stone movies things turn out well.
Not that this necessarily a good thing for the bad guys. |
tt0210299 | Songcatcher | In 1907, Dr. Lily Penleric (Janet McTeer), a professor of musicology, is denied a promotion at the university where she teaches. She impulsively visits her sister Eleanor (Jane Adams), who runs a struggling rural school in Appalachia. There, she discovers a treasure trove of traditional Scots Irish ballads, which have been preserved by the secluded mountain people since the colonial period of the 1600s and 1700s. Lily decides to record and transcribe the songs and share them with the outside world.
With the help of a musically talented orphan named Deladis Slocumb (Emmy Rossum), Lily ventures into isolated areas of the mountains to collect the songs. She finds herself increasingly enchanted, not only by the rugged purity of the music, but also by the courage and endurance of the local people as they carve out meaningful lives against the harsh conditions. She becomes privy to their struggles to save their land from Earl Giddens (David Patrick Kelly), representative of a coal mining company. At the same time, Lily is troubled when she finds that Eleanor is engaged in a lesbian love affair with her co-teacher at the school.
Lily meets Tom Bledsoe (Aidan Quinn), a handsome, hardened war veteran and talented musician. Despite some initial resentment, she soon begins a love affair with him. She experiences a slow change in both her perception of the mountain people as savage and uncouth, and of her sister's sexuality as immoral. Hoping to help share the culture of the mountain people with the wider world, Lily convinces Clementine McFarland (Rhoda Griffis), an art collector, to purchase a painting done by a local woman.
Events come to a crisis when a young man discovers Eleanor and her lover, Harriet, kissing in the woods. That night, two men set fire to the school building, burning Eleanor, Harriet, and Deladis out of their home and destroying Lily's transcriptions of the ballads and her phonograph recordings. Rather than starting over again, Lily decides to leave, but she convinces Tom and Deladis to "go down the mountain" with her to make and sell phonograph recordings of mountain music. As they depart, Cyrus Whittle, a renowned professor from England, arrives on a collection foray of his own, ensuring that the ballads will be preserved in the manner that Lily had originally intended. | dramatic, romantic, murder | train | wikipedia | I don't know if I can argue with that.Neither could Lily Penleric (Janet McTeer), Doctor of Musicology, who came up into the mountains to visit her sister Elna (Jane Adams), and discovered music that had not been heard by "outlanders" in hundreds of years.
The main character Lily's love oozes off the screen and shames everyone who's ever made a tape or CD music collection with far less effort and trial -- and persistence.
The movie exposes the hardships, ignorances, prejudices, resourcefulness, intelligence, commonsense and heart of the people who remained out of touch with "progress".The movie has some graphic and controversial scenes; but the majority is appropriate for all ages.The way the folk music is in-twined in the lives of the local people is magical and authentic.
Songcatcher is a fantastic film about understanding culture and people throughout the beauty of music and the poetry of songs.
Every beat and word represents something that in many ways is so personally related to people's lives, history and emotions.This is the lovely story of Dr. Lily Penleric (Janet McTeer) a preeminent teacher musician who impulsively decides to run to visit her sister at a struggling rural school in the Appalachia, right after being denied of an anticipated promotion where she teaches.
Over there (in the mountains) she founds a new meaning to her life by finding love and discovering very culturally important Scott-Irish ballads that she might use to save her promotion.The whole cast performances are awesome, especially Janet McTeer who comes back with another tremendous performance and Aidan Quinn who hasn't been this good so far.
A nice surprise, since I spend long hours listening to Alan Lomax's field recordings of mountaineers singing old ballads when I was at Bard College - and later parlayed that experience into a radio job, hosting a traditional music show.That aspect alone should make anyone loves this music run to see the show.
The castng overall is superb - Janet McTeer is a unique and believable presence; Pat Carroll delightful as a mountain matriarch; Aiden Quinn his charming, virile self.The plot is acceptable, if not 100% believable - several of the (discreet) sexual situations peppered throughout seem much colored by modern attitudes.
The film is very enjoyable with some exceptional acting particularly in the case of Janet McTeer, Aidan Quinn and Emmy Rossum and features some lovely and moving renditions of classic ballads.
The film's focus is on musicologist Lily Penleric (Janet McTeer) in the early 1900s who has just been passed over for a permanent teaching position for the second time.
While collecting the songs, Lily slowly begins to crack from her shell and she learns to love the people of the mountain.
All the songs in this movie were amazing and as soon as I saw this film I went out and bought the soundtrack.
This film captivates the beauty of the Carolina Mountains and shows what the music of the mountains is really like.
The things that I liked about this film are the beautiful cinematography of the Appalachian mountains that really enhance the realistic quality of the film and of course the music.
The music is the central ingredient in this story and the Scottish and Irish ballads add an indelible flavor that really make it the primary reason to view this film.
I've always like Aidan Quinn and I love that Janet McTeer is not a Kewpie doll someone stuck into a serious film.
The music and lyrics were very haunting, and gave a good look into how life was like for this particular group of people.If you are looking for a movie that is beautiful, thoughtful, endearing, and is filled with original and stirring music this is a must see for you!
The singers and other performers were excellent, and serve as a reminder of the great music that comes out of the mountains.The movie, however, fails to inspire.
My impression of the film was that the writer/director wanted to make a movie about mountain music, and proceeded to write dramatic filler.
As opposed to "O Brother, Where Art Thou?", where the movie was as entertaining as the music, the drama seems to go nowhere.One of the subplots, about two lesbians inhabiting the mountain, doesn't seem to have much of a point at all, other than to bring about the ending that the writer wanted.
Examples include the lesbians making love right along a trail, Rossum's boyfriend through most of the movie, or even McTeer's relationship with a married man.
It's unfortunate, since the rest of the actors do a very good job, especially Pat Carroll.My recommendation is to rent the movie and fastforward, stopping during the singing scenes..
We recently found out that friends of ours who share a love of music by real singer-songwriters (say, Richard Thompson or Iris Dement or Loudon Wainwright) had never seen this movie.
If for nothing else but the chance to see Iris Dement (the headliner in the cast as far as we're concerned) act as well as sing.The wonderful contrast between the very white bread muzak version of Barbry Allen at the beginning and the much more human one by the folks who passed it down later on in the film is for me what the movie is all about.
She then turns on her academic engines and decides to collect and publish this wondrous music of the Appalachians.She is taken to "Songcatchers", or the people who are the preservers of this oral legacy, to learn the songs.
It tries to deal with lesbianism, untrustworthy men, distrustful and violent mountain people, the harshness of the land and life, a male-dominated community and the music.
The performances of Janet McTeer and Pat Carroll stand out, and Aiden Qiinn was good as the mountain man who "had seen the world".
The musical performances of Emmy Rossum, Iris Dement and Hazel Dickens made my heart soar.The film opens in Baltimore this week and I'll be there to see it again.
I only wish there was more of Emmy Rossum and the other music with that Appalachian "edge" on the soundtrack CD, as opposed to the more highly produced songs by more famous people, whose voices/characters did not appear in the film..
I think we learned about Songcatcher via Netflix about three years ago during the O, Brother Where Art Thou and Down From the Mountain excitement.As a movie it was lacking something; all the pieces were there but it didn't quite sizzle.
The reason for this, I think, was the way they shot the film: it was 'too pretty' and therefore unreal, especially for representing lives in the mountains of North Carolina during the timeframe of the movie, so the viewer was sort of outside looking in.That said, however, we LOVED the music and the opening up of the roots of mountain music, and that's why I gave it an '8'.
Anyway this movie was one piece of our growing love affair with this sort of music, especially on the mountain gospel side of things, all the way to the present day with Ollabelle, and the Anonymous Four (American Angels).And to first have encountered Emmy Rossum here and then just recently enjoying her performance in Phantom of the Opera is a real treat.
Janet McTeer plays a 1960s "musicologist: who goes to the Smokey Mountains, loves the music and wants to document it.
Along the way to paying tribute to this historic and wonderful mountain music, the story gets sidetrack by one major issue: out-of-control feminist bias.Hey, you want to make a "chick flick," fine - there are a number of them out there, but don't disguise this agenda by passing it off as some tribute to music, or the mountains.No, this is out-and-out male bashing, complete with only one decent male character (played by Aiden Quinn), the rest all being unlikeable guys.
Oh, wow!!!Hey, loved the music and the scenery, but this is nothing but a Lesbian propaganda piece and - even worse - it's simply a boring film..
It tells the story of musicologist Lily Penleric (Janet McTeer) who travels to an isolated village in the Appalachians and gets to hear the music of the Scottish-Irish people there in the early 20th century.
Because what Lily hears does many things: aside from just being great music, it shows how the people in this village may not be educated or anything like that - and could even be inbred - but they still have their culture.
I value this movie particularly because my great Aunt Mary Jane Queen was an original source for some of the music and I am a descendant of people who lived like this only 4 generations ago.
I even bought the correlating CDs. I know that the people who made this movie must have enjoyed the beautiful mountain scenery and the amazing music.
I thought the movie was a lovely film and moved me to tears when they were singing.
I would recommend this movie to anyone who has an interest in the mountain music.
So she spends much of the rest of the film gaining the trust of the locals as well as recording and writing down their songs for posterity as well as let outside folks know that there is great beauty and wisdom in the hills.
The music is great and so is the movie which features some excellent music, including a screen performance by folk singer Iris Dement, a little known and enormously talented artist..
Add to that a jealous mistress, a difficult childbirth, a couple of condescending swells from the city, and a country boy that's turned his back on his roots, and the mountain folk of "Songcatcher" start to feel like the cast of a soap opera, with everyone undergoing a unique and interesting crisis.The basic premise, though, is a good one.
Dr. Lily Penleric (Janet McTeer), a professor of music in the early 20th century, gets fed up dealing with the male-dominated world of academia and literally heads for the hills, where her sister Elna runs a school with another woman (her lover, we later learn).
With the aid of a phonograph and the frequently bemused help of the locals, she works to record and publish her findings, while coal barons and their lackeys try to take the land and rugged mountain man Aidan Quinn watches first with disapproval, then with admiration.There's the makings of a good story here, in the historically-based recording of folk music and the growing respect Lily has for the mountain community.
The film is best when people are singing those old songs, filled with love and sorrow and death, turning the age-old airs into their own personal catharsis.
I love people and this was a film i though was about real people not perfect people just real I loved the school teachers ideas of heading so far in the mountains that you would have to pump in sun shine yet still so nervous she had every spot of her surroundings covered, all i really want to say is this is a clean ,fun and very true to life movie , my family was part of those mountains , heck i just felt right at home being the baby of ten!
well hope you take time to watch it i found it by mistake and loved it oh i really just was able to set back and enjoy, thank you JanetThank goodness the music got out to the city folks..
My people come from the mountains, I love English folk song and mountain music, and so I tried REAL hard to like this movie.
I guarantee that the only people giving this movie a rating of 10 worked on the film in some way.The movie starts out decently enough, but it soon becomes obvious that the film falls victim to an all too common fate with musical productions: singing > acting.
There are no less than 3 useless subplots to this film including an absurd lesbian thread and a whole two minutes devoted to the tragedy of one mountain family in particular, which resolves so abruptly and ridiculously that the tragedy is more comical than tear-inducing.Speaking of abrupt, the film ends out of nowhere, which is actually beneficial since it's so horrible.If you have a background in folk songs and American music origins, blah blah, sit down, ignore the awful film-making and enjoy the songs.
A somewhat flawed telling of a solid but esoteric story built on a foundation of authentic mountain music, "Songcatcher", a film too much in tune with its feminine side, features good performances, a too delicate execution, and some wonderful hillbilly music.
She appreciates the wonderful nature of the music, that it relates to these peoples' daily lives, at both good and bad times.
Even taking this into consideration though, it seems like a good character progression would have brought her from being straight laced, to having a true appreciation for the music, its history, and its expression of the daily lives of these people that haven't changed much over 200 years.
Look beyond the plot and acting, delve into the scenery, hill billy images and the music, and discover for yourself a very memorable movie..
The story is engaging, about a musicologist (played masterfully by Janet McTeer, also outstanding in this year's Dogma 95 film, "The King is Alive") who discovers a connection between British folk songs and the music of the "mountain folk" in Appalachia.
This movie is supposed to be about the collection of folk music from an identified section of the "Southern Mountains," or Appalachia.In typical Hollywood fashion, it presents the people of this land as hard-drinking, suspicious of outsiders, bearing kids as kids and fundamental Christian extremists.The whole point of this movie is not about collecting songs but to make the viewer sympathetic to the lesbian relationship between the two teachers.
The movie should have an R rating at a minimum because of the gross lesbian love making scene in this film.
the music was good and I am buying the soundtrack....but I have rarely seen such a mess on the big screen....a shame really...these mountain people (my ancestors) deserve a masterpiece.
A good movie about great mountain music.
In one scene, Lily rebukes her love interest as being like all the other men on the mountain, only wanting to sit around all day and play music.
Even though this film is hard on the menfolk, what makes it a delight is the way Lily is won over by the Mountain music and how she comes to appreciate the Mountain People and their peculiar ways.
I was hoping for a movie that focused more on the music and less on the characters, instead it was the other way around.
I loved the music, characters, storyline, scenery and everything else about this film.
A movie whose lapses are worth squirming through-- Janet McTeer is a spectacle even when she's speaking clunkers, Aidan Quinn gives his best line-readings in years, and Jane Adams confirms here that she may be the best young character-actress in American film.
I've also read that the soundtrack is nothing like the music in the movie, with professional musicians filling in for the actors..
I'm suspicious when a director like Maggie Greenwald comes up with a novel and exciting idea and some great song repertory for a film about an important music-making experience - and then ends up with this.
Is a movie about a liberated woman who's lifeblood is music and recording songs and categorizing them - who thinks like a scientist and learns to really LOVE the subject she's analyzing - but who then suddenly "gives it all up" because she's found true love in the hills, is this acceptable?
The music is wonderful, however so buy the soundtrack and skip the movie (fine performance by Pat Carroll, however)..
Songcatcher appropriates the real life story of Alan Lomax, transforms Lomax into a woman, shifts his career into an earlier period in the 20th Century, adds lesbianism to its uninteresting plot and wastes valuable time that could have been devoted to the music of Appalachia.
I wish the movie had made more use of her voice in presenting the music instead of having it sung by folks representing the local population.
"Songcatcher" is a corny movie with beautiful music.Writer/director Maggie Greenwald may have researched the roots of Appalachian music, but I would have liked to learn more about how they were really discovered by musicologists than this confusing mix of romance and cultural exploitation.Janet McTeer was so good in "Tumbleweeds" that her odd body language and facial expressions must have been at the director's request.
The audience couldn't help but laugh when McTeer was referred to as the actress' Jane Adams' "big sister." Aidan Quinn, one of my favorite actors, is playing a similar role as in "The Playboys"; hey that's worth my admission money.But the soundtrack is the reason to see the movie.
How many times will you see Taj Mahal and Iris DeMent in a movie about the roots of folk music?
Others she must just listen to and record lyrics and music on paper.Emmy Rossum, classically trained singer ('Phantom, 2004) and about 13 during filming, is Deladis Slocumb, who sings many of the songs for Lily.Aidan Quinn is Tom Bledsoe, local who had been educated off the mountain, but returned there for the simple life and making music.The movie captured my attention and my imagination from the very first scenes.
For anyone who appreciates music and its origins, a very nice movie..
The story centers around Janet McTeer(Professor Lily Penteric)who finds a treasure of songs, in rural mountain surroundings, and sets out to document them.
A good music film!.
I loved the music, the cinematography, the acting, the sound, the production, but I was really disappointed in this film because it is nothing more than pro-lesbian propaganda. |
tt0276033 | The Country Bears | The Country Bears are an all-bear country rock band who have broken up in 1991 after years of popularity. Number one fan Beary Barrington (voiced by Haley Joel Osment), a young bear raised by a human family, feels left out for being different. His father (Stephen Tobolowsky) tells him that his family will love him no matter what, and that differences lead everyone to their purposes. But Beary's older brother Dex (Eli Marienthal) gives him the truth about his background.
Angry and embarrassed, Beary leaves home and sets out for Country Bear Hall, the former concert hall of the Country Bears. Beary learns from the property caretaker Big Al (voiced by James Gammon) and the band's manager Henry Dixen Taylor (voiced by Kevin Michael Richardson) that Country Bear Hall is threatened with destruction by greedy banker Reed Thimple (Christopher Walken). After many attempts to raise $20,000 to save Country Bear Hall, Beary suggests to Henry to hold a benefit concert and the two of them set out to reunite the group with the band's bus driver and drummer Roadie (M.C. Gainey). Meanwhile, the Barringtons have enlisted police officers named Officer Cheets (Diedrich Bader) and Officer Hamm (Daryl Mitchell) to find Beary.
First, they approach Fred Bedderhead (voiced by Brad Garrett), the harmonica and electric bass player. Fred is working as a security guard on the set of Krystal's latest music video and agrees to return for the concert. Henry needs promotion and Beary suggests the group's former promoter Rip Holland (Alex Rocco) whom Henry claimed had "stolen" the Country Bears from him. Henry calls up Rip who gladly agrees to promote the show. After the call, it is shown that Rip was in an office display of a store as he is told to leave. Fred brings up a talent show history where they defeated an armpit musician named Benny Boggswaggle (Michael Lawrence Morgan) in a talent competition which caused Benny to hit Zeb Zoober on the head with a chair. Meanwhile, Big Al is approached by Reed who learns about the Country Bears' plan and about Rip Holland promoting the show. When Big Al realizes that he is talking to Reed, he has Reed look in one direction. By the time Reed looks back, Big Al is on the steps of Country Bear Hall stating "I'm chubby, but I'm quick." Reed then moves on to his next plan.
Next, they approach the band's fiddler Zeb Zoober (voiced by Stephen Root), who has spent all his years drinking honey at the Swarming Hive Honey Bar restaurant and owes $500.00 to the owner named "Cha-Cha" (Queen Latifah). Zeb wants to return, but can't without paying his debt. Beary places a bet to get Zeb off the hook by beating the house band in a playoff. Zeb starts off rusty, but warms up and wins. Meanwhile, Officer Cheets and Officer Hamm approach Big Al for directions to where Beary went. Because Big Al does not mention that Beary is friends with them and has joined them, the officers think that the bears have kidnapped Beary.
Then, they approach Tennessee O'Neal (voiced by Toby Huss), the one-string guitar player, who is reluctant because he wants nothing more than to make up with his ex-girlfriend Trixie St. Claire, the band's keyboard player. At a restaurant, the Country Bears meet a waitress (Jennifer Paige) who is working to become a singer as she sings her upbeat version of "Kick It Into Gear." Afterwards, a news bulletin is seen on television as a TV reporter (Paul Rugg) does a story where the Country Bears and Roadie have "kidnapped" Beary. After being chased by Officers Cheets and Hamm through a car wash, the Country Bears stop at a motel where Beary learns that Trixie St. Claire (voiced by Candy Ford) is performing at the motel's bar. Beary tells Tennessee about it and he goes in to reunite with her where they sing "Can Love Stand the Test" together. She comes with the band to their reunion.
Finally, they head out to find Ted Bedderhead (voiced by Diedrich Bader), the group's lead singer and guitarist. Ted is supposedly very rich now when they find a mansion where they learn from a gardener (who Zeb claims to look like Elton John) that Ted is still at the local country club working at the wedding. After Ted has the other Country Bears members leave, Fred eventually finds out that he is nothing more than a wedding singer as he sings "It's Not Unusual." Ted is knocked out by Fred and forcefully dragged onto the bus. Meanwhile, Officers Cheets and Hamm return to the Barringtons and set up equipment to prepare for when the Country Bears call in their "demands."
The Country Bears learn that Ted had been doing weddings and birthday parties as he mentions that the "gardener" they met was actually Elton John and that he rented a room over Elton John's garage. Zeb claims Ted to be the reason for the breakup, but Ted claims he held them together and no one was grateful, as the other members were all busy drinking honey (a habit of Zeb), blubbering (a habit of Tennessee), and staring into space (a habit of Fred). Beary reminds them that they claimed each other to be family, but Ted claims it to be meaningless publicity. Beary realizes the real meaning of family and returns home.
After various petty arguments, the Country Bears read Beary's school essay about them and they realize that Beary was right and decide that they must do the concert. Reconciling with Beary, Ted assures him that they do the concert with him. But Reed Thimple kidnaps the rest of the Country Bears and steals the bus. Dex suggests that they use part of Beary's tracking device to find them. Reed Thimple reveals to the Bears that he is really Benny Boggswaggle and is wreaking his vengeance on the bears for stealing his one chance at fame. Beary, his family, and Ted track down and rescue the band and head to the concert together.
When they get to Country Bear Hall, they find out that Reed Thimple has paid Rip not to promote the show, so the concert appears to be headed for failure. Rip even explains his reasons involving business with him ending with the fact that some of it was Reed Thimple's idea. As the other Country Bears restrain Henry from attacking Rip, Big Al arrives and asks if the Country Bears are doing their show tonight. When Fred states that nobody showed up, Big Al reveals that everyone was just out in the back field and that he didn't want anyone parking out on the front lawn. Big Al then opens the doors and a surge of people rush in as Reed Thimple is flushed out vowing to the Country Bears that their feud isn't over. The money raised from the concert is revealed to be enough to save the hall and the Country Bears perform with Beary as member of the band. The group performs their song "Straight to the Heart of Love" as the rest of the Barringtons and the audience watch the concert.
During the credits, a documentary about the Country Bears is shown with interviews with the celebrity musicians, Officer Cheets, and Roadie.
In the post-credits, a scene following the car wash scene had Officer Cheets explaining to Officer Hamm about everyone at the police station wearing a fake mustache as they get to their police car and let the water out of it. | satire | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0175385 | Bubblegum Crisis: Tokyo 2040 | The story takes place in Tokyo where much of the manual labor is done by robots called Boomers, which are run by a mega-corporation Genom. Linna Yamazaki, a new office worker, observes a Boomer that has “gone rogue”, causing destruction and attacking people. Although the AD Police are called in to stop the rogue Boomers, a renegade group called the Knight Sabers dressed in cybernetic, armored Hardsuits appear and save the day. Yamazaki joins the group which consists of: Priss, a rock star; Sylia, a boutique store owner and the group’s leader; and Nene, a computer whiz who also works within the AD Police as a dispatch operator.
Over the course of the series, the Knight Sabers go after the rogue boomers, which frustrates the AD Police officers Leon McNichol and his partner Daley Wong. Genom is not happy with the development. its leader Quincy Rosenkreutz and advisor Brian J. Mason seek to unlock more boomer technology. Meanwhile, the girls must deal with Sylia’s younger brother Mackey. Leon pursues Priss with romantic intentions, but does not know of her connection to the Knight Sabers.
Mason uncovers and reactivates Galatea, a humanoid based on Sylia’s DNA who is able to control all boomers. Genom cuts AD Police’s funding, resulting in a strike, however, Galatea’s influence causes boomers everywhere to go rogue, trapping the Knight Sabers and the AD Police folks inside their own building. The Knight Sabers follow and defeat Galatea at a satellite orbiting Earth. | sci-fi | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0092962 | Emmanuelle 5 | Emmanuelle (played by Monique Gabrielle) is a free-spirited woman who makes erotic arthouse films and runs a dance studio out of her loft in Paris.
The movie opens with a "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous" style montage of Cannes, with a documentary-like narration giving us an overview of the famous film festival held there every year. A film within a film, the sequence shows Emmanuelle premiering her latest film, Love Express, in Cannes, causing a scandal in the process. Later, she defends her film at a press conference to reporters who accuse her of creating pornography.
After the Q&A, Emmanuelle's producer introduces her to Prince Rajid, a wealthy despot who owns the fictional Arab country of Benglagistan. He is apparently obsessed with Emmanuelle and wants to premiere the film in his homeland.
Outside, a throng of male fans awaits Emmanuelle, all desperate for a touch of the famed beauty. Things quickly escalate and the mob strips her of every last article of clothing, sending her jumping onto a stranger's departing boat for safety. Her unwitting saviour is Charles D. Foster, a young millionaire who disapproves of Emmanuelle's erotic films. The couple quickly fall in love after a night of exciting sex on his yacht.
After an argument with the concerned Foster, Emmanuelle travels to Benglagistan to promote her film, and meets Eddie, an Indiana Jones style danger-seeker who befriends her. Prince Rajid kidnaps her for his harem and decides to make her one of his 50 wives. Eddie helps her escape, and together they run into the jungle. Charles send an army helicopter to help Emmanuelle. Eddie dies in the shootout but she escapes with the helicopter.
Emmanuelle joins Charles D. Foster on a midnight plane ride where they drink champagne and make love. The plane quickly falters and crashes into the mountains near Las Vegas. After being rescued and returning home to mourn her dead lover, she receives a note and flowers and realizes Foster is alive and loves only her. | pornographic | train | wikipedia | Emmanuelle 5 is Polish surrealist Walerian Borowczyk's penultimate theatrical feature, a film who's merits are hotly debated among cult and art film lovers.
Some see the movie as nothing more than a commercial sell-out, others as an interesting addition to his body of work.
Adding to the confusion is the fact that there are at least three versions: the theatrical European version, the heavily edited US version (including new scenes produced by Roger Corman!), and a European home video version including extra hard-core scenes that feature none of the principal cast.This time round Emmanuelle is portrayed by Monique Gabrielle, who is, in a jarring change, a bleach blonde American actress.
Never mind that the character is supposed to be French, it kind of works, mainly because Ms. Gabrielle has the sense to play the role with just the right nod and wink.
And while no actress came close to Sylvia Kristel's beauty, charm and class, Monique makes the role her own.
Since the film dispenses with any previous character back story, here she portrays Emmanuelle as a single, free-spirited woman who makes erotic art- films and runs a dance studio out of her beloved loft in Paris.The movie opens with a "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous" style montage of Cannes, with a documentary-like narration giving us an overview of the famous film festival held there every year.
It seems Emmanuelle is premiering her latest film, Love Express, in Cannes...
After the Q&A, Emmanuelle's producer, a smarmy French type, introduces her to Prince Rajid, a wealthy sheik who own's the fictional Arab country of Benglagistan.
He's apparently obsessed with Emmanuelle and wants to premiere the film in his homeland.
Foster, a nerdy, but handsome young millionaire who disapproves of Emmanuelle's erotic films.
Perhaps, but not before a journey back onto the Love Express and Prince Rajid kidnaps Emmanuelle, putting her in his harem.The version most people know is the English language American edit (which in addition to the new Corman scenes also utilizes Borowczyk's outtakes), perhaps the reason Emmanuelle 5 is dismissed by some.
The new scenes, while amusing, just don't gel with the traditional European style that people expect from Emmanuelle films.
While the original release of Emmanuelle 5 certainly doesn't lack a sense of humor, Corman's New Horizon version goes over the top with campy 80s comedy, seeming more like a companion to Bachelor Party (also starring Ms. Gabrielle) and other films of that ilk.
It's also clumsily edited - the transition between film quality is jarring.
What they attempt is admirable (give the story more cohesion, tighten the pacing), but apparently they didn't even bother doing a final film print edit, it was all put together on 3/4 video with a series of bad fade-ins and bleeds.
If you can track down a copy of Borowczyk's original theatrical edit of Emmanuelle 5, do so.
It's a smart, interesting film well worth owning, and has a lot more going for it than Monique Gabrielle's bare breasts..
For fans of Monique this movie is a must!.
Many versions exist of this film; none of them good..
Such a promising career early on as an important player in avant-garde European cinema, his talents wasted by the time this movie was made.
I can understand sometimes you have to pay the bills (ask Jean Rollin) by making porn, but this could have been made better.
The first 20 minutes are an extension of Emmanuelle's "Love Train" movie which we see being screened by Cannes audiences.
This 20 minute sequence contains 3 pornographic sequences, which look like they were intended for another film but found their way into Emmanuelle V.
(The sex toys on display are those of Borowczyk, I guess to make these scenes "arty").
After these sequences, the film continues in the same way as the American versions except for a porno sequence in the ballet school and a porno lesbian encounter at the sheik's harem (with more of Borowczyk's "personal collection").
Monique Gabrielle does not appear in any of the porno sequences, just the softcore ones.
For Monique Gabrielle, "Emmanuelle 5" did not become a long lasting breakthrough, but kept her in business.
The story is pretty straight: Emmanuelle is kidnapped by Rajid who locks her up in his harem.
Rajid behaves like a dictator and snores: "Women are weak", so he obviously didn't get to know Emmanuelle well enough yet.
Friends of Emmanuelle want to rescue her, but wait until plenty of women inside the harem have been filmed long enough ;-).Director Borowczyk was celebrating the character of Emmanuelle: "She is free, without prejudice, and she has confidence in herself" (quoted from "Cinema" 4/87).
Even though is has very little to do with the original Emmanuelle, Vol.5 is at least fun, moving faster than any other contribution to the series.
The scene which sticks to everybody's mind is right at the beginning, when an enthusiastic crowd tears Emmanuelle's clothes off at a film festival, so her only escape is a jump on a yacht whose owner is understandably bewildered.
I voted 7/8/6/4/6/7 for the six cinema films of the series.(Edit 2017) Nine years after my review above, I got a copy of the German version to watch.
I am not surprised that the American distributors decided to shoot additional scenes and re-edit the whole mess to make it more commercial - less art maybe, but a lot more enjoyable..
Penthouse queen Monique Gabrielle stars in this low budget Andy Sidaris style 'thriller' as an actress lured to some fictional middle eastern kingdom to be a sex toy for its cruel ruler.
What make the other Emmanuelle movies appealing is the way they drip with local color and jungly Asian atmosphere, not to mention steamy hothouse sex, and the previous installment (Emmanuelle IV) was still churning this out.
I haven't watched the movie in full yet, I am just coasting along merrily taking in the view, and the golden- tressed curves of the road makes for a pleasure-filled ride.
I don't think anybody else could have filled her shoes, even if she seems to be carrying them the whole time.Serious movie, clearly NO, but pretty heroine SURE ENOUGH.
Things happen way too soon and heavy-handed for us with the (ahem) refined tastes, but our salivating grease-monkey brethren want it no other way, and they'd be bored if the movie came in at a slower, more subdued pace, hence the unbelievably ridiculous Cannes scene.
While I don't want to rave too much about the 1970's Emmanuelle films, either the "official" French series with Sylvia Kristel or the more notorious unofficial "Black Emanuelle" series of Laura Gemser and Joe D'Amato, there was always SOMETHING interesting about them.
First off, they cast American B-movie bimbo Monique Gabrielle in the title role.
It's like casting Queen Latifah in the lead role of "Memoirs of Gisha".They did hire interesting if erratic director Walerian Borowzyc, but when he and Gabrielle clashed they fired him.
The European fascination for these kind of interracial sex scenes was not exactly a blow for civil rights (anymore than Joe D'Amato's fascination for equine masturbation was a blow for animal rights), but whether these cuts made the film less racist or more racist, they certainly ruined the rhythm of the movie, left Gabrielle and her equally untalented male co-star with too much screen time, and it's even hard to tell in the final cut that this film was shot on location on the beautiful island of Reunion--thus the movie loses all the travelogue appeal of the early series (other than an idiotic prologue set at Cannes where Gabrielle's character is chased and stripped naked by a mob of fans).After this fiasco the producers tried to recapture the European-flavor and old magic with "Emmanuelle 6" and by dusting off Syvia Kristel and teaming her with washed-up former James Bond George Lazenby in a French television series.
But finally, the "Emmanuelle" movies fell victim to silicone, both in the increasingly overstuffed breasts of increasingly untalented actresses, and in the "futuristic", computer- themed plots, which were apparently aimed at sexually frustrated "Star Trek" fans.
A sad end for a series that was never good, but certainly deserved better than this..
As such, the acting is near always amateurish and unrealistic; story line ridiculous if even existent; and most importantly, its structure is segregated into sex scenes with filler space between them to fake a movie format.
A good softcore movie has many great sex scenes, and somewhat entertaining if imbecile filler space.
"Emmanuelle 5" has only 4 sex scenes, mere 2 of which are decent, and 1:40 of BAD filler space.
Emmanuelle 5 (1987) * 1/2 (out of 4) Emmanuelle (Monique Gabrielle) is at Cannes showing off her latest film, which is bought by an Arab prince.
Emmanuelle goes to his small country for the premiere but soon she is held captive by the evil ruler who won't even allow women to show their legs or touch themselves but that's not going to sit well with our star.
Apparently there are three versions of this film; the original European version, an American edit and an alternate hardcore version.
I watched the American edit, which features some newly shot scenes as well as outtakes from the Euro version.
I've never been a huge fan of the director but I might go as far to say this is the most entertaining film I've seen from him.
If you've seen any of the Emmenuelle movies, whether the original series or the Black Emanuelle movies, then you know what to expect.
Gabrille isn't much of an actress but she does have a great body and shows it off enough to keep the film moving.
The biggest problem is the studio subplot dealing with the evil ruler who won't let women be free but of course we all know this movie was made to show women naked so the political message just comes off silly and rather stupid.
Apparently fans have called Borowczyk a sell out for doing this film but there's still plenty of "art" here to where he can call it his own.
I doubt his die-hard fans are going to give this film too much credit so I'd say those seeking cheap nudity will be the ones to enjoy this the most..
"Emmanuelle V" is the first entry in the infamous series to not feature Sylvia Kristel, the Dutch actress who made the character legend.
Monique Gabrielle takes the reins, and is admittedly awful in the role; her acting is abysmal, and she lacks the classy, Euro-style beauty of Kristel, and even Mia Nygren, who was featured in "Emmanuelle IV." It is easy to dismiss this as trash, but the film does possess a unique style, and features some striking, avant garde imagery throughout.
This opinion is based on the European theatrical version, as I have yet to see the version edited and altered by Roger Corman for North American release.
The Euro version runs for 84 minutes, and features almost non-stop nudity and sex, which is what one expects from this genre.
E5 is an editing disaster, random, surreal imagery is splattered across the screen, in a jarring, repetitive style.
For the first half hour, the film seems to go nowhere, but it certainly gets better when Emmanuelle heads to the Middle East, to find herself entrapped in Prince Rajid's harem.
There are some truly fine sequences, like when Emmanuelle is picked up and driven to the Prince's castle, by the Arab boy who calls himself Rocky Stallone!
When Emmanuelle tries to give him some money, he refuses, wanting instead, only a kiss from the beautiful movie star Emmanuelle.
The boy meets with a sad fate later in the film, while Emmanuelle must escape the fanatic Rajid.
"Emmanuelle 5" is a garish, but undeniably stylish and entertaining film.
Emmanuelle is not the classy and delicate French wife of an Ambassador, but rather an airhead, bleach blond American film star.
The uncut European DVD is the one to look for, however director Walerian Borocyvk claims in interviews that he had little to do with the filming of either version.
Not a very good film, but this one certainly deserves a cult following..
Emmanuelle, the globe-trotting whore, returns, this time portrayed by Monique Gabrielle, playing hanky panky with a US businessman, Charles Foster(..played by the nebbish Dana Burns Westburg) with considerable power and influence(..he has a New Jersey company which makes door knobs!)and her favorite photographer, Eric(Crofton Hardester).
Meanwhile, rather dumbly, Emmanuelle whisks off for the Middle East at the invite of a wealthy Shiek who wishes to produce a film with her, when, in actuality, he wants her as part of his harem of 50 wives!
The version I watched includes a local protector who helps Emmanuelle reach freedom(..he communicates with Foster, and the millionaire sends in a helicopter to lift the shack she was hiding to safety).The film is credited to Euro-cult director Walerian Borowczyk, but this never felt like a movie he'd make.
Instead, it seems like someone else, maybe this Steve Barnett guy, tampered with the product, tossing in random sequences featuring Emmanuelle engaged in foreplay and soft-core sex with whoever interests her appetites.
I think she provides the right kind of performance for the ridiculous, mind-numbingly juvenile material, playing around with the persona of Emmanuelle.
I grinned constantly at how she approaches the men, working them into a frenzy, like my favorite scene where she slowly disrobes for Eric when he surprises her with a visit to her office in the dance studio, or demanding Foster's coat after turning up on his boat buck naked due to the rowdy Cannes crowd stripping off her glamorous wardrobe(..this feels the most Borowczyk out of the movie I watched).
The Harem portion of the film looks like it was shot on cheap studio sets, and the most hilarious part is when Emmanuelle picks up a machine gun, blasting Shiek Rajid's(Yaseen Khan)soldiers as she and her men attempt to escape his jungle.
There's never a moment in the film I ever felt was played serious, you can kind of see how this fifth film in the Emmanuelle cycle was more broad farce, almost poking fun at the character and her willingness to step into problematic situations.
Most will call Gabrielle's performance "awful" or "the pits", but I think she could only play the character this way for the material just can not be taken with a grain of salt.
Is it a far cry from Kristel, known as the true Emmanuelle, I guess so, but Gabrielle certainly has a body to die for and we get to see plenty of it.
The most important thing to know about "Emmanuelle 5" is that Monique Gabrielle gets naked a lot.
He wants to host the premiere of her new film and force her to join his harem.
Does he really think he can control the wild and untamed Emmanuelle?
Soon Emmanuelle will make a break for it with the help of a photographer and an AK-47.Well, this wasn't a good movie but with this many breasts on display, I can't complain too much.
Gabrielle doesn't quite have the range necessary to tackle the demands of being Emmanuelle.
You know, like being able to act sad, happy, excited, distraught or just about any other emotion you can think of.
She has sex about four times and looks pretty good doing it.
There are also a lot of scenes in the harem where the topless women roam.
Overall, this Emmanuelle isn't worth the time but if you must see it, I doubt you'll get too upset watching it..
Borowczyk's penultimate film is a curious addition to the "official" Emmanuelle series, disowned by its director and unlikely to totally please either his fans or fans of the soft-core franchise.
But there's enough of Borowczyk to interest his admirers, even though the result is undeniably a confused mish-mash, with a plot line which vies with Emmanuelle 4 for the most ludicrous of the good lady's misadventures.The film begins with Emmanuelle (poorly played by the miscast blonde Monique Gabrielle) running into controversy at Cannes when her new film Love Express is premiered.
Critics don't seem to agree whether its art, pornography or a twisted version of "Walt Disney" a controversy similar to that generated by some of Borowczyk's earlier masterworks and Emmanuelle is chased by a raving mob of paparazzi along the Cannes main drag, which strips her naked and would have ripped her to shreds had not she sought refuge in the speedboat of a passing millionaire.
Rajid, a lunatic dictator and Orientalist stereotype par-excellence, kidnaps Emmanuelle and imprisons her in his harem.
But certain sections most notably the clips from Love Express demonstrate Borowczyk's usual artsy and disorientating approach to erotic mise-en-scene.
At times, the film seems like a random compendium of Borowczyk's abiding interests we see erotic memorabilia, the raging sea, the female struggle against objectification, the male attempt to impose his own kingdom on the world of things (Prince Rajid's country has some affinities with Goto, Island of Love).
But these affinities with Borowczyk's previous work are more like echoes from better days than a cohesive new artistic statement, and the film never creates the space in which these things believable though extraordinary in The Beast or Immoral Tales come across as slightly ludicrous affectations.The film was taken out of his hands some time between shooting and release, so I guess we'll never know how close this film is to Borowczyk's conception, or whether he could have made an artistically successful contribution to the Emmanuelle series.
Like the Kristel Emmanuelle films, Borowczyk's heyday was in the 70s, where there was a market for upmarket soft-core confections which he then managed to subvert into something far more rich and strange.
Emmanuelle 5 is worth seeing for both Borowczyk and Emmanuelle completists, but be aware that both had seen far better days. |
tt0236784 | The Tailor of Panama | Harry Pendel is a British expatriate living in Panama City and running his own successful bespoke tailoring business Pendel and Braithwaite. His wife and children are unaware that almost every detail of his life is fabricated, including his former partner, Mr Braithwaite. In reality, Harry Pendel is an ex-convict who learnt tailoring in prison.
Andy Osnard is a young British MI6 agent sent to Panama to recruit agents to gather intelligence and protect British trade interests through the canal. However, Andy has his own agenda and, after he discovers Harry's past, sees the perfect opportunity to recruit a new agent and extort money from the British government.
Concocting a fictitious network of revolutionaries, known as the silent opposition, Harry, through Andy, manages to attract the interest of the British secret services, U.K and even U.S. governments. However, Harry has used his own friends as the basis for his fantasies, and as the plots are taken more seriously they become known to the Panamanian authorities and Harry struggles to cope with the guilt of setting them up.
Harry's wife, Louisa, becomes suspicious of the amount of time he spends with Andy and suspects that Harry is having an affair. She breaks into his office and discovers all his fantastic lies.
Harry's friend, Mickie, kills himself rather than face the risk of going back to jail, and Harry helps dispose of the body, making it look like he was executed. As Mickie is the supposed leader of the silent opposition, the U.K. and U.S. governments use this as an excuse to topple the current Panamanian government.
At the end of the book the U.S. military has begun another invasion of Panama, based largely on Harry's fabrications, and Harry watches the destruction from the window of his house. | violence, intrigue, boring, romantic, flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0095126 | Mamba | The film takes place in Neu Posen, German East Africa sometime before the First World War. "Mamba" is the name given to a South African snake. The reptile of this adventure is Auguste Bolte (played by Jean Hersholt), who is constantly reminding those with whom he has a chance to converse that he can buy anything. He neglects his appearance and does not even bother to shave or brush his hair. The German officers hold themselves aloof from him and the only individual he has an opportunity to talk to at length is his valet-secretary, a Cockney, who feeds his master with flattery. One afternoon Bolte recalls that he has received a letter asking for 200,000 marks from Count von Linden. The Count is in Germany and in a footnote it is written that Bolte might marry von Linden's daughter, Helen. The white people of the post have as little to do with Bolte as possible and the British officers across the frontier also spurn him. It occurs to Bolte that a beautiful wife would perhaps help to make life more agreeable for him. He thinks also that the officers would then overlook some of his failings and be quite impressed. He therefore allies himself to Germany.
Helen (played by Eleanor Boardman), like most daughters who marry wealthy villains in melodramas, does so to save her father from ruin. There is a flash of the wedding and soon Helen and her ignoble husband are seen aboard the steamship bound for East Africa. On the same vessel is Karl von Reiden, the officer who is to take charge of the Neu Posen post. He is not averse to a little flirtation with a beautiful woman and therefore when Helen goes out on deck to avoid Bolte, Karl succeeds in meeting her. These scenes are fairly well filmed and the color effects are capital. Karl, played by Ralph Forbes, is a handsome fellow. So soon as he knows that Bolte is Helen's husband he realizes that the marriage is not to her liking. Later these passengers are on the river boat, and when that craft reaches Neu Posen. Bolte stands on the aft deck hoping to make all the German officers envious of his attractive bride. He later gives a feast and takes good care to make a show of his wealth, even to having a procession of natives carrying the viands.
A visit from a native woman interrupts the proceedings, and in a subsequent passage Bolte, enraged with his wife, is about to flog her with a whip when Karl comes to the rescue. All this happens just prior to the World War, and in the closing chapters word is received by both the Germans and the British that hostilities have been declared. Bolte, the snake, believes that money can buy his freedom from military service, but soon he learns otherwise. He is compelled to don a uniform and then decides to run away. His end is sudden, for he fires at one group of natives without knowing that others are behind him. They know something about Bolte and his pleas for his life fall on deaf ears. There follow episodes in which Karl goes to the rescue of Helen and others, who are in danger of an attack by the natives. These are pictured with due attention for red blood on the hero's shirt. It seems that the Britishers might have been more solicitous about Karl's wounds, but all the British commandant says when he comes up to Karl is to ask him whether he will have another Piccadilly cigarette. | revenge | train | wikipedia | (This has all the makings of a cheap exploitive thriller.)"Mamba" ("Fair Game" in the United States) is a decent, albeit somewhat exploitive thriller about Gene (Gregg Henry), a deranged computer game designer who locks his ex-fiancé Eva (Trudie Styler) inside their apartment with a deadly Black Mamba snake.Directed by Mario Orfini, he keeps a tight pace and strong sense of dread as Eva runs around her apartment trying to avoid certain death at the fangs of a lethal snake, all the while Gene watches the madness from a car parked down on the street.
Styler really carries this film on her delicate shoulders, even remaining strong in some of the sillier haunted house/slasher-style moments.
It does seem kind of strange that her apartment is devoid of windows (thus setting up the fun-house element for Gene's later entertainment).One thing that does seem to bother me is how the camera does seem fixated on Styler during a few instances when she has to strip off her clothes.
While the camera misses a few of the more explicit shots of her feminine features, you kind of get the idea that Orfini (and the audience) are still getting tantalized."Fair Game" gets a fair rating for at least keeping you watching.4/10.
"Fair Game" or "Mamba", which is the less imaginative but apparently official title for this film, actually is the simplified and much more straightforward version of the British early 80's thriller "Venom" starring Oliver Reed and Klaus Kinski.
That movie revolves on petty criminals facing the threat of a venomous black mamba snake whilst trying to take hostage the sickly son of a rich family.
It's a fun but incredibly far-fetched (the mamba ended up in the house through an "accidental" wrong delivery) film and the script is over-ambitious for its own good, with police forces surrounding the house and virulent intrigues between the kidnappers mutually, whereas basically it should have just been a claustrophobic lethal-snake-on-the-loose suspense movie.
Mario Orfini, writer/director of "Fair Game" and of course an Italian, obviously saw "Venom" as well and immediately realized that only the escaped snake formula is more than enough to attract horror audiences.
The rudimentary plot of "Fair Game" is reasonably effective just because of its simplicity, and it's merely the details and character drawings that cause major disbelief.
Gregg Henry ("Body Double", "Slither") is almost too good as the frustrated and seriously deranged ex-husband who can't process the separation from the joyous artist/play-dough sculptor Eva. What do you expect?
He buys a mamba, kills the seller, injects the animal with hormones to make her even deadlier and finally lets it loose in Eva's hermetically sealed flat without windows.
She faces a virulent battle with the slithering dose of venom whilst the psychopath watches everything in his car via a computer-designed game.
"Fair Game" naturally is a highly improbable thriller, of course, but the approaching snake sequences are undeniably suspenseful.
The score and sound-effects, although inspired by the legendary "Psycho" shower sequence noises, are terrific and the film contains approximately 30 ingenious POV shots, even though admittedly they serve more to provide glorious shots of Trudie Styler's bottom.
Speaking of which, Mrs. Sting proves herself to be a very untalented actress but, in all fairness, performing all alone with just a not-so-talkative animal in the room isn't exactly the most grateful role you can get.
Interesting little detail for horror fanatics surely is that Bill Moseley forms the entire supportive cast all by himself in his second 'important' role after starring in "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre II"..
All's fair in love and murder, apparently, as a man attempts to kill his ex-wife through use of a modified exotic, poisonous snake.
To ensure that his wife not escape, he jams her door (apparently she only has one?) and taps into her phone which allows him to periodically call in to make sure she's still alive.Fair Game probably has one of the most interesting premises I've seen in a while but, due to only having one real potential victim, it gets bogged down by a ton of false scares.
You keep seeing the snake seemingly draw near or think it's going to pop out only for the woman to miss it entirely.
After that, the woman's paranoia causes her to act out in increasingly bizarre ways as he panics.Long before Kill Bill popularized the black mamba, it was being used as the exotic snake of choice in this movie.
Trudie Styler, the intended victim, gives a very witty, neurotic performance that will endear her to some while likely annoying others.
This level of weirdness, however, may make the viewer question why she'd be the one to leave the relationship >_> Gregg Henry, her would-be killer, plays the role rather stoically and has few bits of dialog to speak of.
More interesting than either the male or female leads is the brief cameo by Bill Moseley, who ironically is the only cast member to really do much with the rest of his career (one that's spanned numerous horror films, might I add).The title refers to the notion that the man is giving his ex-wife a chance of survival.
If the movie has one real fault it would be that very little happens at first but once things start happening it quickly loses the shock value and gets fairly campy..
Trudie Styler holds the film together?.
I don't know what movie the one reviewer saw, but it is clear from this that Ms. Styler is NO actress.
Maybe the work she has done in other films is decent, but I have yet to see it or find the other films.This one, on the other hand is awful: weak plot, weak characters, bad cinematography, and horrible dialogue.
Not worth the price of the rental no matter HOW tempting the 99 cent rack may be....."Return of the Killer Tomatoes" was money better spent than this.The gist of the story: Video game inventor takes revenge out on girlfriend who left him by trapping her in her loft/building/house with a deadly mamba.Parts of this are so ridiculous that I find it difficult to type them: this guy (Greg Henry) injects the snake with it's own hormones to make it produce more venom.
I guess the moron writing the script couldn't be bothered to pick up the "Idiot's guide to basic knowledge of herpetology" or even turn on the t.v. to catch a couple of Steve Irwin's misadventures into the snake world to know that this cannot happen.....but I digress.
When Trudie's character does realize she has a cold blooded guest in the house, her methods of protecting herself look like slap-stick - and one need not look too deep to see that the homely Mrs. Sting seems a little TOO enthused about her self (i.e.
Another factoid that is laughable in this disaster and poor excuse of a movie is the way she affords her rather spacious and expensive looking digs: she makes Play-Dough sculptures - that's right, boys and girls: PLAY-DOUGH SCULPTURES - for kids.
And her work is anything but inspiring, let me tell ya'.Her running around the loft/house/warehouse home of hers, running from the snake as if it were a machete wielding Jason has it's hilarious moments, all unintentional by the way, but the ending is a real screamer....check this out only when you hate yourself, but not enough to commit Hari-Kari..
It's a concise, yet mildly exciting close quarters psychological/deadly animal-on-the-loose thriller that puts to good use its short running time.
After the humid, nihilistic set-up involving Bill Moseley (snake handler) and a domineering Gregg Henry in seamy, heartless mode collecting/and testing out his newly acquired mamba.
There it moves onto young headstrong sculptress Eva (performed with ticker by Trudie Styler) soon to be ex-wife to Gene (Gregg Henry).
His plan is to seal off her windowless loft and unknowingly to her release a steroid-injected mamba, as he sits outside in his car getting his rocks off watching the mamba hunt its prey on a tracking device from his lap-top monitor.
The lengths this vindictive man would go to can be seen as a power trip showing that his strike is just as lethal, if not deadlier than the snake.A very elaborate, although not foolproof get-up...
Styler's character escapes a trapped relationship thinking that it's all behind her, but finds herself literally caught in another enclosed battle.
In a way it's a waiting game as she spends a good amount of time unaware of the threat, poking and prodding about, leading to set-piece after set-piece of close shave encounters.
Many thanks to my friend and student at the time, Sergio Canto, who got the passes to the screening.P.S. I could take a line or two to outline what I remember about the plot of the "film," but that's as much as the writer did, so I guess I won't bother..
You know how some movies are so bad, they're good?
DVR this...watching it double speed is fine - just slow down for the ridiculous rare dialog.The film appears to be entirely an Italian production.
I kept guessing that the only way this was made was that it was written, directed, and starring Trudy Styler, and produced by Sting...to keep her busy.
But nope, unless Sting paid off a bunch of Italian people, it looks like someone actually read this and thought "hey, this worth making".
Gene Campbell (Henry) buys a deadly black mamba snake and traps his former wife Eva (Styler) in her apartment with the snake.
He sits outside in his car, monitoring both the snake and Eva on a computer tracking device.
Speaking of dialogue, Henry is great in his role as the deranged electronics whiz who, feeling jilted by his former wife, decides shooting and stabbing her are so old-fashioned and having her get bitten by a poisonous snake is the wave of the future.
She must make a lot of money making play-doh sculptures of octopi to afford her gigantic, vast, windowless apartment.
She doesn't wear pants throughout most of the movie, even when putting on all her clothes to protect herself against the snake, the pants don't last very long.
You'll wonder why Sting wanted to marry her.It is established that Eva is an animal lover, so maybe it was out of pure diabolical evil that Gene wanted to use that against her and kill her with a snake.
There is an animal theme throughout the movie, from Eva's shirt with a fish on it, to their names (Eva = Eve, i.e., Adam and Eve and the snake, and Gene = the genetic map of life), and her sculptures.Also, music legend Giorgio Moroder not only did the music, but also co-produced the film.
There are only three characters in the entire film, and one, Bill Moseley's character, only in the beginning as the snake salesman.
Technically, there is also an uncredited actor as a delivery boy, but this primarily two-person (in two separate places, mostly) film almost could have been a play.
Bizarrely directed by Mario Orfini, "Fair Game" is an oddity.For more insanity, please visit: comeuppancereviews.com.
A clever and intriguing concept is poorly handled in this 'killer snake' thriller starring Trudy Styler (wife of pop icon, 'Sting').
This starts off brilliantly as twisted boyfriend and video game engineer, Greg Henry purchases a deadly black mamba off of nomad snake-handler (played well as usual by Bill Moseley in an all-to-brief appearance).
This opening scene does a tremendous job of displaying the icy remorselessness of Henry's character as he disposes of Moseley just before unleashing the snake into the giant loft apartment of his artistic ex-girlfriend, Styler in order to play a sick revenge game.
She sinks an all time low in her eccentric display of stupidity when she dumps powder all over the floor and gets on top of the refrigerator, pointlessly attacking the snake with eggs and shouting "filthy, filthy!", meanwhile, Henry watches on his computer in a near-by, high-tech stakeout.
Styler eventually redeems herself in a clever and final confrontation with Henry, but by then, it loses interest, and the camera prowling about the floors of the apartment imitating the snake looks unrealistic.
Its worth seeing for the good opening and Greg Henry as the cold and abhorrent villain, but Styler's character's attempted self-redeeming woman is just so laughable..
A narcissistic intellectual video game designer doesn't appreciate the fact that his "weakling" ex-girlfriend has moved on with her life, trying to earn a living from her putty sculptures(?!)enjoying the fruits of her labor in a posh vast loft, blessed with limited windows, highly secure.
Gene(Gregg Henry)decides to put an end to this by "inheriting" a deadly venomous black mamba, required by a snake handler(Bill Moseley, in one his many grubby roles..the actor has a whole trunk load of these parasites he can pluck for use)he dupes and murders.
Gene's plan at eliminating an "ungrateful" inferior girlfriend is to seal Eva's(Trudie Styler, and hour or so of running time spent with her is enough for any wary viewer to endure)home, locking her inside with the Mamba snake, with a special tracking device on both of them, watching their "progress" from his car.
Gene injects more hormones in the snake supposedly giving it a limited life expectancy providing the Mamba with "extra motivation" for attacking anyone in it's proximity..Gene even has a timer set on his computer as to when the snake would die if it couldn't release it's venom in time.
So the main meat of the film is Eva by herself practicing meditation and yoga, talking and joking to herself, making funny expressions to herself in the mirror, and generally goofing off until she realizes the snake is in there with her..and the fact that her loft is locked tight with no exit it seems.
The film often cuts to Gene in his vehicle, "sweating" it out as the counter clicks away and Eva often evades the deadly fangs of the Mamba.I would recommend seeing this film for those interested in Gregg Henry.
The DVD release of "Just Before Dawn", and films like "Slither", "Payback" and "Body Double" feature his talents.
It probably is if you find Trudie Styler interesting or entertaining, because, in just my opinion, the film hangs on her likability..she is in the film the most and it's her plight we must be concerned with.
I say if you like Styler's performance and character, the film will work..if not, then you'll feel the same way I did.
Really, the interesting premise on paper never quite materializes on screen although, as I've mentioned already, Henry's villain is quite memorable.
To be honest, in a real movie, a character such as Styler's would've been mincemeat.
Trudie styler(aka mrs sting) plays the ultimate game of keep away from one angry venomous reptile placed there by a spurned computer game playing geek.(it's always the quiet ones you know?)most of the plot is incredulous to be generous,but i did think the one scene where she dumps flour on the floor to track the mamba's movements was pretty smart.
well if nothing else if you have ever wondered what sting's wife bare bottom looks like, then you will see it in all its pale moon glory!
i laughed, i cried,(not really i cheered for the snake!)and for the first time , i honestly believe that i could have mane a better movie than Italian director mario orsini.
for one thing there would have been more shots of her fine hiney, and less of the geek in the car watching the game unfold with a voyeur's delight..
"Fair Game" is a really weak and barely worthwhile horror film.**SPOILERS**Conducting a business deal, Gene Campbell, (Gregg Henry) purchases a deadly mamba snake from Frank, (Bill Moseley) a renown dealer of exotic and deadly snakes.
Still upset over his divorce from Eva, (Trudie Styler) he pays her a visit to her apartment and uses it as an excuse to leave the snake behind.
Forced to defend herself, she tries to stay alive as the snake stalks her within the spacious building.The Good News: There wasn't much of anything to this one.
The fact that there's a real snake to this one is a big plus, as those that are used to giant killer snakes will have been used to terrible CGI or barely realistic-looking prosthetics, and one where the creature is actual and real does draw some benefits to it.
The house where it takes place is actually really nice, giving off a nice Gothic feel with it's spacious rooms, off-beat designs and intricate furniture all give it a unique look that serves well to make it really enjoyable and the perfect opportunity for something fun and enjoyable.
The last big plus is that the final confrontation, which is the focal point of the whole film, deals with the snake stalking her through the house, and these are all full-on, tense and exciting scenes.
From the bathroom confrontation to the scenes of the snake attacking in the living room, there's a lot to like about them.
The fire scenes are just as good, and lend a little more believability to the film that, along with the real snake, make for a really fun scene.
It's not entirely exciting watching her walk around doing yoga or trying wacky means of fitting food into refrigerators, or even stuff like the constant phone calls or flipping around the TV aren't that interesting at all, and the stuff that goes on while the snake's stalking her isn't any better.
There's three people who have screen-time over ten seconds, and with a snake in the film, the deaths are guaranteed not to be too graphic at all, which is pretty common anyways.
These here are the film's weak points.The Final Verdict: With a few good points about it and not a whole lot really wrong with it, this one ends up being incredibly underwhelming. |
tt2354407 | Teri Meri Kahaani | In 1960, aspiring musician Govind (Shahid Kapoor) and popular Bollywood superstar Ruksar (Priyanka Chopra) meet on a train heading to Bombay, India. Ruksar had run away from her home Lucknow with her best friend to become a film star. The two bond over their careers but part ways after arriving in Bombay. Govind befriends Radhika (Prachi Desai), a confident and modern girl, who is charmed by his simplicity. Ruksar and Govind meet again and hit it off at a party, but Govind notices a photo journalist following them. He holds Radhika's hand to mislead the journalist, unaware that Radhika has fallen in love with him. Radhika is the best friend Ruksar had run away with, and the two tell each other about the man they've fallen in love with, not realising he is the same person. When Ruksar, Radhika and Govind all meet, the three realise what happened and brokenheartedly part ways.
In London in 2012, college students Krish and Radha meet after Krish breaks up with his girlfriend, Meera (Neha Sharma), on his birthday. After a misunderstanding between Krish and Radha is cleared, they become friends and spend time getting to know each other. When Meera learns that Krish is with Radha, she angrily uploads embarrassing photos of him to Facebook that go viral. Radha learns that Krish spent the night with her on his birthday only two hours after he broke up with Meera, but when she tries to talk to him, he is too busy retaliating against Meera. Frustrated and heartbroken, Radha leaves.
The film rewinds to 1910 Sargodha during the times of the British Raj. Javed, a Punjabi Muslim womaniser with a talent for reciting poetry, meets Aradhana, a young woman in the village, while being chased by the police. They become acquainted, but Javed's flirty nature upsets Aradhana. Javed insists she is special and focuses all his attention on her. He joins Aradhana's father in a protest for freedom from the British, but when officers begin to physically abuse the protestors, Javed hides while Aradhana's father is beaten. Aradhana is disgusted with him. To appease her, Javed allows himself to be beaten and arrested in front of her. She visits him in jail and tells him their love cannot happen, but he asks her to wait. Three months later, Javed is freed, but he learns that Aradhana was married a month before. Aradhana tells Javed in tears that she only got married to make her father happy. Soon after, Javed also must marry for his father's happiness. Aradhana comes to the wedding to see him one last time. During the vows, Javed realises Aradhana is wearing a widow's clothes and stops the wedding, insisting on marrying Aradhana.
To conclude, all three couples are revisited. In 1960, Govind packs up and boards a train, but is followed by Ruksar, and the two reconcile. In 2012, Krish speaks to Meera and Radha one more time, severing ties with Meera and confessing his true love to Radha. In 1910, Javed and Aradhana vow that their love will not only last this lifetime but for all lifetimes to come. | romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0195778 | Here on Earth | Kelvin "Kelley" Morse and Jasper Arnold become involved in a car race and accidentally damage a restaurant owned by Samantha Cavanaugh's parents. Both are sentenced to perform community service by repairing the damage. Although Kelley comes from a wealthy family and Jasper's parents are working-class, they soon find themselves fighting over the same girl, Samantha. While Jasper and Samantha have been dating publicly for years, in secret, Kelley and Samantha begin to spend time together. They soon find that they have more in common than they imagined, and they fall in love. Eventually, Jasper learns of their interlude and doesn't like it. During a trip to Kelley's home in Boston, Kelley reveals to Samantha that his mother killed herself. Samantha brings Kelley into the house and they sleep together. In the morning, after Sam makes Kelley breakfast, Kelley's father arrives and informs him he must attend college early and give up his fling with Samantha. Upon returning to the small town, Samantha's parents soon learn that their daughter has osteosarcoma, stemming from a track/field injury, and only a few months to live. Samantha tells Kelley that she thinks everyone has their own heaven and it is made of a combination of all the things we loved in life. She says that his mother has Kelley with her in her heaven. When Kelley learns the awful truth, he must decide if he should obey his father's wishes and go to college or stay by the side of the first girl he's ever loved. In the end he returns to be with Samantha during her final months of life. At her funeral, Kelley recites a passage from a poem he and Sam loved. The film closes with a shot of Samantha running through a field in her version of heaven. | romantic, melodrama | train | wikipedia | But it is better than many of the "teem movies" made recently.Sam (Leelee Sobieski) is a small town girl whose big plans to go to UM on a track scholarship got waylayed by a knee injury.
She has a boyfriend Jas (Josh Hartnett) that she has known forever, he loves her ("I know you better than anyone, Sam."), but we can see there isn't the passion one expects of true love.Along comes Kelley (Chris Klein), the smart (valedictorian) rich kid who is stuck on himself, the last person Sam's sister and parents want her to get mixed up with.
To rate it a "1" as so many have, or to call it "possibly the worst movie of all time" are just absurd.The DVD was fine, with Dolby 5.1 sound, but the extras consist primarily of several trailers for other films put out by this company..
Leelee Sobieski was as good in this as she was in Joan of Arc. Josh Hartnett who plays her small town (boy)friend was so sweet you almost wanted him to get the girl.
Jasper (Josh Hartnett) is a local hick with a good heart and a bad temper.
I actually liked Josh Hartnett better than I did Klein.
Actors Josh Hartnett and Chris Klein I also give a 10 for having a cute face..
Writer Michael Seitzman also wrote North Country, a movie I'll now be avoiding like the plague.I think "The Plague" was a working title for Here On Earth.This is director Mark Piznarski's only feature film, his credits including television shows, TV movies, and the sixth director for a documentary about drying paint.
It is a movie based entirely on a love triangle with three unlikable characters; consequently, no one cares who ends up with who.
And by the time the climax comes, Sam is so unlikeable you just really don't care what happens to her.Finally, this weak plot may have worked(not likely, but possibly) if they had chosen some different actors.
You don't know why Sam (Leelee Sobieski) falls for Kelley (Chris Klein), or why Jasper (Josh Hartnett) allows it.
Plot points follow this paragraph, by the way, but you might save yourself a lot of boredom if you just read them.The manner in which we are supposed to feel sympathy for Leelee Cantactworthadamn's character is simple.
Hell On Earth, by comparison, seems geared to prove that Hollywood is only geared towards a very narrow, rigid demographic.In case I haven't impressed upon you how bad this trash is, let me close by just saying that this film's entire plot was done a billion times better in about twenty minutes of Groundhog Day..
Enter Klien, a spoiled rich kid with a bad attitude who burns down her family's restaurant in a chicken race, and Sobieski falls head over heels in love with him because (a) she sees him naked to the waist and sweaty and (b) they like the same poem.
The dialogue is filled with stilted cliches and fortune-cookie attempts at pseudo-philosophy.Apparently aiming at being a moving and profound look at life and love, the film ends up being merely pretentious.
Its a Great love story, surprises, and you can definately feel chemistry between Klein and Sobiesky.
I can't think of one element in this movie that was original, worthy of watching or interesting.Note to all you Josh Hartnett/Chris Klein/LeeLee Sobieski fans - enjoy their collective fifteen minutes, folks, because they're not going to be famous much longer....
Samantha Cavanaugh (Leelee Sobieski) works in her family's restaurant and is the sweetheart of Jasper Arnold (Josh Hartnett).
One day, Kelley Morse (Chris Klein), a spoiled rich young man goes to her restaurant, and challenges and offends Jasper.
I watched this movie just because of the teen stars (Josh Hartnett, Leelee Sobieski and Chris Klein).
The characters totally stink, Klein switches from being a big jerk to a gentleman, and Sobieski is so flat and uninteresting that half way through the movie I kept wishing something would happen and she would just die.This movie is a big waste of time.
Every time that Josh Hartnett was in it, he was either having a fight, starting a fight or sweet talking Sam. After Sam was in hospital i just gived up on this movie.
I never hoped to see the credits on a movie before until i saw this.FINAL THOUGHTS Josh Hartnett should quit the love films and go onto action, thrillers and horrors.
This very poor movie considers true love the one of a pretty face with flowers and a night of pleasure instead of the one of every day, the one that lovers build every minute with every gesture and breath, the not so predictable.
Okay, so maybe I did enjoy the film A LOT for the simple reason of the gorgeous and talented Josh Hartnett being in it but I did think the film was good anyway.
the only character in the film who has a backbone and decency is the poor kid's best friend...Don't waste your time, I've already done that for you....
Chris Klein's "gee, I'm a sensitive male" is getting a little old.I will forever hold a grudge against my friend for making me watch this instead of playing a round of golf like I had originally went over to his house to do..
The main character is arrogant, he's sleazy, he's ungrateful, he makes fun of poor people - it seems like they're setting up some kind of redemption story, but then they forgot to film the redemption parts!
This is the first Chris Klein movie where I don't want to hang out with his character (and yes this includes Street Fighter).Why are we supposed to cheer on Leelee Sobieski as she cheats on her boyfriend with this guy?
They have zero chemistry and they never portray her boyfriend as anything less than a good guy, and I'd argue more women would choose Josh Hartnett over Chris Klein- it's mind-boggling that we're supposed to sympathize with her as she makes out with Klein RIGHT IN FRONT OF HER BOYFRIEND'S BEST FRIEND and he's supposed to be the bad guy for ratting them out?
With the opportunities that Chris Klein has had over the past few years in his yet young acting career, this film shows that he can really move an audience.
By the end of this movie you can't stand Klein and you really don't care what happens to Leelee.
Here on EarthFalling for someone out of your social class is only acceptable if you're the poor one.If you're middle-class like the girl in this romantic movie, however, you get to choose.When affluent Kellie (Chris Klein) and the underprivileged Jasper (Josh Hartnett) crash their cars into Sam's (Leelee Sobieski) family's restaurant during a street race, both delinquents are ordered to repair the damages.Although she is seeing Jasper, during the reparations on her parents' place Sam starts dating Kellie for his intellectual prowess.
He hits on waitress Samantha Cavanaugh (Leelee Sobieski) and gets into a road race with her boyfriend Jasper Arnold (Josh Hartnett).
The movie has a great cast who play there characters good, I think we are going to hear a lot more about that three young actors..
Josh Hartnett was the only good thing about this movie, but even he was not enough to save it.
If I had not read the back of the video box before watching the movie, I probably would not have even known what the character's names were.
I like Hartnett's character from the start, probably because I was only watching the movie for him.
So you like the new boy in town, at least have the class and decency to break up with your boyfriend before you start making out, geography style, in the grass.I would give this movie a 1, but I think that Josh Hartnett, and the cows, saved it from that rating so I'm giving it a 2/10..
The characters are merely cookie cutter at best: the young, doomed girl whom is torn between her love of the past and the breath of fresh air sweeping through the sleepy town; Kelley, the poor/rich boy who learns a life lesson and of course Jasper: the jilted lover.
Hiss!Chris Klein is way too sensitive in this movie and Leelee Sobieski's movements are very awkward--in fact it is painful to watch her.
(Think back to the scene in the kitchen with her "dancing" around) Josh Hartnett redeems the movie a bit with a character that actually has more than one layer.
It's definitely not a movie for the intellectual crowd, but I think most teens looking for a good romance will enjoy it.
Chris Klein was very handsome in this movie, so if your a fan of his, you will like that aspect of it.
The actors and actresses did a wonderful job in making you know what they felt like in the movie.
After watching this movie..(don't read the last part if you don't wanna know anything about the ending) I learned that life is too short and not to cheat on anyone because I realized how truly hurtful is really is.
As the end credits rolled by to the strains of Britney-with-vocal-chops Jessica Simpson, it occurred to me that this movie was little more than a vehicle for promoting musicians from the Fox affiliated stable.The plot and characterization are so sterile and free of the burden of reality that I remember thinking more than once "who would care?"I don't think I'm alone when I say that teenage life is just not like this, and few people that I know seriously think "love" is this important and all-consuming.
Here on Earth stars Josh Hartnett and Leelee Sobieski as Jasper and Sam, two semi-poor teenagers who have been best friends/in love all their lives.
Though the ideas are somewhat cliché and trite, the overall ending and film are too good to miss.Rating:Cast: EXCELLENT (5 out of 5)Characters: VERY GOOD (4 out of 5)Success in the overall genre: SUPERB (6 out of 5)Script: TOO GOOD TO RESIST (1039449359834346443 out of 5)You will be sucked into the emotions of the characters and fall in love, feel you are taking somewhere else, yet stay right here on earth.PS: You won't ever look at Robert Frost's "Birches" again- trust me!.
Kelley (Chris Klein) is a spoiled rich brat at the beginning of the movie and is still one at the end.
i think the plot is quite fine, though a bit old fashioned, is till like it cos it's so touching!this film has a special charming point, the setting is quite cool and the cast is awesome!!!
Chris Klein, Josh Hartnett and Leelee Sobieski star in"Here On Earth," a movie that had promise in the beginning but ran out of gas.Despite the talent of these three young stars, "Here On Earth" falls apart at the seams because there really is no sense of direction as to where the movie should go.
Chris Klein, Josh Hartnett and Leelee Sobieski star in"Here On Earth," a movie that had promise in the beginning but ran out of gas.Despite the talent of these three young stars, "Here On Earth" falls apart at the seams because there really is no sense of direction as to where the movie should go.
I mean who wants to watch a movie about a girl who is trapped between two loves, I unfortunately did because I didn't know going into it."Here On Earth" did do one positive thing for me, which solidified that Chris Klein has come to Hollywood becoming one of the brightest new talents.This is a movie I wanted to see at the theaters, so when it came on video I rented it right away.
I had actually been waiting for weeks for this movie to come out (I love good dramas ecspecially with new, young actors...) I had high expectations for this movie, and although they were nearly met, more plot development and less moping of the characters would have helped.
Still, I found myself feeling sad for the good guy that doesn't get the girl, and happy for the other "good guy"(you have to see it to know what I mean.) Almost everyone around me was crying, and there were many touching points in the movie(ie.-"Kelley's Speech".) For some in the theater, during points that were supposed to make you mad, one guy sitting behind me actually yelled profanities at one of the characters who enraged him.
Talk about involving your audience!All in all ,see this movie when you feel like thinking about life--and the meaning, or lack thereof..
This movie was good, everyone acted great, but this attempt to be a tear-jerker was not there.
Chris Klein (as Kelley) comes across as a despicable elitist throughout the film - his supposed transformation into a nice guy is unconvincing.
Josh Hartnett actually seemed to express some real emotion - in stark contrast to the robotic performances of Klein and Sobieski.The intended moral of the story is that life is precious and you should live every moment to the fullest.
So I will never again waste an hour and a half of my life watching another movie as bad as this one.".
This brings him in contact with a girl with a secret (Leelee Sobieski), who finds herself torn between her new interest and a lifelong friend (Josh Hartnett).The perpetual teen film takes on a new direction with far more sobering, sometimes sweet, but over-sentimental tale of young love.
Hartnett is a rare find, and will be seen later in Virgin Suicides to better advantage, though here he gives a rather nice and intelligent performance in a simple character.There are some lovely elements in Here on Earth, and for its target audience, it's a welcome change from male-dominated teen dramas that flood the market.
Good acting by Leelee Sobieski and Josh Hartnett..
Albeit Leelee Sobieski and Chris Klein, who fell flat through much of the movie, weren't as compelling, real teens were well represented by Josh Hartnett.
the actors were great also, Chris Klein did a great job considering its his 3rd movie.
i thought that the acting was good, but i josh harnett didn't play in enough scenes, it was a great story about love and lost and finding love.
chris klein was great for this being his third movie and leelee was great also.
this movie contained all the young actors in hollywood and it was just a great story about love and family and life..
What was supposed to me a touching, moving romance about 2 teens that fall in love was ruined by a really lousy script, so-so acting, and all together I didn't think the story was put together very well.
Kelley played by Chris Klein (a major HOTTIE) and Sam played by LeeLee Sobieski.
While obviously trying hard to be the "Love Story" of 2000, with a very similar structure, the film fails to capture what made that old movie an instant classic..
Leelee gave an ok performance, Chris' was better but I think Josh's was the best, not just because I'm a fan.
Chris 'dude, don't I look like Keanu Reeves' Klein, Leelee 'I'm Helen Hunt's clone' Sobieski and Josh 'Get me a haircut NOW' Hartnett are great actors if they are given the possibility to prove it.
Otherwise, it's a nice story about being young and in love and feeling torn.I recommend this film if you want to watch something sweet without complexities..
Between Leelees whining, Chris Kleins plastic Ken-doll smile and Josh Hartnets permanently perplexed expression I found it hard to make it through.I think the casting director might have been asleep at the wheel.It is supposed to be a tragic love story but the tragedy begins when you press play and continue to watch.
If you like predictable, dull plots and bad acting this movie is for you!.
Here On Earth is a wonderful heart-touching movie, with good acting all the way through.
If you don't follow my advice, Chris Klein or another horrible actor in this movie might make a good film, and because of this movie you won't be able to bring yourself to watch their movie.
HERE ON EARTH (2000) ** Chris Klein, Leelee Sobieski, Josh Hartnett, Annette O' Toole, Bruce Greenwood, Michael Rooker, Annie Corley.
Chris Klein plays a guy who is a complete jerk in the film, and steals away Josh Hartnett's longtime girlfriend.
If the writer knew what they were doing, this film would have followed the proven formula, and made Hartnett an ass, and Leelee as the girlfriend trapped in a bad relationship, from which she's saved by Klein.
This movie was TERRIBLE, but Josh Hartnett was great!.
I rented this movie the other day b/c I love romance stories, but this has got to be the worst one I have ever seen in my life.
The only good thing about the movie was Josh Hartnett.
I thought he did a wonderful acting job, and I'm going to start watching more movies of his..
Go back to humping your American Pies.This movie was terrible in almost every sense, save Josh Hartnett's mildly endearing performance as LeeLee's stiffed boyfriend Jasper.
If you like Josh or are thinking of casting a kid who knows a few things, he's your man.
Sam (LeeLee Sobieski) is a raving idiot for living nice guy Jasper (Josh Hartnett) for snobby rich-kid Kelly (Chris Klein)This movie is a piece of trash.
I never really understood for a moment how this romance between Kelley (Chris Klein) and Samantha (Leelee Sobieski) ever got started.
Rich good looking kid gets in trouble, poor girl falls in love with him, jealous ex-boyfriend causes tension..
You want dynamic characters in a movie, but Chris Klein's jumped around so much that you couldn't tell if he was coming or going.
We are lied to, and forced to believe that the funny guy from American Pie (Chris Klein), and the sappy girl from Deep Impact (Leelee Sobieski) are supposed to in love? |
tt0090856 | Club Paradise | Jack Moniker (Robin Williams) is a Chicago firefighter who becomes injured on the job. Using his disability money, he decides to retire and live the good life in a small Caribbean island called Saint Nicholas. He buys a small amount of property there and lives among other washed-up personalities such as Anthony Croyden Hayes (Peter O'Toole). Appointed by the British crown as governor of St. Nicholas, Hayes is more concerned with vacationing than governing. Miss Phillipa Lloyd (Twiggy), who is visiting St. Nicholas with some sailor friends of hers, decides to stay permanently and becomes Jack's girlfriend in the process. He playfully refers to her as "Miss Philadelphia".
Jack befriends financially troubled reggae musician Ernest Reed (Jimmy Cliff), and they together form "Club Paradise," which they market as a Club Med-style resort complete with a brochure that features photographs of Jack in various disguises on every page. This attracts a handful of tourists, including Barry and Barry (Rick Moranis and Eugene Levy) who are there for the pot and the women. Much of the film involves the tourists' comic misadventures adjusting to island life and the low-rent facilities of Club Paradise. Also travelling to the island is New York Times travel writer Terry Hamlin (Joanna Cassidy) who ends up spending most of her time in the company of Governor Hayes. Adding to the fun is suburban housewife Linda White (Andrea Martin), who is vacationing with her plastic surgeon husband Randy (Steven Kampmann). She tries her hand at just about everything the island has to offer, including cliff diving lessons from two handsome instructors, Christopher and Helmut.
Voit Zerbe (Brian Doyle-Murray) plays a key role, as a developer who wants to run Jack and Ernest off their property so he can build a massive high-end casino on the beach as part of a deal he's making with two business partners - one Swiss, the other Arab. To do that, he uses the help of the local prime minister Solomon Gundy (Adolph Caesar) and the prime minister's men to cause trouble and get Club Paradise to close "legally." Jack and Ernest go so far as to sneak aboard Zerbe's yacht to provide some "useful intelligence" for Governor Hayes by finding out what is going to happen to the future of Saint Nicholas. They skin dive to the yacht (not before Jack brings a helium tank instead of an oxygen tank) where they are captured by local police and thrown in jail. When Prime Minister Gundy's strong arm tactics don't work, he orders a military takeover of the island. Ernest builds up a resistance force, and St. Nicholas is soon threatened with the possibility of civil war, which is averted at the last minute with assistance from Jack and Governor Hayes. When Gundy's takeover fails, Zerbe and his partners leave Saint Nicholas and head for the Cayman Islands. Jack is then inspired to create a new tagline for the club: "Club Paradise: Your Hot Spot for Fun With Guns in the Sun." | comedy, humor | train | wikipedia | The charm is in its Carribbean setting, the mostly reggae soundtrack, Jimmy Cliff's character and Robin Williams' character--while we're at it throw Peter O'toole in their too.
Before Robin Williams solidly established himself as a star in "Good Morning, Vietnam", he starred in several innocuously silly movies such as "Club Paradise".
There, he joins up with tour guide Ernest Reed (Jimmy Cliff) and the two of them open a wild business, with the help of Gov. Anthony Cloyden Hayes (Peter O'Toole).
Once the rich American tourists start arriving, the high finks take off.The movie is mostly an excuse for a bunch of goofy things to happen, especially when the characters played by Eugene Levy and Rick Moranis embarrass themselves.
True, Williams did better with some of his later work, but "Club Paradise" is still pretty funny..
The eclectic selection of humorous scenes is well woven.O'Toole lends a great deal of sophistication to the film.
His thought provoking words on government and island life stirred my imagination.Williams seems to have been at his comical best early in his career.Moranis proves himself to be a true oddball.Certainly, this is a picture you should not miss seeing..
Yet it is the movies I remember the most and this is one of them.It is cute and fun and with some great actors playing, so what if it didn't win any Oscars?
Sure it wasn't gut bursting laughs by the minute, rather smiling all through the movie.No. It is all about the beautiful warm feeling you get, like coming directly from the Caribbean sun itself.
While I can only give it a six or a seven, I always think of it with a smile; it's definitely just as funny or funnier than the average comedy coming out today.Part of my affinity for this movie is the cast.
Robin Williams, as you would only expect, is his manic self here, a fish-out-of-water ex-Chicago fireman, struggling to open a low rent tourist resort in a banana republic.
He's got some funny bits, and his throwaway ad lib's are better than most other actors' scripted lines.The real bonus, though, is the rest of the cast.
Peter O'Toole swills drinks and purses his lips around his extra long cigarette holder,while spitting out his cynical, glib observations regarding the tropical paradise/hellhole.But some of the funniest moments here are provided by several veterans of SCTV.
Andrea Martin plays a pampered wife, most definitely out of her element in Williams' accomodations, while Rick Moranis and Eugene Levy are hilarious playing two slaughterhouse workers trying to score, in more ways than one.
Some of the drug humor connected with their characters is every bit as funny as anything Cheech & Chong attempted.Additionally, Brian Doyle-Murray, Twiggy, and Adolph Caesar round out a very busy cast.
Robin Williams is at his best Club Paradise is full of great Jamaican music, buetiful scenery and is full of comedy.
This is one of my favorite movies with Robin Williams.
This is a great movie to watch in the dead of winter.
I love Club Paradise, great soundtrack by Jimmy Cliff and the only Robin Williams movie I can say I truly enjoy.Its a cute silly film, mostly disliked but a great post SCTV carry over cast with Eugene Levy and Rick moranis up to no good in the jungle.Williams delivers and Peter O' Toole is so superior as "The Govenor" truly wry British humor is used at all times.A great $4.99 value found recently for sale at Walgreens, pick it up and have a larf.Cherrio caps!-Sean in LA.
Some hokey gags, but lot's of hilarious banter from Robin Williams and Peter O'Toole, plus epic songs from Jimmy Cliff and others.
Lot's of great performances in smaller roles by Brian Doyle-Murray, Rick Moranis, Twiggy and Jimmy Cliff..
I found the movie funnier, when I first saw it back in 87' with a friend, who was a Robin William's fan.
With a new found love, sexy Twiggy, Williams sets up a new resort called Club Paradise, where soon greedy and corrupt forces are trying to buy it up, where Williams and co won't budge.
Really here is a clichéd and unoriginal scenario in these sort of comedies, laughs scarce, far or a few between, yet I still enjoyed it, but truly it's a comedy that sags, that does have some interesting moments, one involving a anaconda choking one of the female guests, that same guest earlier having one hell of a shower as promised by Williams.
William's likable character is one of the few components that makes the film watchable, as does Twiggy, providing eye candy, where Peter O Toole is fun too as a contradicting aristocrat, despite that stupid Razzie nomination.
The lucky, pot smoking locals are very appreciative too.u. Also with Jimmy Cliff singing, we also get to watch him act too, and he ain't half bad.
If you weigh up Club Paradise with Williams and Twiggy, etc.
Despite the presence of possibly the (collectively) funniest cast in the history of film, "Club Paradise" is only sporadically amusing.
Robin Williams heads a cast which includes Peter O'Toole and Jimmy Cliff.
Second City and SCTV vet Harold Ramis directs a script by he and fellow Second City & SNL alum Brian Doyle-Murray (who also plays one of the villains of the piece), and fills it with a ton of other Second City vets including Joe Flaherty, Steven Kampmann, Robin Duke, Mary Gross, Eugene Levy, Andrea Martin, and Rick Moranis.
This is a very fun movie starring Robin Williams, the cast is great, it has the whole cast of SCTV, except for John Candy, who should have been in it playing one of Robin Williamw' buddies or something.
It's got everyone else though, Eugene Levy, Rick Moranis, Brian Doyle-Murray, Mary Gross(Saturday Night Live), Andrea Martin(AKA Edith Prickley), and Joe Flaherty is hilarious as the crazy unexperienced pilot.
The movie's slapstick was awful to the point of it being painful to watch, but I really enjoyed the witty banter and verbal jibes between the cast most of the time.
There were plenty of times the film had me laughing out loud with their verbal jabs, but the physical comedy was so overacted, it looked like a silly, low budget comedy.
I gave it 6 stars because it's still a fun movie and it's always a pleasure to see stars like Peter O'Toole and Robin Williams mixing it up with other comedic talents, even though this one falls a bit short..
This movie must have been a hell of a lot of fun to be working on the set of.
You get a beautiful tropical setting and a cast full of very funny, talented actors and comedians.
You get Robin Williams working with nearly the entire cast of SCTV and a few fun SNL faces(Mary Gross, Robin Duke, and Brian Doyle-Murray) and veteran Peter O'Toole thrown in for good measure, all under the direction of another SCTV veteran, Harold Ramis.
It is a lot of fun seeing these people work together.Unfortunately, the film lacks in everything else.
I cannot recommend this film, but the cast does make it watchable, if it isn't worth watching..
Chicago firefighter Jack Moniker (Robin Williams) dreams of retiring to the Caribbean island St. Nicholas.
Minister of finance and tourism Solomon Gundy wants to take over Jack's reggae friend Ernest Reed (Jimmy Cliff)'s club over his back taxes.
Jack starts Club Paradise which brings in tourists such as best friends Barry (Rick Moranis) and Barry (Eugene Levy), New York Times travel writer Terry Hamlin (Joanna Cassidy), friends Mary Lou (Robin Duke) and Jackie (Mary Gross), and Linda White (Andrea Martin) and her plastic surgeon husband Randy (Steven Kampmann).
With Robin Williams and Peter O'Toole, there should be more laughs.
Too many great lines from Robin Williams and Barry and Barry make the movie!
I wish more people knew about this movie, one of the better 80's vacation comedies.
Robin Williams was amazing and is known for so many bigger films but he is great in this.
Williams is in full flight, Martin, Moranis and Levy are hilarious, Doyle-Murray wrote his own retorts, and O'Toole holds his own as the "Formerly Honorable...".
Throw in music by Jimmy Cliff, and this film is a must see for anyone who loves a comic romp..
Robin Williams has never been better in a comedic role (though he's been very good in serious roles), but Peter O'Toole steals the show and appears to be having a great time doing it.
Rick Moranis and Eugene Levy are brilliant playing the hormone-driven island-goers and Brian-Doyle Murray was perfectly cast as the money-hungry developer.
For a good, mindless laugh, you can't beat Club Paradise..
This movie isn't as good as Schindler's List or anything obviously but it's not supposed to be, it is just a fun silly comedy movie and for what it is supposed to be it is a good movie and fun to watch.Robin Williams is doing his usual stuff in this or at least the stuff he used to do all the time with the manic comic over acting and zany character work.Peter O'Toole is Peter O'Toole and he is awesome in everything he has ever done including some great comedy work including this movie, Club Paradise.Take it for what it's worth and have a nice simple laugh watching a fun Harold Ramis movie!.
And CLUB PARADISE is one of the worst films he's made, which is saying something.
It's hard to imagine that something so bad could have been directed by Harold Ramis (usually a rather reliable director/writer).The cast all look awkward and the jokes are forced and unfunny.
You see the names: Robin Williams, Peter O'Toole, Eugene Levy, Rick Moranis.
You decide to actually watch "Club Paradise."This movie is dreadful.
This story might have been more funny on paper, because as a movie it wasn't particularly impressive.What the movie had working for it was its impressive cast list with lots of familiar faces.
And while it is a part of the Robin Williams movie legacy, it is nowhere near his best work.So if you want to get away for about an hour and a half, "Club Paradise" is not the best of locations..
Injured while risking his life to save an angry German shepherd, Chicago Firefighter Jack Moniker retires and moves to a small Caribbean island named St. Nicholas.Allegedly, this film was originally supposed to star Bill Murray and John Cleese (I assume instead of Robin Williams and Peter O'Toole).
One is clearly known more for humor, but they are both classy, reputable actors.What makes this film memorable (and there are not many things that do) are the nipples of Eugene Levy.
They seem to have a bigger role in this film than Rick Moranis..
Williams, O'Toole, and the rest of the cast are hampered by characters that are dull and uninteresting.
I'm an aspiring screenwriter myself, and after I watched this film, I said to myself: "I could have written better characters..." That my dear friends is what went wrong..
This film is an example of bad comedy writing, and lame humor.
Even Robin Williams seems to be a bit bored, and is clearly not at his best here.
Granted, there is a great ensemble cast, but none of them are given a whole lot to do and, save Robin Williams, are underdeveloped.
The film does start off rather well, with Robin Williams' character Jack Moniker retiring from the Chicago Fire Department on a disability settlement and heading off to St. Nicholas, a tropical island.
There, he settles in and gets involved with a local businessman/musician named Ernest Reed (Jimmy Cliff, who gives some excellent musical performances) who runs a resort called Club Paradise.These initial scenes were quite funny as they showed Jack getting used to his surroundings and later, dealing with the tourists who visit the island.
Among those visitors are Eugene Levy and Rick Moranis, two losers who are trying to score with women and get high.
He and Robin Williams even get to play off each other a little bit.However, if there's one major flaw in the movie it's that it tries to do too much in its finale.
On the good side of things, the best element outside of Robin Williams and Peter O'Toole was the music, consisting almost exclusively of reggae.
Overall, while the film is a nice 80's time capsule it's quite forgettable and I wouldn't consider it essential viewing for Robin Williams fans..
Robin Williams stars as a retired fire worker from Chicago who moves to the Caribbean to help a rundown "resort" cater to affluent Americans.
But they coulda done more with the women.Co-stars include Twiggy, Peter O'Toole, Andrea Martin, Rick Moranis, Joanna Cassidy, Eugene Levy, Jimmy Cliff and Adolph Caesar.The film runs 96 minutes and was shot in Port Antonio, Jamaica, Chicago and L.A.GRADE: C+.
This is possibly one of Robin Williams' lesser known movies, but it is quite good.
Williams plays Jack Moniker, a jaded firefighter who retires to a small Caribbean island named St. Nicholas.
A pretty good cast,which includes, Twiggy, Rick Moranis, Gene Levy, Peter O'Toole, Joanna Cassidy and Jimmy Cliff.
Robin Williams is a wee bit subdued in this, not a lot of his familiar quick one liners, he's still funny though.
The highlight of the movie are, the great Reggae music, performed by Jimmy Cliff, the madcap antics of the character, Linda White, played by Andrea Martin and Joe Flahery's role as a wacky aircraft pilot.
The down side is seeing the great Peter O'Toole looking so poorly.
Robin Williams and friends from the Second City gang take a vacation on the lovely, fictional isle of St.Nicholas (filmed in Jamaica) in the summer of 1985 and bring along Peter O'Toole, Twiggy and Jimmy Cliff.
Enjoy the tropical locations and songs by reggae star Jimmy Cliff.
Fans of Williams and SCTV will get a kick of seeing all the comic actors in one place, but will be hard pressed to enjoy it.
Robin Williams and Peter O'Toole were funny.
Eugene Levy and Rick Moranis were funny.
It is still a funny comedy with gobs of stars and characters.
One Of Robin Williams' Worst Films.
Hollywood can give Robin Williams the best casts, the best directors and the best screenwriters in the world of film comedy but they still won't be able to give him a truly memorable comedic film or performance.
"Club Paradise", despite the much talent that it has been given, just might be the worst film of Williams' career (next to "Insomnia").
The perfect cast: Robin Williams; Eugene Levy and Rick Moranis as a couple of losers who think all the women love them; and the hilarious Andrea Martin as the wild wife of a boring businessman.
Match that with the great direction of Harold Ramis (Vacation, Caddyshack), and a script by Brian-Doyle Murray (Bill's brother) and you have the makings of a hit!
The story wasn't much, but this movie was more of a collection of one-liners and funny sketches than of plot development.
If you put all that important stuff aside, you have a great movie that is just plain fun to watch.
The whole cast of second city, plus Robin Williams and Peter O'Toole, this is a treat to watch, fun one liners, great scenery, cool music.
Mindless Fun. You'll either fall in love with this film or you won't.The story of an injured fireman who goes to the tropics and becomes involved with a hotel, Twiggy and local politics is a film played strictly for laughs.
The humor is very broad and often not very clever but if you can go with its good natured attitude you'll have a good time.The cast of Robin Williams, Jimmy Cliff, Twiggy and several escapees from SCTV is up to the task of being Silly.
Peter O'Toole is even better than the rest as the world weary British Envoy to the island who wants nothing more than to be allowed to drink.For me this film is a perfect ten on the enjoyment scale.
Robin Williams stars in Harold Ramis' 1986 comedy.
The late, Williams (Mrs. Doubtfire) plays Jack, a Chicago fireman who leaves his profession and travels to Jamaican island, St. Nicholas where he helps turn a failing dive "Club Paradise" into a resort.
Rick Moranis (Ghostbusters), Eugene Levy (Splash), Brian Doyle-Murray (Caddyshack), Andrea Martin (Black Christmas) and the late, Peter O'Toole (Lawrence of Arabia) co-star.
This is a good, wacky 80's comedy and Williams is great in it.
Williams was just about a huge star, Ramis was a competent film maker, and it was part of that weird sub genre that had comedians trying to save a hotel or shack against property developers, like Summer Rental, or that one where Demi Moore had dreadlocks.But once you watch the movie, its easy to see why this hasn't been shown much since its release, despite the fact that it's entirely watchable, its inconsistent, and it doesn't know what to do with its final act.Williams is as good as ever, he always was a remarkable screen presence, and the support is good too, especially Levy, Moranis, and O'Toole.But then the film has Twiggy, the model, and Jimmy Cliff, the singer.
Both cannot really act and bring the film to a stand still.The final third feels rushed and out of place in a comedy, featuring gun toting soldiers trying to get Williams and Cliff, it's almost as if Ramis didn't know how to end this, so he just put a little bit of action, and a speech come the end.But it's not a bad movie by any means, it's just a good story has been handled hastily, and this is the outcome.Worth seeing if your a Williams fan..
classic movie with great quotes.
various great songs by jimmy cliff.
second, great quotes by rick moranis and eugene levy, most referring to marijuana.
sure, robin williams has an annoying role in this movie and a lot of his jokes are terrible... |
tt0929425 | Gomorra | The film opens with the murder of gangsters relaxing in a tanning salon. This shooting occurs between clans of the Di Lauro Camorra syndicate which rule Scampia-Secondigliano, and triggers the so-called Faida di Scampia (Scampia feud) which is the backdrop of the entire movie. The Faida erupts between members of the Di Lauro syndicate and the so-called scissionisti (separatists), who are led by Raffaele Amato, brother of two of the killed men in the opening scene.
The film intertwines five separate stories of people whose lives are touched by organized crime.
Don Ciro
Don Ciro (Gianfelice Imparato) is a timid middleman who distributes money to the families of imprisoned Di Lauro clan members. After the feud develops within the clan, he is ambushed by a pair of angry scissionisti during a delivery. Fearing for his life, he later offers to defect to their side. They refuse his offer, and tell Ciro that he has to "pay" for his life by selling some of his former associates. He leads them to the location where he is given the money for distribution. The pair raid the place, killing everyone but Ciro, and take the money. Ciro quietly walks off to an uncertain future.
Totò
Totò (Salvatore Abruzzese) is a 13-year-old grocery delivery boy who witnesses some drug dealers abandon a bag of drugs and a gun while evading the police at Sette palazzi in Scampia. He returns the items to the gang, who take him in. His initiation in an underground cavern consists of him being shot while wearing a bulletproof vest as a test of courage. As the feud intensifies, families in the neighborhood whose loyalties are suspect are ordered to move out or suffer violence; Totò's fellow gang members receive similar threats. Later, while hanging out with his gang in the streets of Scampia, one of his gang is killed in a drive-by. The gang members decide to stand their ground and exact violent retribution by selecting a woman, Maria (Maria Nazionale), as their next victim, as her son has joined a clan of Secondigliano scissionisti. Totò, who has delivered groceries to Maria, is forced to lure her out of her apartment, where his comrades execute her.
Roberto
Roberto (Carmine Paternoster) is a graduate who works in waste management. His boss, Franco (Toni Servillo) provides a low-cost toxic waste disposal service that allows northern industrialists to dispose of materials like chromium and asbestos in the countryside of southern Italy. Franco and Roberto orchestrate the illegal disposal of the waste at abandoned quarries and other environmentally-sensitive sites. During one such operation, a drum of toxic chemicals is accidentally spilled on a driver. Franco refuses to call an ambulance, and hires children to drive the trucks when the workers refuse to continue their work. Later, Franco and Roberto meet a family of farmers who, desperate to extinguish their debts, decide to allow the burial of chemical substances in their countryside. An elderly farmer gifts Roberto a basket of peaches, but Franco later tells him to throw them away because they are contaminated. Roberto then decides to quit his job and tells Franco he cannot bring himself to poison the earth, to which Franco says that he shouldn't think he is the better man, because thanks to the actions of people like them Italy was able to enter the European Union, solving problems others had caused. Roberto walks alone on a desolate countryside road.
Pasquale
Pasquale (Salvatore Cantalupo) is an haute couture tailor who works for Iavarone (Gigio Morra), a garment factory owner with ties to the Camorra. Pasquale takes a night-job training Chinese garment workers. As they are competing with Camorra-controlled firms, the Chinese drive him to and from work in the trunk of their car. His secret work is discovered nonetheless, and his Chinese associates are killed in a drive-by. He survives the attack, but resigns his job. Later, working as a truck driver, he is in a transport café where he spots Scarlett Johansson on TV wearing one of his dresses. He smiles wryly as he drives away.
Marco and Ciro aka Sweet Pea
Marco (Marco Macor) and Ciro (Ciro Petrone) are two young wannabe-gangsters who try to operate their own small racket independently of the local clan. Impressed by mafia portrayals from Hollywood movies, they quote lines and spontaneously reenact scenes from Scarface in Walter Schiavone's villa while dropping references to Tony Montana, Miami, and Colombians. Their first score is robbing African immigrants during a drug purchase at the famous Hotel Boomerang, Castel Volturno. The word of the incident gets to the local mob chieftain Giovanni (Giovanni Venosa), who summons them and warns them under threat of violence not to repeat such behavior in the future. Ignoring him completely, they spy Camorra gangsters hiding a stash of weapons. They steal the weapons and amuse themselves by firing off rounds by the banks of a Regi Lagni canal estuary in the marshland. Once they run out of money, they use their guns to rob a video arcade, and spend their stolen funds at a strip club. The gangsters, angered, find them and threaten to kill them if they don't return the weapons within a day. The pair prove stubborn. Zio Vittorio (Vittorio Russo), one of the local gangsters approaches them in a bar with an offer to come work for him. He offers them €10,000 if they return the weapons and murder Peppe O'Cavallaro, in fact uncle Bernardino (Bernardino Terracciano). They accept the contract, which turns out to be a trap, as they are ambushed and killed by Giovanni, Bernardino, Vittorio and others at the location of their supposed target, an abandoned beach resort next to Regi Lagni canal estuary. The last scene shows their dead bodies being carried away by a front end loader. | violence, cruelty, murder | train | wikipedia | It's a gangster as capitalist world, one where turning to killing kids or a woman is looked down upon, but not off-limits.The film starts off with a fantastic sequence of tanning machines and surprisingly graphic murder, which would lead one to think that they were moving headlong into a Scorsese-like blood bath of macabre.
It's a very European film, and as far as gangster pictures go, with its no nonsense documentary style, and only slowly escalating violence and patience it feels like a unique addition to the genre.
The book was the result of months of direct contact with the people who keep the System (the gangsters themselves refuse to use the word Camorra, which can be considered the local version of the Sicilian Mafia) and became a huge success, the downside of which was Saviano receiving multiple death threats from the people he'd exposed and being forced to live with a permanent police escort.
The reason I'm mentioning both books is they were both made into successful films (Gomorra even walked away with the Grand Prize of the Jury at the 2008 Cannes Film Festival), with one crucial difference: Romanzo Criminale is very good, but does at times, as implied by the title, feel like a novel, a fictional story.
Gomorra, on the other hand, using the same raw, in-your-face style as City of God, throws the viewer into a new, scary world - the real deal.Director Matteo Garrone, who co-wrote the screenplay with a bunch of collaborators (including Saviano himself), wisely decides to ditch the book's first-person storytelling, the only (possible) reference to the author being a young man named Roberto who helps businessman Franco (Toni Servillo) close a series of suspicious deals with various companies in the North of Italy (Venice is explicitly shown).
His story is one of five that constitute the film's narrative: along with him, there's also Don Ciro (Gianfelice Imparato), who pays the family members of imprisoned crooks; Pasquale (Salvatore Cantalupo), a tailor whose life is at risk because of his contacts with the Chinese (Italians don't like competition) and whose work ends up being worn by celebrities like Scarlett Johansson (Angelina Jolie in the book); and then there are two different examples of young blood, one a loyal boy who runs errands for his drug-dealing neighbors, the other two young punks who have watched Scarface way too often (a reference to the fact that a real-life Camorra boss had his villa designed exactly like Tony Montana's) and think they can take over.An ensemble gangster flick, then.
This is because Gomorra doesn't set out to be a real, straightforward story, but rather offer a series of bleak, extremely real examples of how the Camorra (or the System, though neither word is ever spoken in the film) controls everything.
Aside from the documentary-style cinematography and anxious cutting, the highest degree of realism comes from the cast: the only really famous actor in the film is Servillo, familiar from Paolo Sorrentino's filmography; the rest have a theatrical background or, in the case of the kids especially, were taken directly from the street (the movie was shot on location, and rumor has it the mother of a Camorra boss asked for a cameo).
Garners more respect than a spot on favorites list, "Gomorra" chronicles five seemingly disconnected stories with one thing in common: all are heavily influenced by a criminal organization run by the Camorras, an ominous mafia organization with a tight grip on Naples, Italy.
Within this feat of architecture we follow several threads including a money-man, a boy getting into the life on the lowest rung, a man starting out in the corrupt world of waste management, a black-market tailor looking to earn a bit more on the side and two young men who decide to seize power in their region from the old, fat men who sit at the top.
This is not the Italian gangsterisms of The Godfather where there is a certain sense of class and aspiration, in Gomorra the top men are trapped in the world the same as everyone else - with more money perhaps but they are not living in mansions or controlling things from a tropical island.
I didn't really like the technique employed throughout where the focus was on the subject in the close foreground and everything else was blurred, even as it came into play in the scene but otherwise it was well done, with the sudden moments of violence made more impacting by not being seen due to confusion simulated in the camera or by quick editing.Gomorra has been compared to City of God, Goodfellas and all the other crime films that get wheeled out for reviews.
It is not "enjoyable" per se due to the lack of flair, but it is a very good film nonetheless and, like City of God did with City of Men, it offers the potential for a mini-series to further explore and find stories from within this world..
Based on Roberto Saviano's best seller ( over 1.000.000 copies sold in Italy ), this movie is an inside look at Camorra's underworld in Naples, depicted as a sort of modern Dante's Inferno.
Using unsophisticated realist cinematography, editing and aesthetics, and through the choice of actors, most of whom are simply local residents of the neighborhood, the movie does throw you mercilessly in this inferno for over two hours, where you can smell the blood, feel the misery of Naples's slums and live that vicious circle of violence, despair and injustice.
This again shows the reality of the film and the lives of the people in Naples.The endings of the different story-lines complement each other in sending the message that you are either with or against the Camorra.
What makes this film terrifying is the fact that this is based from reality and that the people living there have no choice but to go along or face the consequences (usually death).Read more movie reviews at: championangels.wordpress.com.
The one story that was slightly interesting was the two wannabe gangsters.Unless you like movies just for the fact that it is set in Italy, avoid this nonsensical bore fest..
Anyway I'd like to point out something about: this work of Art is halfway between neorealism and epic style, the extraordinary use of lessons taken by best cinema makers in the world, the long sequences recalled me Hitchkock, the "dollies" sequences recalled me Sergio Leone, the choice in acting recalled me Ken Loach, the sapience in using noises and music Stanley Kubrick, and definitely the light looks chosen by Rotunno and Visconti; everything makes a no doubt new original artist named "Matteo Garrone"!
The title of the Italian film "Gomorrah," is a chilling descriptor and play on words referring to the "Camorra"- a notorious, violent, organized crime syndicate that controls the city of Naples and surrounding countryside.
Flat and at times hard to follow dramatization of Italy's modern-day crime families with a documentarian air about it by filmmaker Mateo Garrone based on Robert Saviano's book (so controversial the author is under 24/7 police protection in re: the real criminal threat out to silence him!) and executive produced by Martin Scorsese interweaves many plots including a fading don (Imparato), a middle-management type in the mob (Servillo) , an indemand textiles expert facing competition and retribution (Cantalupo) and two idiotic punks who think they live in a real-life SCARFACE world (Macor and Petrone).
It's a far cry from the gangster lifestyle we're used to seeing through the eyes of Brando, Pacino and Liotta, this is an existence that few wish to be (or survive to be) part of.The other stories show slick businessman Franco (Toni Servillo) running the aforementioned toxic waste dumping business and Salvatore Cantalupo's tailor, Pasquale, who is caught up in the violence after offering his services to Chinese fashion rivals.
Like the novel the movie is based on, Roberto Saviano's Gomorra, which forced its author to leave the country to save his life, Mattheo Garrone's movie is the definitive depiction of one of the most violent branches of the Italian mafia, the Neapolitan Camorra.
The sense of realism is so palpable it feels like someone is following these people around with a camera shooting random snippets of footage as they go around extortioning others, stealing drugs and coldcocking each other.As a bleak, realistic documentation of Italian organized crime, Gomorra is undoubtedly a rousing success.
Matteo Garrone's Italian neo-realist crime drama Gomorrah is a set of five separate stories about the Camorra crime syndicate in Naples, Italy.
There are no grand narratives about respect and power like we find in American mafia films; instead, the film tells the stories of five ordinary people from all walks of life and how they are all sucked into the Camorra's crime web.
This film by Matteo Garrone explores the violent crime clans of Naples known as the Gamorra that have an estimated 25,000 members on all levels of the criminal ladder and are involved in the drug trade, toxic waste disposal, construction, trafficking, extortion, public housing and lots of killings.
I came into GOMORRAH expecting an Italian version of CITY OF GOD: a grim, gritty story following would-be gangsters as they go about their business on city streets, where violence and corruption are matter of fact and ruthlessness the norm.I got nothing like.Honestly speaking, I found GOMORRAH a bore.
Take it from someone who sees exactly these kinds of crimes on a daily basis: Crime is the Universal Language- especially when it comes to "illegal narcotics." (In the past five days, we've had four murders here in Crack Town; a man was shot down in cold blood a few years ago less than a hundred feet from where I live; the body of a young woman suspected of preparing to testify against local meth dealers was found rotting in her apartment a few blocks away; the housing project where I used to live, notorious for its open-air drug dealing, was finally shut down when one of the dealers shot the father of two kids when he asked them not to deal drugs in front of his apartment (the man was shot in the head, at point blank range, and I just happened to drive by as a school bus full of underage eye-witnesses poured out into the street to look at the still-bleeding victim); when "authorities" made an arrest, the scores of large dumpsters in that complex were set alight and allowed to melt to the ground (I saw light flickering outside my back door and looked out to see what was going on: I saw flames that reached all the way up past the telephone lines- right next to my car, which just happened to be the only car in any of the parking lots; moving my car required ducking under flames that extended out over the hood and backing it across the parking lot; I was later told by firefighters that MINE had been the only 9-1-1 call made that night), etc.
A Cannes prize winner, the film weaves a complex look at the activities of the Camorra, a crime syndicate that had the book author Roberto Saviano put under police protective custody for his expose on their activities, which range from drugs to dealing in toxic wastes, and their extensive money laundering activities which the closing credits stated their involvement in financing the new World Trade Centre in New York.It's a gritty, unflinching look at the crime activities a modern day Italian crime family undertakes day to day, and the community that it both supports, and taps from.
An incredibly well-balanced and viscerally stunning film, Gomorra really must be seen twice to fully appreciate the complex and relationships between the divergent story lines and the lives they represent.Gomorra is a film about organized crime, but it is in no way the "mafia movie" that American films dealing with similar themes so often grow to be.
after many films about gangsters, crimes, South Italy, for the viewer must be clear the entire story.
The film dragged and was only good at the times when the the more interesting narratives were juxtaposed together.I would not recommend this film as it is very boring and you do not care about the characters, also, there is no pay off, so you're waiting for something to happen but it doesn't!I think people will appreciate the directing and how the film is viewed through the characters but it is far too long!Enjoy!.
If the title of the film was not Gomorra, I would not at all have guessed this was about organized crime.This review should contain 10 lines of text but I feel there is nothing to tell about this chaos of pictures..
I am now used to reading through reviews lauding films as if the directors and screenwriters deserve knighthoods and I again find myself wondering whether I watched the same movie.Gomorra(h) is about the most mediocre, tepid and uninspiring 'exposé' of characters and lifestyle that you are ever likely to see.
Gomorra's achilles heel is that its independent stories are not only (dare I say it) boring, but they leave the film creaking with a lack of structure and even the characters wondering 'who's on who's side?' I am a fan of Gangster movies, mob movies, dark movies...Gomorra, for all it may be real and representative of Italian sub-culture, struggled to engage me and to be honest, it didn't open my eyes to anything I didn't already know, understand and could imagine.An entertaining picture?
So the Academy had no real reason not to nominate the film.Gomorrah tells five small stories set in tower blocks of Napoli and the affects that the Mafia and organised crime has one them.
Here Matteo Garrone co-writes and directs an excellent complex film about the Mafia and general working class life in the Southern Italian city.
"The Godfather" is filmed in a wonderful style, through grey-brown filters and "Goodfellas" is a film of endless stylistic choices from Martin Scorsese, but neither of them have the realistic intensity of "Gomorrah", a film which deals with the brutal and violent Camorra of Italy.Shot in hand-held, raw and kinetic fashion, "Gomorrah" deals with the gangland violence and shady dealings which have turned Naples into a city of crime and squalor.
Also, its worth while to watch it twice to appreciate the details that you may have a missed the first time around.The depiction of the crime families in Naples seems to be true to life, with a good build up of the multiple characters.
It was something of a revelation to watch gangsters in this part of the world, as they are nothing like those in the Sopranos, or the Godfather, or any of the other great crime movies I've seen.
Because there are five stories going on in the film the director fails to actually explain who these people are working for and why they are doing what they are doing or are they actually Mafia at all?
Thrust into a world where violence and crime is accepted as a way of life, the camera shows the unexpected, as it should, and it is almost always violent.Five major plot threads are followed, and the director presents them well enough for one to care to see this through.
Director Matteo Garrone takes a neorealist approach very different from the Hollywood gangster films that have been highly romanticized and delivers a raw and realistic film about the modern day crime organization that is responsible for having killed over 400,000 people in the last 30 years.
If you want to know how real the film is then just ask Saviano who has to live under 24 hour protection because he received several life threatening messages from the Comorra, or ask director Garrone who had to constantly keep on changing filming locations in fear of the violent organization's reprimands.The movie opens with a violent introduction in which a group of men are killed inside a tanning salon.
I will not add anything to the plot as it has been told many times over here; i saw Gomorra for the first time yesterday; i was waiting for it to be aired on Sky Cinema because i liked the book and i must say i have been impressed how close to the real thing this movie feels.
There's little humour here, and Mateo Garrone has captured a world where it's pretty easy to see why.Running at nearly two and a half hours, the lack of light further makes it an arguous struggle to sit through, the first time anyway, but Gomorrah leaves you feeling like you've seen a thoroughly absorbing and powerful interwined set of stories that pull no punches and offer no hope.
There can be little doubt as to whether or not Matteo Garrone's Italian crime film, entitled Gomorra, is an ambitious piece; a fluctuating, sweeping, soaring, towering film flitting in and out of numerous stories covering various characters of varying shades of grey as they go through life effectively making money out of others people's misery.
Each thread could make their own very interesting film, so putting them all together may be too much, but kudos to the director Matteo Garrone for allowing each to breathe free and conclude their respective arcs.The unflinching look into this underbelly of the drug trade, hitting home at the end when you find that the crime world here actually invests in US projects including the new Twin Tower site, is tough to watch at times.
Ultra-realistic take on the book by Roberto Saviano, this film displays the camorra, i.e. the current biggest crime syndicate in the world.
Set in the violent underworld of Naples, this movie focuses on different characters involvement in the crime scene.
What I got was dark, horrible, brutally authentic, and brilliant.I really think that this movie sets itself apart from other gangster films that I have seen, in that it really offers you no chance to empathise with the characters. |
tt1272886 | Small Apartments | Franklin Franklin is a hairless, overweight, eccentric social misfit and compulsive hoarder obsessed with Switzerland, who walks around wearing little more than briefs and mismatching socks and lives on a diet consisting of Moxie soda and pickles with mustard. Living alone in an almost bare apartment in a rundown building complex in Southern California populated with other eccentrics, including cynical stoner Tommy Balls, neurotic geriatric recluse Mr. Allspice, and aspiring dancer Simone who lives with her mother - both of whom may or may not be prostitutes.
At an earlier point, Franklin's landlord Mr. Olivetti accidentally died after slipping on spilled mustard caused by sneezing fits when receiving fellatio from Franklin over frequent unpaid rent. In an effort to get rid of Olivetti's body, Franklin takes it to Olivetti's house and tries to stage it as a suicide, implementing an unlikely over-array of suicide methods. Attempting to dump Olivetti's pickup truck in the outskirts of town results in Franklin being robbed (of both his brother's watch and Olivetti's truck) and assaulted by two very dimwitted muggers.
The next day, Franklin wonders why he hasn't gotten his weekly audiotape from his institutionalized brother Bernard, whom Franklin almost idolizes as Bernard is handsome, charismatic and popular and included Franklin in his social life. Unknown to Franklin, Bernard has died of an inoperable brain tumor and among Bernard's effects is an envelope holding a key to a locker containing a recorded message revealing that Bernard stole from his employer and has left Franklin a savings in a Swiss bank account and a passport in a new identity. Meanwhile, fire investigator Burt Walnut, and other detectives examine Olivetti's body, and quickly conclude that it's staged due to Franklin's amateurishness, and put a lookout for his pickup truck. Walnut, visiting the apartment complex, meets Balls and Allspice and becomes suspicious of Franklin. Walnut is estranged from his wife (who was having an affair with his cousin), and learns that Allspice's wife died around the time as Olivetti's wife, 13 years ago.
Working at his convenience store, Balls shatters Simone's dancing dreams with his brutal honesty; upset, she hides in the restroom. Balls is then held up by Franklin's muggers, who shoot Balls in the torso when startled by Simone. Franklin returns to his apartment, but seeing the police, keeps on driving. Walnut discovers that Allspice has committed suicide, (likely upset over the death of Olivetti as Allspice revealed that they were close friends) and when answering a phone call by Franklin, is asked to adopt Franklin's dog (also named Bernard). Walnut informs Franklin of the muggers' arrest, calling them Olivetti's murderers, remarking of Olivetti that "some might say that he had it coming to him."
Although innocent, Franklin takes his Switzerland flight (dressed in shorts and button up shirt), sitting next to Dr. Sage Mennox, a self-help author whom Bernard obsessed over. Franklin tells Dr. Mennox that his brother had died, and was not insane (as Mennox had previously asserted), but had actually been impaired by a fatal brain tumor "the size of a racquet ball". Mennox is taken off guard by this, and Franklin (who has held a grudge against him for belittling Bernard, his hero, in the past), slyly remarks that they would be stuck together, in this awkward situation (on Mennox's part), for the duration of a very long flight.
Ultimately, Franklin is seen in Switzerland standing in front of the Matterhorn mountain surrounded by three attractive Swiss women in Swiss folk costume. | murder | train | wikipedia | But there is no doubt it carves it's own path, and a fairly unique one - which isn't easy to do nowadays.I'll start by saying that it's a very funny movie at times - in an awkward sort of way.
But after it was over it I realized it had a much more impressive affect on me.It probably won't be obvious until the end that there was a lot of care put into the direction and dialogue of this movie.
It really is a very skillful little movie.If you come across it, check it out, and don't abandon it after five minutes because it seems too odd.
I found myself mentally casting actors to play the amazingly quirky but identifiable characters.
A great amount of time passed before "Small Apartments" found its way into the hands of a director who "got it".I have to say that it is difficult, for me, not to compare this work to that of Tarantino, if only for the raw emotional concept, quirky behaviors and "street view" filming process.
I can't imagine anyone other than the "heavyweights" who breathe life into characters like Franklin Franklin (Matt Lucas), Burt Walnut (Billy Crystal) and Tommy Balls (Johnny Knoxville) but it doesn't stop there.
both are addressed in Small Apartments, however, it brings home the very real point that true happiness lives in our mind, however small or large!I was both eager and apprehensive about finally watching this film, especially knowing the author, screenplay writer and executive producer (Chris Millis) on a personal level...
I rented this movie from a Redbox, for something amusing to watch on a night off from work.
Instead, I found it to be a psychological cross section of character studies of people I don't get to see much in films, or life, for that matter.
But these people have their own dreams and dignities, that we may scoff at, but are what keep them going.Matt Lucas brings a kind of innocent goofiness to his character, Franklin Franklin.
That said, it changed my empathy for his character very much.Why Franklin finds himself in the dilemma of disposing of his landlord's dead body comes as a surprise, and as he goes about it, the viewer comes to know Franklin better.There is some wonderful star power in this movie, and they shine subtly, but brilliantly.
even Johnny Knoxville who I have never rated, or really thought of as an actor, was brilliant.Its a Dark Comedy that slowly unravels whilst keeping you on the edge of your seat the entire time before ending perfectly.I did almost give this film 9 out of 10 but when I thought about it, I couldn't think of a single thing that would lose this film any marks..
It was not enough to punch the eject but - Wow that character is weird is all I will say.By movie's end I have to say I was very pleasantly surprised, a very good movie that held my interest all the way through.
The movie in question is a 2012 American black comedy directed by a famous video maker (Jonas Åkerlund) and tells the story of an odd obese Switzerland-fan (Franklin Franklin, distinguishably performed by Matt Lucas) who inadvertently kills his landlord.
All the characters - in spite of their rank in society - are strange zanies, and even if briefly on screen, they are catchy thanks to good/distinctive actors such as James Caan, Johnny Knoxville, Billy Crystal, James Marsden, Peter Stormare, Amanda Plummer, Dolph Lundgren - first and foremost.
Apart from crazy moments and depictions, the plot contains several "correct" views on love, friendship, family relations etc, making it hectic and uneven at times, and there are some ending predictability related to the protagonist and bad guys.
But as the movie is not long (around 1,5 hours), it is still catchy to watch and you will have your laughs and chuckles..
You do not fall in love with its characters or empathize with them but it definitely scares you to see their lives and you pray not to end up like them.
This movie forces you to confront or at least acknowledge the alienation,apathy,and surrender of some in the modern society who live on it fringe with little expectation of any worthwhile impact on anyone's life other than their own.
But still it leaves you with a nice little message about forgiveness , family and the meaning of a well lived life.You are not going to remember this movie for long but it's decently directed eerie movie for a select few who are patient enough to take a lesson home.PS: Watch at your own risk.Either you will hate it or you will applaud the efforts for such a real depiction of lives in small apartments!.
He finds the distractions of lust, the death of his beloved brother and a crew of misfit characters, forcing him on a journey where a fortune awaits him.This is one weird movie.
Johnny Knoxville is probably the least weird person in the movie.
trying to see if you are worthy of the message this movie delivers,-Literally - the filmmakers have given you life's meaning, spelled out word for word, in a crappy little semi-comedy, on the surface that's what this film is ...
but, I'll bet you a dollar, this film makes you cry.The main character spends the whole film in his underwear, and Johnny Knoxville does a great job of breaking his typecast in this, I cant say this movie is like ..it's not like anything i can think of...maybe kinda has the same feel and pace as "spun", it is not like anything i have seen, it is a twisted tale of human interaction, told from an unwitting standpoint...
I went into watching this movie expecting another indie drama with a big ensemble cast and just enough quirk to be cool with the hipsters.
The plot revolves around Franklin Franklin, a bizarre man living alone in well, a small apartment, and his interactions and excursion with his various neighbors.
I completely understand the negative reviews from critics, because the movie isn't perfect, There is some bizarre writing and story choices that might not bode well with audiences, but I honestly think that this movie is, in a way, a masterpiece.
The characters all start off weird and somewhat repulsive, but as the movie progresses you begin understanding them and you begin to feel for them.
The reason for that is that the acting was fantastic, everyone played their character greatly, and there were little to no weaker parts to the performances.
Funnily enough he had starred in similar surprise movie, "Interstate 60", also well worth a watch.
Acting is great, Matt Lucas is superb as Franklin Franklin, a slightly mentally challenged loner who longs for his much cooler brother's affection.
Having since seen the trailer, I think it is a real spoiler to where the film is going to take you.
What a bizarre but delightful little movie!
If you like odd plot lines and characters with attention grabbing antics and dialog - this is your movie because it is perfectly told.I only found this treasure because I was looking for movies with Juno Temple.
Had never heard of this flick and after reading the other actors names I certainly had to give this a look!At a certain point in the story you can guess what will happen to Franklin Franklin but the charm of this film is how the story gets you there.
And on the way you will have numerous surprises!A good movie!.
Not that other characters portrayed in this movie are without any flaws or doubts themselves.
But while it's an ensemble piece our big friend is the one who's playing front and center (tonally and picture wise).You sometimes wish some characters would have gotten more screen time, like the landlord, who has some very funny but also very offensive things and lines to do in the movie.
If you relish the quirkiness of "Juno", "The Perks of Being a Wallflower" and "Little Miss Sunshine", then you have to see this movie.
I won't go into the detail of the plot line as there are plenty of reviews on that already, but if you relish the out of the ordinary compared to the typical Hollywood fare, then watch this movie.
This movie is about the story, and the lives of the characters within the story..
This is one of my most favorite movies.A quirky story, one to be enjoyed through multiple viewings.
The surprises are in the cast and their contributions to this.While Matt Lucas is wonderful as the white-underpants clad protagonist, it is the others around him that really shine.Some delightful cameos from many famous and deserving actors, but special mention must go to James Caan as Mr Allspice, Billy Crystal in a great role where he performs understatedly, Dolph Lundgren, Peter Stormare and most especially Johnny Knoxville for his superlative performance as Tommy Balls.
It is at least quite quirky and keeps you involved.However, as the film progresses, you learn about the various characters and realize it has much deeper meaning and dialog.
The movie just gets better and better until an ending which anybody has to love.
This is a movie that sticks and will have you thinking about it long afterwards.The lowly rating on this has me thinking that people just didn't see anything in the first 5 minutes to keep them going.
And when there is a dead landlord in his apartment the story takes off from there.
With couple of other different and a bit bizarre characters getting involved.
Originally drawn to it because I'm a fan of Per Gessle who does the soundtrack, after watching it I was pleasantly surprised at what a little gem of a movie it is.
What we see is a pretty uninteresting story, told to us in a slightly dark, moody, nevertheless humorous, and - in any case - highly original way.This presentation surely makes 'Small apartments' an unusual film.
Hiding his landlord's dead body becomes the least of a social miscast's problems in this offbeat indie comedy starring Little Britain's Matt Lucas.
There is one very funny, darkly comic moment as his staging of his landlord's death as suicide backfires, however, best moments here belong to the supporting cast with James Caan as a grouchy neighbour, a near-unrecognisable Dolph Lundgren as an eccentric self-help book author and an equally near unrecognisable Peter Storemare as the odious landlord.
The film is so reliant on oddball elements though that things fall apart near the end as the narrative takes a sharp, dramatic turn when Lucas discovers some unexpected things about his brother.
That said, there is a lot to like in how the events of the film indirectly lead to justice being carried out with regards to two supporting characters.
The setting is pretty nifty too with 'Rear Window' parallels in plentiful supply, and the film almost serves as a comical spin on the seminal Hitchcock movie with the extreme oblivion of all residents to the landlord's disappearance - and his body being dragged out in full view at night!.
This is a fringe film to be sure unusual but rewarding for the effort if you can enjoy a non mainstream small budget movie with minimal production values but a sincere effort with no weak performances in my opinion but a truly wonderful performance from Billy Crystal and others an oddball little gem and music is fresh and works well .
But I hope I have maybe added to the interest in watching this lark this fun and even interesting little gem ..
This film tells the story of a bald man, who lives in a small apartment with his dog.
One day, he accidentally kills his landlord, and he has to cover it up and dispose of the body."Small Apartment" is also light Cindy and it is very funny.
Out on a limb creativity makes for interesting/great movie.
This movie is not a traditional hero conquers oppressive forces finds love with an out of his league chic then acquires instant fame flick.From the beginning, seeing the main character, Franklin Franklin, how he dresses- various wigs and tight white under drawers (which is pretty much how I imagine all bloggers, except me, dress at home), it is clear that this movie is quite different.75% of the film has the main character in those tight white under drawers.
Not long after the opening credits, he has to dispose of a body, gets tricked by a mean teenage girl, and keeps blowing on an alp-horn when he needs to check out for a bit.There are many interesting aspects to this film, not the least of which is the fact that it is based on the winning novel of a three day novel writing contest.The performances of Matt Lucas, James Caan and the especially lovely toned-down Billy Crystal make this an extremely worth while watch or even a keeper..
This movie has strange characters played by interesting choice of actors.
Every time Franklins neighbors ask if the has seen the landlord he just blatantly says that he's dead on the floor, but nobody delves further into the claim.
All in all, you should watch this movie.
i liked the movie, the story is great!
despite the fact that the book was written in a 3 day contest it also is a great mixture of comedy (very dark humor), a little bit of drama and at last but not least it has a massage hidden and in the end outspoken...
so its not a big surprise with the ending little bit to predictable, but for a novel its OK.
i didn't really like little Britain and was a bit sceptical about the movie, but mr.
lundgren is a surprise, don't want to tell spoilers but i really loved his character and the style in which he was presented (specially the colours!) knoxville was OK and fitted perfectly into what he was expected in his character, not that kind of skilled acting needed i think the director put the novel into what it should be, a really good adopted movie!
the story lines are not really merged but the fact that maybe one can find oneself in some of the characters is interesting sometimes you think its getting boring, but in the end you will definitely enjoy it!.
Yes, this movie can make you uncomfortable, since watching mealy, weak people get beaten up is never too much fun, but I could sense something good was going to happen to Matt Lucas.
When a clumsy deadbeat accidentally kills his landlord, he must do everything in his power to hide the body.But the distractions of lust, the death of his beloved brother, and a crew of misfit characters, force him on a journey where a fortune awaits him......Well there is no doubt that its one of the most bizarre films that I've seen in a very long time, and if your not a fan of Akurland and his narrative flow, you probably won't like this.But the wealth of characters in this film, and the way that they are handled, as well as carrying the main protagonists narrative, is very impressive.The fact that you care about every single character, as well as follow a flashback narrative, and the present narrative, takes some doing, and he pulls it off.The first and second acts are the best, and they are a fascinating insight into the human psyche, with the individuals dealing with different stages of emotion, and barriers.But the last act loses its way, and although Lucas is a good actor, he just cannot carry the film in his own.But the film is well worth seeing, and Lundgren hasn't been this good in forever..
I can't recall the last time it took almost a full paragraph's worth of text to describe the main character in this film.
And wait till I tell you more.Franklin loves eating his pickles with mustard on them, wandering aimlessly around his apartment with his loyal dog, and keeping several different wigs handy for the next time he goes out.
He is played by Johnny Knoxville in one of the film's only interesting performances.
Well, Franklin just so happened to kill his landlord because of a small little uprising and now must dispose of the body.
Small Apartments is so juvenile, grotesque, and often bleak that it comes off as a sad character study on several lost souls that we want to hug, not laugh at.If the reprehensible Movie 43 combined almost every mainstream, A-lister Hollywood could offer at that point in time, Small Apartments should go down as the Movie 43 of independent films, featuring a large cast of charming screen actors in less-than-charming material.
Matt Lucas, who is predominately famous for Little Britain, does fine work playing a character we're rather unsure of, Johnny Knoxville, as stated, is pretty good, Juno Temple is welcomed, Rebel Wilson, in her concise role, isn't too bad, Billy Crystal is a nice addition, James Caan is cool, and DJ Qualls is good, albeit shortchanged and woefully underused.
Yet what soils most of their appearances is the fact that they are subjected to obsessively quirky material and uninteresting banter that substitutes plot progression.Director Jonas Åkerlund, who worked for several years in the music video field, likely relished the thought of having an ample amount of time to construct a story from the ground up, and thus, Small Apartments features a design similar to that of a skit or music video.
I laughed on occasion, grew restless frequently, and overall, will regard the experience with mounting confusion and perplexing emotions.Starring: Matt Lucas, Billy Crystal, James Caan, Johnny Knoxville, Juno Temple, and Rebel Wilson.
Yes, though I wasn't feeling lyrical about it, I was having good fun with this 'Small Apartments' and its inhabitants and visitors.
But then there's the ending which takes place while the dead character Bernard Franklin speaks to us by a tape that is labeled 'the answer'... |
tt0808331 | Joshua | Brad (Sam Rockwell) and Abby Cairn (Vera Farmiga) are an affluent New York couple with two children. Their firstborn, 9-year-old Joshua (Jacob Kogan), is a child prodigy to such a degree that he thinks and acts decades ahead of his age. He is nearly always clad in conservative business attire and demonstrating limitless brilliance as a pianist with a marked predilection for "dissonant" classical pieces.
Joshua gravitates toward his aesthete uncle Ned (Dallas Roberts) as a close friend, but distances himself from his immediate kin, particularly following the birth of his sister Lilly. As the days pass, bizarre events transpire as the mood at the house regresses from healthy and happy to strange and disorienting. As the baby's whines drive an already strained Abby to the point of a nervous breakdown, Joshua devolves from eccentric to downright sociopathic behavior.
Joshua causes a fight between his mother (who is Jewish, but non-religious) and paternal grandmother (who is an Evangelical Christian and who constantly proselytizes Joshua) when he tells his parents he wants to become a Christian. Abby gets very angry and swears at the grandmother, telling her to leave her house immediately. Joshua later convinces his mother to join him in a game of hide-and-seek. As Abby counts to fifty, Joshua takes his baby sister from her crib to hide with him, causing his mother to panic and pass out while searching for them in the empty penthouse above them, before he puts the baby back into the crib to make it look as though his mother was hallucinating the entire incident.
Later, after discussing Abby's psychological problems with his brother-in-law Ned, Brad takes two weeks off from his job to look after Abby and his children. When he arrives home, Joshua has gone to the Brooklyn Museum with his sister and their grandmother Hazel (Celia Weston). Joshua frightens his grandmother by describing to her in detail about Seth, the Egyptian God of Chaos, and his violent acts. While they are at the museum, Brad watches a video tape of Joshua scaring his baby sister with a light, making her cry. He arrives at the museum, just in time to see Joshua attempt to push his sister in her carriage down a large flight of stairs, but he stops when he is caught by his grandmother, whom he proceeds to push down the large staircase, killing her and disguising it as an accident. However, Brad is convinced Joshua pushed her and confides in Ned at the funeral.
That night, Brad installs a lock on his bedroom door and tells Joshua that Lilly will be sleeping with him, fearing Joshua will attempt to do something to his sister. That night, Joshua builds a house of blocks in the living room and provokes his father. Brad tells him he won't be able to hurt anyone else, as he now realizes he is causing trouble. Later that week, on Ned's recommendation, Brad brings Betsy (Nancy Giles), a psychologist, into the home to meet Joshua. Betsy comes to the conclusion that Joshua is being abused. Later, Brad tells him he is being sent away to a boarding school, causing Joshua to run away. When Brad arrives home, he finds Joshua hiding in a cupboard, crying hysterically with a large bruise on his back.
The next morning, he and Joshua go for a walk with his sister, but Joshua has stolen her pacifier, causing her to cry. When Brad confronts him, he begins to mock him, causing Brad to strike him. After Brad realizes what he did, he tries to apologize. Joshua further taunts him, which drives Brad to beating his son in public, strengthening Joshua's case of abuse and sending Brad to jail for child abuse and assault. In addition, it is indicated that Joshua has framed his father for tampering with his mother's medications, suggesting that Brad will spend the rest of his life in prison, leaving Ned to adopt Joshua and his sister.
In the last scene of the film, Joshua is playing a piano while his uncle Ned is talking to a person in a phone about having a nanny to take care of Lilly. Afterwards, Ned sits with Joshua and the two compose a song with Joshua singing an original song. The lyrics of the song are basically how Joshua's parents both will never be loved by anyone due to all the events. It is then revealed in the song that he only wanted to be with Ned and got rid of everyone else. | mystery | train | wikipedia | Joshua is clearly not a movie for the everyman and it never really tries to be.It is a story about a boy who longs to be understood by parents who choose to watch from the sidelines.
But if you want a movie that slowly and coolly toys with your mind until the very end, Joshua will likely deliver what you are looking for..
If you think all your children will be lovable, don't see Joshua.However, if you want the bejesus scared out of you by a kid so bright he could skip two grades and play Beethoven's Piano Sonata No. 12 at recess, director George Ratliff, whose Hell House could have entitled this expert psychological thriller, has fashioned a hell of a cautionary tale about appearances and reality, unlovable kids and their clueless parents.
When, however, nine-year old Joshua Cairn (Jacob Kogan) begins missing his parents' affection, displaced to his crybaby newborn sister, strange but not too strange things happen, not easily ascribable to him.As in most successful thrillers involving miscreant kids, even to the end is a doubt that they could be the source of the growing terror.
Director George Ratliff weaves a tale of mounting dread and tension through stunning performances, brilliant cinematography (for which it won the Sundance '07 Best Cinematography Award) and haunting music.The premise of the film is simple and genius, a parent's worst nightmare: what would happen if your 10 yr old child felt no love for you at all?
Jacob Kogan, apart from being a very good piano player, is a believable and fearsome Joshua.Pinpoint cinematography, good plot and a very suitable script that keeps the story rolling in ways you could expect and in some others you wouldn't.I can't believe why some people walked out theatres!
It slowly unfolds, an ominous atmosphere slowly growing like a cancer.Sam Rockwell, one of the most likable and natural contemporary actors, and Vera Farmiga, one of the most unassuming and realistic up-and-coming actresses, are perfectly cast, unlikely to be choices for a typical psychological thriller as disturbing as this one, making their drama more dramatic and disconcerting, having to do with the easily miscommunication of feelings between parents and young children.Joshua's music score assists the the disturbing moments in this film with its brooding.
It's so taut and suspenseful, with the acting god Sam Rockwell rockin' the gifts that the mighty Apollo gave him from Zeus's hand, this is a must see film.As one guy said during the Q&A: "This is the first time I've wanted to throw up watching a movie and it was good thing." I know I haven't said much about the film, but that's the idea.
(one on each hand; guess which one.) Mr. Ratliff appears to have adopted the mantra of every amateur filmmaker in Europe:1) If I just leave things out, it automatically becomes mysterious 2) the moviegoer will be forced to fill in the missing pieces 3) relieving me as a writer and director the burden of having any talent 4) use the tried-and-fail method of the abrupt and ambiguous ending so everyone thinks that all the foregoing shortcomings were intentionalOf course Sundance liked this one, because this is typical faux snob fare.
I can't believe the overall rating on this film was a paltry 6.0, thus it's obviously up to me to do all that is in my power to make sure this film get to at least a 6.5, or more on IMDb, seeing that this number represents my cut off point for what I'll view on film; unless, of course, I've seen the film and fallen in love with it before I've visited IMDb, then, my personal rating cut off point trumps IMDb, and I won't feel like I've just wasted 2 hours, the time it takes watch a movie while stuffing my face with popcorn.
Joshua is one of those movies which I fell in love with at the theater, watching it twice, just because I wanted to see the closing scene just one more time.This movie seriously reminded of a type of Exorcist but without the supernatural agency of evil and special effects which at times can confuse and reduce the art of film making to an amusement park theme.
With a smart script and great performances by everyone, including Sam Rockwell, Vera Farmiga and the kid playing Joshua, the only downside to this movie is a rushed "and-then-it-ends" anti-climax that I found unsatisfying.
Especially when Joshua starts to realized that his parents are not the loving couple, they seems to be and he is planning something sinister for his family.Directed by George Ratliff made an fascinating creepy little thriller that is well-acted (Especially by Kogan & Farmiga as Joshua's long-suffering mother), well directed and it has some enjoyable suspenseful moments.
But where Joshua only occasionally sees his simpatico uncle, Vitus gets to spend a lot of time with his wonderfully relaxed and entertaining granddad (Bruno Ganz, anything but a Hitler this time) , who makes things and goes on walks with the boy and talks about his dreams of being a pilot way back when.Bad things start happening in Joshua's household from day one (the film takes us, rather harrowingly, through 70-plus).
When people watch the trailer, it leads them to believe that "Joshua" is something like "The Good Son" - a cool film about a psycho little brat who just likes to kill people for one reason or another.
Like a little Cillian Murphy.When watching the film for the second time, I realized that it makes the parents out to be bad characters without them actually being bad.
Sneaking a peek at videos of his constant wailing as a baby also does nothing for his frame of mind, and it's not long before he's sneaking in to little sis's room to make her cry the way he used to.All these scenes are intelligently scripted and handled – as is Joshua's unique piano recital – fooling you into believing you're in for something really special but, while the film is still impressive (and far better than much of the stuff coming out of Hollywood these days), the plot developments become increasingly predictable, while the aim of Joshua's quiet campaign of terror on his parents is something of a mystery initially, and a little far-fetched when revealed in the final scene (which, naturally, leaves the way open for a sequel)..
Again, the list of things wrong with this film spans the gamut from the broadest theme to the finest detail but a couple faves were the fact that the actress playing the lead character of Joshua's mother apparently wasn't available for all the days of shooting ....
Sure, it touches on middle class issues and indeed on issues on how parent and child 'might' feel in such a situation, but hey, please don't compare it with 'Don't Look Now', this film doesn't even come close in comparison for intrigue acting drama thrills or suspense.
Joshua is about how a weird 9-year old boy (Jacob Kogan) affects his family when his parents (Sam Rockwell and Vera Farmiga) dote on his newborn sister.
Rockwell as Joshua's father is charming and likable enough and appears to be the only normal one in the entire cast.The homage to the famous Odessa steps sequence in Battleship Potemkin became at first laughable but jarring soon after.The story is pretty simple, overstretched and heavily ridden with plot holes but the film is undoubtedly beautifully shot; the intermittent piano playing makes you feel heady even when there is just slice-of-life silence..
The movie "Joshua" presents a perfect example of this kind of trite and idiotic story about a highly intelligent boy who in spite of being well cared for and affectionately nurtured wants to hurt his parents and others as much as possible for apparently no reason whatsoever.
Even as a child younger than Joshua, I used to wonder how adults could seriously believe I and those my age were somehow "innocent", how easily they could all be "played" against one another if that's what you felt like doing.I grew up somewhere along the way, and while it wasn't for lack of trying, I managed to make it without killing anyone.
There's a scene just like this in the film, where Brad (Sam Rockwell) is protectively clutching his newborn daughter in a doctor's office while staring down his son Joshua (Jacob Kogan), smiling with a hint of hysterical glee, after having caught his son murdering his mother out in public by throwing her down the steps of a museum.
He's clearly frustrated and suffering from the pressures of work and home and an abrasive mother and distressed wife.The film is never explicit or implicit in indicating that anything Brad sees or catches on to the behavior of his son is real or imagined, yet the absolute subtlety of it all, and the fact that Joshua never appears to actually do or say much that is outright "evil" or violent whenever his father isn't around.
There is little reason for the less than 130 IQ viewer to watch this flick because you will not like it at all.This is a story about yuppie and bitchy parents who are confused and out witted by a genius son, who although weird, knows exactly how to get what he wants.There is some blood, maybe some murders and maybe some dead animals along the way.
I had interest in watching Joshua,because I had read a lot of excellent commentaries about it.I had finally the opportunity to watch it and,although I liked it,I have to say it disappointed me a little bit.This is a solid movie but for some reason,I did not find it memorable.First,let's see the positive elements from this movie.Sam Rockwell and Vera Farmiga bring brilliant performances,which are full of details and which are absolutely natural and credible.I would have liked to see these two actors getting recognition for their excellent works.I also appreciated the ambiguity from this movie.I like to see a movie which trusts the spectator will be enough intelligent for taking out conclusions.Now,I have to mention the negative elements from this movie.I did not like Jakob Kogan's performance too much.I do not think it's bad but I think he should have been a little bit more credible and natural on his role of an evil kid.Plus,there are a few irrelevant scenes.I liked Joshua,mainly for the fact that it kept me entertained.But,with the exception of Rockwell's and Farmiga's performances,I do not find something special on it.In summary,a solid film,but not too memorable.Rating : 7.5.
Nine-year old Joshua Cairn (Jacob Kogan) is a prodigy who excels at school and is already exhibiting the traits of a master manipulator; when his new baby sister comes home, he sets into motion a plan to erase her from the picture, but not before driving parents Brad (Sam Rockwell) and Abby (Vera Farmiga) off the deep end.
Director/co-writer George Ratliff shows a flair for mining tension from plot turns that are fairly mechanical, and builds a sense of pervasive unease that, till the thoroughly telegraphed denouement, is a modest echo of Polanski's "apartment trilogy." The adult performers are excellent, with Rockwell ("The Green Mile") and Farmiga ("The Departed") absolutely convincing as the well-meaning parents whose lives descend out of control (even if it's hard to believe they wouldn't have had Joshua committed years before); Rockwell possesses a fine mix of fatherly devotion and paranoia, and Farmiga's psychologically damaged mother is sympathetic and nigh tragic.
i had never even heard of this film until after i had seen Orphan.some of the reviews for that film and the message board had recommended this film.some had suggested it was a superior film.so i decided to give it a shot.i'm not sure i would call it a superior film.it has some similarities to Orphan for sure.however,i found it much more deliberately paced than Orphan was.Vera Farmiga(who played the Mother in Orphan)plays the Mother here and is a revelation.and Sam Rockwell is very good as the father slowly unravelling at the seams.Joshua(Jacob Kogan)is certainly an evil seed,there's no doubt about that.but i just didn't quite feel the same intensity as i did with Orphan.don't get me wrong.this is still a good movie.for me,Joshua is an 7/10.
We may want to stop watching the film or take their eyes off the screen, or shout, or whatever; but the important thing is something is working.Director George Ratliff certainly knows this way, and in "Joshua", his first full-length fiction project, he exploits it: there are times, believe me, in which we become the characters.
In fact, Joshua hasn't even been baptized because his parents have different religions.Brad (Sam Rockwell), a working man who wants the best for his family, and Abby (Vera Farmiga), a housewife who suffers a lot at home but won't accept that a nanny watches her children, have just had a daughter: Lily.
But in the midst of all the chaos, everyone's forgetting about little Joshua...The most important thing in a movie like this is a good villain, and let me tell you, does this film have one!
I think people dislike a movie not because it is bad, but because it creates a discomfort, especially when you are a parent when it reminds you that your son that you love so much might become a psychopath or destroy your life, like it happens in real life every once in a while.Essentially the movie is about a father and son relationship that goes from good to bad thanks to the evil intentions and ruthless intelligence and rationality the 8 year old son (Joshua).The father tries his best to protect his family, but he is not smart enough to fight against someone so hateful, but who is always one step ahead of him.
I just want to put that out there so people expecting a film along the lines of 'The Omen' won't be surprised.The film basically follows the story of two parents, their nine year old son 'Joshua' after the birth of his sister.
It was enjoyable most of the time, though I don't think it's anything I'll watch again (so it'd make a good rent).That said, it really shows the parents steadily going crazy with the problems of the new child, and the family slowly falling apart.
Dallas Roberts is the mothers very nice & attentive brother,He is the only one that really pays attention to his nephew.Jacob Kogan is Joshua, people in the cast think he is responsible for some bad things, I may be wrong, but I feel the boy is not really to blame.
Most importantly, "Joshua" is a great story about troubles and insecurities of modern day parenting and revolves around the theme rarely picked up by movie writers, especially not in the horror genre - namely the fact that there's no golden recipe for a perfect child.
While the writing seems just a little too sweet to fit in with the likes of its B-movie shelf mates, "Joshua" seems to feel right at home, a gem in the long wait for a smart, new blockbuster.Following the very quick transition from delivery room to home life, the film keeps a close watch on its title character (taken by film youngster, Jacob Kogan) as he silently criticizes the change that has been laid on his family since his baby sister was born.
4/10 just because the acting was good from the parents especially Vera Farmiga as the Mother but if you want to see a movie about an evil 'child' go see Orphan.
JOSHUA is an effectively strange film, until it falls apart in the third act where it is offensively insinuated that the titular character is a young homosexual whose evil deeds have all been an effort to live an openly gay life with his gay uncle.When I saw the director's previous effort was HELL HOUSE (a brilliant and creepy documentary), I began to wonder if this movie is simply an adaptation of a narrow minded evangelical cautionary tale on the evils of Godless parenting in the Big Apple.We have Sam Blackwell playing the Wall-Street power-broker who has turned his back on a rural Born-Again upbringing to marry a "Big Fat Jew" (as Farmiga's character puts it.) The family lives in an opulent ROSEMARY'S BABY style uptown apartment with their 9 year old son, Joshua, who is fastidiously well-groomed, anal-retentive, and loves nothing more than tickling the ivories with his Broadway-loving gay uncle (who never appears in a scene without a martini.) Joshua even mentions to his Dad early in the film that he hates playing soccer -- and baseball too!Rockwell's mother comes to help with the family's newest addition - a relentlessly screaming infant girl who drives Farmiga into a severe (at times melodramatic) postpartum depression.
It makes you look at the interaction of family, the complexity of life, the circumstances of chance, and the feelings of a child.If any of you disliked this film because you wanted to see jump-cuts of gore, hear the soundtrack jump to high levels (so you know when to be scared) or just to see a body count, re-watch it and just let the characters tell their story.
What is unclear is whether Joshua did all the devious things we think like push his grandma to her death,drive his mom to insanity,try to harm his little sister,kill the family dog,and frame his own dad for child abuse.Or is he innocent and just intelligent and misunderstood!The dog was old and could have died naturally,his mother was already out of her mind,his grandma could have slipped and fell since no one witnessed it,and his dad may have been guilty of child abuse because of Joshua's bruises and the drawings etc.The problem with this movie is it's not clear what is happening.It is too easy to assume Joshua is a conniving psychopath,but then maybe he is!I'm not sure what the producer or writer had in mind.I hope there is a sequel so it can all be wrapped up because the ending was too confusing. |
tt0078766 | Americathon | In the (then-near future) year 1998, the United States has run out of oil, and many Americans are living in their now-stationary cars and using nonpowered means of transportation such as jogging, riding bicycles and rollerskating. Many Americans wear sweatsuits. Paper money has become completely worthless, with all business transactions being conducted in gold; even a coin-operated elevator warns, "Gold Coins Only". In search of leadership, Americans elect Chet Roosevelt (Ritter) as President. Roosevelt, a "cosmically inspired" former governor of California, proves to have little in common with Teddy Roosevelt or FDR other than his name. Roosevelt, an overly-optimistic man who quotes positive affirmation slogans, stages a number of highly publicized fund raising events, all of which fail. He becomes interested in having a relationship with Vietnamese American pop superstar Mouling Jackson. Real money comes in the form of loans from a cartel of Native Americans, led by billionaire Sam Birdwater (George), in control of Nike (which has been renamed "National Indian Knitting Enterprise").
The federal government, now housed in "The Western White House" (a sub-leased condominium in Marina del Rey, California), finds itself facing national bankruptcy and in danger of being foreclosed and repossessed when Birdwater goes public on national television with the fact that he lent America billions of dollars and now wants the money back, the alternative being foreclosure and the country reverting to its original owners, stating, "Hey, I have to eat, too. Does that make me a bad guy?".
In desperation, Roosevelt hires a young television consultant Eric McMerkin (Riegert) to help produce a national raffle. Instead, they decide that the only way enough money can be raised to save America is instead to run a national telethon, and hire vapid TV celebrity Monty Rushmore (Korman) to host it. However, Presidential adviser Vincent Vanderhoff (Willard) is secretly plotting to have the telethon fail so that representatives of the United Hebrab Republic (formed by the merger of Israel and the Arab states) can purchase what is left of the country when Birdwater forecloses. | humor | train | wikipedia | null |
tt1830617 | Grimm | A brother and sister, Jacob and Marie, live with their father and mother. The family is in a situation where living becomes difficult for them. One day Jacob and Marie's father abandons the two of them in woods while they go collecting firewood. From that moment on, the two teens must fend for themselves, fighting off rape and taking on any possible situation, reacting to situations as if animals. Their mother put a note in Jacob's jacket telling them to go to their aunt and uncle in Spain, but they arrive to find them both deceased in an accident.
Not sure what to do, Jacob, feeling hungry, goes to buy a roll, and finds a note left by Marie that she has gone off to marry a rich man named Diego. Jacob arrives at the house, ominous in spite of its brightness, and finds much to distrust in Diego.
Diego, a surgeon, then plots to steal Jacob's kidney to help his sick sister Theresa. Diego drugs both Marie and Jacob and separates the brother and sister.
After Marie escapes, she finds Jacob severely injured in a stolen car and both brother and sister (reunited again) drive away. Suddenly they are chased by Diego in a car. In the chase Diego's car crashes off the road. Jacob and Marie take shelter in an abandoned house in an abandoned village. With the help of Marie, ailing Jacob gets healed.
As the days pass one windy day Diego comes in search to take Marie and kill Jacob. In the encounter by hide and seek Jacob kills Diego by shooting an arrow. Jacob and Marie bury Diego's body and on hearing sound they sneak under the house. Police come on routine patrol and search the house and leave.
Jacob and Marie sit relaxed beside a nearby flowing river and the credits scroll on. | fantasy | train | wikipedia | Grimm largely follows the line of most crime dramas, but with the fun twist that the bad guys are characters from fairy tales and folk-stories.
The main character is reasonably interesting, his partners (one his human police partner & a new friend that is basically a big bad wolf) are mildly amusing, and the crimes are intriguing.
It is a show that can appeal to fantasy fans (like me) and crime drama fans (like my husband).Being one of two fantasy themed new shows on network television, Grimm is inevitably compared to ABC's Once Upon a Time, which is a bit more fantasy.
I am enjoying Once Upon a Time a great deal (my husband hasn't watched since the first episode), but frankly it seems more like a mini-series.
Nick, the main character, is coming to terms with this whole new world and the fact that he is a Grimm.
A lot of TV series keep rehashing the same old stories and people are turning away to Cable TV for original shows.I think "Grimm" is NBC's way of saying, "Hey there now, we're not giving up." Love the show, love the stories, was waiting for the next episode during Thanksgiving Weekend and now I'm waiting the week after and I have yet to see the next episode.
I don't know why NBC is trying to kill this show by making its audience go somewhere else for entertainment.Either way, the show is great, the stories are hella weird and this show is out there, along with American Horror Stories, the only two shows I'm currently watching on TV..
"...If you like shows that have the main character chasing after monsters that were written about in old folklore just to save someone they don't even know..." Give it a shot!.
I'd definitely give it a shot it I were you; depending on if you like shows that have the main character chasing after monsters that were written about in old folklore just to save someone they don't even know.
This show is gutsy.....not many shows deal with, or show the kind of things this show does...I watched it in Sweden,(where I live...yeahhhh)all four episodes, and didn't realize until the 2nd episode that it was run on NBC.I really thought it was a cable produced show.......not only does it deliver sweet looking co-ed dismemberment after attacking werewolf basically eats her to death,but also shows pedophiliac monsters,action and arm ripping jokes....I mean yeah, sure, somethings are off.....
this city is crawling with blödbaden seemingly running wild,yet every single case is assigned to the same detective(are there any more detectives?and why is that specific Chinese cop always fetching what they need?I'm guessing they're his superior but he dresses like the rest of the cops.....,and the model looking vet girlfriend who makes me wonder if the next episode is the one where she dumps him.....other than that........
The writers then draw out the time that it takes for the actors to figure out the problem until the end of the show, arc or season or until you have a coronary.I do not enjoy watching main characters who are suddenly stupid and then turn smart only at the end of the show, season or arc.
When the main characters I like get fooled or out thought, I like it to make sense, not just periodic episodes of mental deficiency.I do not see this type of writing in Harry Potter, Star Wars, The Hobbit, Castle, NCIS, Lee Child, the late great Michael Crichton, etc.
I enjoy reading and watching stories written cleverly and not dependent on cheap devices like periodically stupid characters or suspense that is drawn out just to fill up the time required for the episode and does not enhance the story.
The main character is your average way-too-young-and-pretty TV Detective, living a seemingly normal life, until his sickly aunt shows up and informs him he's inherited the role of a Monster-Slayer (cough-Buffy-Cough) and that his parents, who he thought died in a car-crash, were actually killed by 'Him', a mysterious figure who's also now hunting the main character down.
Of course, no one but our hero can actually see or identify these monster-folk (who are each portrayed by brief glimpses of bad and terribly repetitive CG face-effects), and not wanting to seem crazy he keeps it a secret from his thoroughly unlikable girlfriend and his ridiculously thick-headed partner.
I watched almost every episode of the first season, and entirely regret the time wasted.
Oh God if that is her character in real life, I would stay away from her, because she is boring and annoying.I do not know who wrote her character or casted her, but that person did a very bad job.Summery, Grimm without Julliete is 7/10.
(there is one exception: one guy is actually German, so his pronounciation is good, but the others all suck)And, btw, if these "Grimms" and these "Wesen" came from Germany long time ago, they would either know how to pronounce the words correctly or would have changed them into the language they use in everyday speech.
Love the characters and great choice of main characters, the acting is good, love the set and the overall plot is very different which makes it well worth the watch.
Each episode is a surprise, some have major frights in them, though the one criticism I have is that the main character isn't "grim" enough.But to me the revelation - and half the fun of this show - is the character Monroe, played masterfully by Silas Weir Mitchell - truly funny, bringing a human touch to the monsters on display...
The way the writers mix the Grimm's Fairy tales into present day plots are very interesting.
The way the writers mix the Grimm's Fairy tales into present day plots are very interesting.
I was actually going to rate this as one, but out of loyalty to Grimm stories, it has earned an extra point.You can tell the show has a big budget so invest in some worthwhile writers goddammit.
Presentation is at times equally stupid always repeating stuff that has been shown over and over again so even the most dumb audience can understand it obviously.If you want people acting just the slightest like an average intelligent human being - this is not your show.
The phenomenon is very common with a lot of series, i call it "tension by stupidity".Having a script to become utterly stupid as soon as the writers feel that one party is getting too strong and them apparently being devoid of ideas.So lets just make the characters do more mistakes and bend, bend, bend around the plot...hoping this makes it more exciting.It doesn't.
The idea is great - Nick discovers that he comes from a long line of "grimms" that police the supernatural creatures of the world.
I liked Supernatural for a few seasons then the characters kept coming back to life too much for me and they started introducing angels and other religious esoteric stuff.Grimm has the same feel.
Show had lots of potential in first 2-3 seasons (i'd rate first 2 seasons 8/10) but the writing just took a bad turn one after another, eventually rushing the ending as well.If you've watched the netflix show 'Love', I kind of imagine the writers of Grim like the ones that Gus works with, people just doing it for the sake of doing it with no real propose or storytelling..
I mean I think the ideas great, the back stories of the Wesson can be cool even if they sometimes look really bad.
I just feel that maybe they could have casted the characters a little better and made them more relatable, I really lack any sort of feeling towards the Grimm, I'm always rooting for some dirty angry looking creature to pull his legs off, but instead episode after episode it's just run of mill, hero always wins bad guy loses.
The special effects are good for a made for television show and each character depicted from Grimm's Fairy tales seems to follow the baseline of the original stories.
I am halfway through Season1 of Grimm, and I would just like to say I think the bad reviewers have got it wrong.
Nick's wolf friend, Monroe (Silas Weir Mitchell), who helps him with the cases, is fun to watch, and the rapport between the two guys brings extra humour to the show.
But season 5, especially episode's 12 dialogues are so so silly, they destroyed the series and it was for the best that Grimm was discontinued.
Anyone who writes a bad review about this show, has not seen it from beginning to end.When I first started watching this show, I admit I wasn't THAT intrigued.
The first episode was great, then I kept watching the next episodes in the first season and felt like it wasn't really going anywhere.
Most of the first season is just getting to know what a Grimm is and what they do, it also gets you familiar with different types of Wesen, good and bad.
I like the premise of the story and tie-in with the 21st century and how the "monsters" all know the Grimms without even an introduction.
It has great characters, the plot has interesting takes on classic fairy tales,and there is just the right amount of mystery and hidden back story.There is some awkwardness in the first few episodes of the season as the actors find their characters and the show starts to hit its stride.
They have great chemistry on screen and it really adds a lot to the show.And as you move through the season, more of the back story involving Nick's family and Renard (Roiz) is revealed in a slow burn.
This show is a combo of both the detective and fantasy genre which I think is a beautiful combination and makes sense since fantasy stories at heart are mysteries, whenever we first read them we never really know what land their in or what is there.I really love the dark noir atmosphere the show has, from the use of the darkness and shadows it really has creates a feeling of a foreboding, mysterious and dangerous world where anything could be hiding withing the next shadow.
However one highlight of the battles are that Nick sometimes uses different med evil weapons which is cool because it shows he has a various arsenal and we see certain vessen dispatched in different ways which keeps things fresh.The characters are also great, each of them are three dimensional, have dynamics, they develop and are involving.
She is tough, capable of kicking some ass and she's cute and kinda hot, what can I say I'm attracted to bad girls.But two of my favorite characters are Monroe and Rosalee both are vessen but good people.
I really like the chemistry between both Monroe and her both play off each other well and we see it develop into something more, let alone the fact both are a different vessen species which in a way makes them a bi racial couple which is cool.
Even like it whenever both Juliettte and Rosalee both interact and work together which is always fun and evens things out since most of the show we see the guys have their own dynamics.Grimm is not you usual fairy tale.Rating: 4 stars.
Like most shows when you started watching it you keep going and want to know how the story continues.
I love the character of Monroe and think that he brings a lot to the series.
There is a show that is a million times better, it's called Supernatural - and I don't even watch that but have seen a few of them.Like your police procedurals but with a twist, humour, chemistry, great acting, great writing - Elementary.How people can come on here and rave about this show and give it 8, 9 or 10 stars beggars belief.
Cop is a descendant of the brothers Grimm (of the fairy tales) and can see the real nature of the monster which walk among us as normal people.
In this series the large storyline is so thin that it's hard to suppress the irritation of all the clichés Still, the character isn't bad looking so during the wait for the better stuff (True blood, Walking death) this is a nice way to kill time..
One reviewer mentioned something about the series getting really interesting from episode 10, so I decided to keep on watching.
For the most part, I think it is an interesting show with a unique plot line and characters although I will say it takes some getting use to but overall I am starting to enjoy it..
I digress, in Grimm the show doesn't only focus on the main character, the show allow you to fall in love with and be intrigued by the story lines of literally 10 other co stars.
**** Unsure what constitutes as a spoiler – I wont be talking about individual plots or anything that happens to the characters ****When I watched the first couple of episodes I wasn't sure if I liked it.
The main character is a bit too stereotypical for my liking so I'm glad Munro is in all of the episodes.I don't feel the NEED to get home and watch this and crave more when a episode is over, which is a sign to me that I'm obsessed with a show.
First off, I want to say I really enjoyed watching the series, because of some good acting and a great implementation of the traditional fairy tales.
Not so closely following fairy tales as in Once upon a time, but merely putting 'beings' from them in the normal world works surprisingly well and this makes for some great episodes.
I haven't completely caught up yet but a little ways in season 2 he reveals that he still doesn't know how most Wesen know he's a Grimm.There are more weird inconsistencies like this and I find the contrast with the forceful explaining quite annoying at times.
Instead I really hope this will come back to bite him somehow, how this should happen I leave in great anticipation to the writers.All in all I find it a solid series and I enjoy watching it despite it's flaws, especially because of some great characters like Monroe and Juliet.
Each episode boasts a new crime that needs solving, and it is made better by the fact that we know something supernatural is at work.
We are introduced to new kinds of bad guys in almost every episode; the fact that they're supernatural beings serves to make it more interesting than your normal crime show..
Now the show has Trubel, a girl who doesn't know how to eat properly, doesn't listen to anyone and rides along with Nick and Hank while they do their police work.The actress that they got to play Trubel is painful to watch and its obvious that David, who plays Nick, has to over act his part to make her look better!
Indeed, they are not really monsters at all but a secretive sub culture of human hybrid creatures known as "Vessen".Grimm is an enjoyably creepy series that does not take itself too seriously.The development of storyline is cleverly managed, there is the real sense that the world we see is only superficial and there is another world waiting to be discovered.The acting too is good.
In fact, it's quite good because it presents viewers with a completely different world full of imagination and creativity.A "grimm" is someone who can see the "hidden side" of certain humans, which may possess supernatural abilities or be monsters themselves.
The main character, Nick, is a grimm and works as a detective to solve crimes committed by these people.
Throughout these crimes, in each season there is a main plot or storyline that carries through each episode that keeps you watching so that you can find out more about what's going to happen next.Over the past few seasons, a lot of new creatures have been introduced, and the creativity of the writers is great.
I'm enjoying the ride with the world of Grimm, and I hope they continue to up their game and come up with more stories and subplots that can keep viewers entertained.Great show with entertaining supernatural action scenes and strong musical score, so I give it a 10..
It's like I feel that none of people involved in making the show have never watched a finished episode.
I liked this show from the start, never got bored in any episode..
Good characters and interesting story..
Grimm is a good show and hopefully NBC doesn't can it like it does all of their shows.
Also,like many shows, there are filler episodes which do not advance the plot enough but to my delight, this new season has been so intense that the fillers have been minimal.
The show started slow and but needs to make nick a little more bad ass and after last weeks episode he is coming into his own.
This is a fun series that has nothing specifically great about it, and yet for some reason I like it more each time I watch a new episode.
I real had my hopes with good rating and I read that people think it's great but damn...
When I read the story line, it made it seem like the Grimm was going to kick some ass.
I never care for Juliette, I like adelind better for nick if she truly becomes a good person.
Grimm is now one of my favourite TV shows of all time, enjoyable plots and twists around the corner on nearly every episode.
Started to watch recently from season one and I became addicted after first few episodes. |
tt0160521 | Megazone 23 | Megazone 23's story is set in the far future of the human race, after, in the early 24th century, various environmental issues rendered Earth uninhabitable, forcing humanity to leave in several massive colony ships, the titular Megazones. The story itself follows the population of Megazone Two Three, based on an unnamed part of Japan.
=== Part I and II ===
The first two parts occur roughly 500 years after humanity left Earth, as the government attempt to hack into the civic computer, Bahamut, for their city, in order to use the city's benevolent artificial intelligence, known as EVE, to influence the people to help them in a near-endless war against the Dezalg.
Into this is thrown Shogo Yahagi, after he is given ownership of a strange experimental bike by an old friend of his. Over the course of the story, he discovers how false his world is, and eventually makes contact with the EVE Program, who enlists him to assist humanity in any way he can. However, unfortunately, before he can do anything meaningful, the city's government have become focused on the destruction of the Dezalg, and have decided to terminate Shogo and EVE, who has fled into cyberspace. In the end, Eve manages to save Shogo and his friends, sending them in Bahamut's system core to Earth as the battling ships are destroyed, ending the conflict, at the price of an unknown number of people on both ships.
=== Part III ===
The third part occurs several centuries after this, with a hacker named Eiji Takanaka, who is scouted by a rebel group working against the teachings of a mysterious spiritual leader known as Bishop Won Dai. Sion, a high-ranking member of the rebel group, who work under the aegis of Orange Amusements, begins scouting Eiji, while also investigating a strange program, Project Heaven, the E=X Bureau, Won Dai's elite staff, are preparing. Sion manages to confront Eiji as Orange attempt to stop whatever Project Heaven is, and, badly wounded, instructs Eiji to go to the lowest point in the city, finding the real, centuries-old, Eve Tokimatsuri, who was meant to be awoken by Shogo Yahagi. She takes him to Bahamut, meeting the independent version of Eve from the previous two parts, while Sion manages to stop Orange from making the same mistake as several centuries before, using it to broadcast the E=X's master plan. In the end, Eiji and Eve confront Won Dai, and he is slain, Eve heading to the ADAM moonbase to shut down and destroy it, while also taking out the city's computer, finally beginning the final part of the plan enacted around a millennia before, while Eiji heads off to meet with Ryo to begin his life anew. | violence | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0071609 | Himiko | In an unnamed forest, a group of women with white-painted faces and robes wander to a ritual site. One of the women, Himiko, the shaman and translator of the Sun God, lies on the ground while another holds a bronze mirror up which reflects the sun's light. Himiko starts to convulse and moan, imitating an orgasm which symbolizes the Sun God penetrating her body. We see several different tribes, one of the Land People, and one of the Mountain People. The Mountain People are a raggedy, unsightly group, all conjoined together by a single rope, and donned with haunting makeup consisting of heavy paint, cobwebs and strings. They wander around the mountain like insects, twitching and in almost no control of their own limbs and muscles. A lone traveler appears, named Takehiko, from the far side of the mountain and enters the forest.
Himiko spends her days weaving cloth on a loom. She hears of Takehiko's arrival and it pleases her. In a ritual, the king of the Sun-God People, Ohkimi, holds a meeting to discuss the visions of the Sun God seen by Himiko. He also discusses the possibility of Mimaki as his own successor to the throne. Mimaki is pleased at this, but Nashime, servant to Himiko, believes that Himiko will be the successor herself, as direct orders from the Sun God. Mimaki is suspicious of this. He confides in his brother Ikume and King Ohkimi and tells them that Himiko might be losing her ability to communicate properly with the Sun God. That her love for Takehiko, a sympathizer of the Land God People, is not allowing her to translate the Sun God's words properly. Mimaki also states that he believes the Land God and the Mountain God are false Gods because they believe that God is in all things and any human being and living creature is able to communicate with God, and the only way for the Sun God People's kingdom to prosper is to take over the Mountain and Land People's kingdoms and force them to believe in only the Sun God. Anyone who resists will be killed.
In the forest, during a ritual, Himiko sees Takehiko hiding behind a tree, and engages in conversation with him. Nearby, Adahime, one of Himiko's assistants in the ritual, over hears them. Takehiko comes to the kingdom of the Sun-God people and meets Himiko in her quarters after dark. Himiko reveals that Takehiko is her half-brother. Despite this, she seduces him and they have sex. Adahime is not far away, and watches them from behind a pillar. During a ritual in the king's court the next night, Himiko addresses the court subjects of the Sun God's wishes. She states that the Sun God requires the people of the kingdom to also accept the Land God and the Mountain God as valid Gods. This shocks the people of the court. King Ohkimi refuses to believe that this is true. He restates Mimaki's assertion from earlier, that Himiko has lost her powers to speak with the Sun God, and her statement is solely out of her love for Takehiko, who is a sympathizer of the Land God People. Believing that Himiko is not wrong in her assertion, her assistant Nashime assassinates the king while the subjects are all distracted by Himiko's speech. King Ohkimi falls and Himiko takes over rule of the Sun God People. She orders anyone who did not believe in the Sun God's words that she would be ruler to be buried alive in the mountains.
The next night, Himiko and Takehiko again sleep together, but Takehiko is resistant to stay with her. Himiko tries to gain Takehiko's favor by offering him a cloth that she knitted. He accepts but leaves her anyway. Adahime follows him and meets him by a lake. She professes her love to him, pleading him to make love to her. After resisting, he eventually obliges. Himiko is horrified to know that her lover has been with another woman, and orders his arrest. Takehiko is captured in the mountains and brought back to the Kingdom of the Sun God. There, Himiko banishes him, but orders her subjects to first rip out all of his fingernails and tattoo his face in colors of shame. Takehiko leaves the kingdom bloody and in pain. The Mountain God People carry him up the mountain where Adahime reunites with him.
Back in the Sun God Kingdom, Nashime consoles a broken Himiko, who feels betrayed and unloved. Himiko proceeds to perform oral sex on Nashime. Meanwhile, Mimaki and Ikume conspire to take power away from Himiko, who they still believe is not acting on the Sun God's behalf, but rather through her own love. They do their best to convince Nashime, and he eventually succumbs to the belief that Himiko has lost her powers, and he keeps her stashed away in her room and Mimaki takes the throne as the leader of the Sun God People. Nashime then tells Mimaki that the young girl Toyo will take Himiko's place as the shaman and translator of the Sun God.
Mimaki declares war on the Land and Mountain God People. The battle between the kingdoms wages in a field. Takehiko and Adahime decide to run away to be together forever, but they are ambushed in the forest by Mimaki's soldiers who pierce them with arrows. Takehiko and Adehime's corpses are brought back to the Sun God People's Kingdom to show to Himiko. She is angered and sad. Nashime again tries to console her, but she tells him to leave. Nashime realizes that Himiko has lost all her powers and possibly her mind too. While she is knitting cloth, the Mountain God People kidnap her from her room and torture her. She calls out for Nashime's help, but he only watches and cries. Himiko dies and Nashime's falls into depression, crying out in the mountains for her. Ikume and Mimaki are shown battling with swords on a ridge, and Mimaki kills Ikume.
Mimaki has a court ritual in which the new translator, Toyo, comes and declares the Sun God is still within Himiko. Mimaki is disturbed by this. Nashime breaks down crying. The film flashes forward several years, and Nashime is walking in the forest, old and fragile, still crying over Himiko. He looks up and sees a helicopter. The camera pans out of the forest to reveal that it is atop a kofun, or ancient keyhole-shaped burial mound, surrounded by a suburban neighborhood with offices, houses, factories and a highway, revealing the film as a mythical fable shrouded from, yet within, modern times. The credits roll with aerial shots of more ancient tumuli and their modern surroundings. | cruelty | train | wikipedia | A modernist historical fiction. An imagined life of the prehistoric Japanese Queen Himiko, based loosely on a few mentions in Chinese chronicles. Himiko is presented as the head priestess of the Sun Goddess cult and a spirit medium. This cult later was used by the Japanese Imperial family as their claim to rule. Himiko is made queen when the king is killed, but lets the men around her rule. She is then deposed and killed because she lusts after her half-brother, who is more interested in Adahime, who supports the Earth Goddess.Done in modern style, with little effort made to have the costumes, the sets and the lighting be as they would be at the time. The Japanese language and characters' motivation seem modern also.Butoh dancer Tatsumi Hijikata and members of his troupe seem to add a touch along the lines of what one expects in a Fellini picture, but dance historians may be interested.. Himiko (1974). I like movies about shintoism, but it's really surprising how few of them are in circulation. New Wave director Masahiro Shinoda's movie Himiko, winner of the 1974 Strangest Poster Contest, is not a direct recounting of shinto myths, but instead a tweaked, re-imagined biography of shaman queen Himiko, here played by Shinoda's wife Shima Iwashita. Shinoda strays far from official history to create an author's take on power, sexuality and religion, mixing elements from both ancient Chinese and Japanese sources, with an affinity for slight surrealism.The movie's plot line has some similarities with actual shinto myths, most notably the one where the Sun goddess Amaterasu gets into an argument with her brother Susanoo, so she hides in a cave, letting the world fall into darkness now that she can't provide sunlight anymore. She is then tricked out of the cave and the world becomes bright again. In the film, Himiko falls in love with her half-brother Takehiko, but arguments ensue and she has him killed, while she is kept away from the public eye. She is killed by the courtmen and replaced by an oracle girl, who raises the mirror (Amaterasu's symbol) and proclaims that she is indeed Himiko, who likely got reincarnated. The camera pans way back and up, to reveal a contemporary landscape to remind of the history's progress through repetition.Of course, that's not all. Shinoda's film is also a comment on patriarchy and the gap between sexuality and political/religious duties. The first scene of the film even has Himiko indulge in a ritual where she orgasms by having the mirror reflect the sunlight on her genitals. While the film is cryptic, it's not outright undecipherable, and the sheer amount of exposition thankfully helps not to get completely lost in the world of inside shinto-references, with kabuki and butoh elements (butoh dancer Tatsumi Hijikata and the members of the troupe also appear in the film). The music was done by Toru Takemitsu, a frequent collaborator with Shinoda.The movie's visual style is amazing. It's like a mixture of Eastern mysticism, Jodorowsky and Fellini in his surreal period. The outrageous costumes and the red-white color palette, the shadow play, the expressionistic color compositions - wow. I also really liked the design of Himiko's palace, really stunning. I was also impressed by the image of Takehiko standing in the forest with a dozen arrows through him, or of Himiko in that beautiful shaman dress/make-up, visiting the forest with her servants.. Another Japanese cinematic piece of art from the previous century.. First off: much thanks to IMDb users mevmijaumau and psteier for their enlightening reviews on 'Himiko'. Personally, I couldn't think of more than 'Shakespearian' as far as the story is concerned. And the ending must have inspired M. Night Shyamalan for 'The village' (2004), right?Back to 'Himiko'. A wonderful, but rather extreme (violence, incest) tale of a couple of Japanese clans who are at war with each other. Was it just the 'land' people versus the 'sun' people? I thought there were 'mountain' in there, too? Or are they the same as the 'land' people? I'm not sure, as I am unsure about many other details. A good excuse to watch it again sometime, because beyond the story, this is a terrific, vivid piece of cinema that deserves to be seen more than once.I especially enjoyed the various costumes (the court men, or the ones 'dressed in grass'), but also the settings and the long, impressive monologues and the elaborate punishment (of Takehiko) scene. But perhaps that is unfair toward all the other scenes, because it was all captivating.An impressive ancient tale with a modern twist at the end. 9 out of 10.. Ludicrous and Indecipherable!. HIMIKO. Viewed on Streaming. Restoration/preservation = ten (10) stars; cinematography and lighting = ten (10) stars; set design = ten (10) stars; subtitles = eight (8) stars; music = three (3) stars; choreography = one (1) star. Director Masahiro Shinoda (who is also credited as co-writer) presents his take on the life and times of the ancient Sun Goddess Himiko (a shaman/medium and translator for the Sun God) who actually existed and ruled a chunk of Japan circa 200 AD. It seems to be a time of many deities limited only by the imaginations and political ambitions of those who invented them. The photo play deals with several including the Sun God, the Land God, and the Mountain God. Perhaps the most influential deity, however, is the Drug Dealer God! The cast and especially the "dancers" often seem to be high (and the film was made during the psychedelic 1970s!). Shinoda depicts the Queen as having epileptic fits and simulated orgasms (and, perhaps, drug trips) when making predictions and speaking for the Sun God. The Director also tosses in incest (Himiko seduces her half-brother) and ceremonial on-the-go orgies. There are many scenes of women with white-painted faces wearing spotless white robes wandering around the forest (rural homeless geisha prototypes?). Overall, this is a Kabuki-like play striving to be a Shakespearian-like tragedy, not a movie. Acting is so-so with most "dialog" consisting of voice-over expositions. Sort of like listening to a radio play of years ago. Surprisingly, this cinematic nonsensical mess boasts excellent cinematography (narrow screen, color) and lighting plus drop-dead art direction and set design. Interiors consist of eye-popping surreal art deco sets (about 1,700 years ahead of their time!). Restoration/preservation is outstanding. Subtitles are close enough. Music is unimaginative and consists of one or a few instruments. It stays in the background (where it belongs!). Choreography is a grade-school-level joke! A film that gives history a bad name! Highly unrecommended. WILLIAM FLANIGAN, PhD. |
tt0051141 | Until They Sail | The film opens in a Wellington courtroom, where testimony prompts Barbara Leslie (Jean Simmons) to flash back to the events that led to the trial. She and her sisters Anne (Joan Fontaine), Evelyn (Sandra Dee), and Delia (Piper Laurie) live in Christchurch, where most of the male residents, including their brother Kit and Barbara's new husband Mark, are preparing to leave for World War II duty. Delia announces her engagement to Phil Friskett (Wally Cassell), known as "Shiner", who is one of the city's few remaining bachelors, but word of Kit's death dampens the celebration. Repressed and judgmental spinster sister Anne disapproves of the upcoming nuptials, but Barbara defends Delia's decision.
Within weeks of the marriage, the sisters come to resent Shiner's abuse and are happy to see him leave for active duty. Delia moves to Wellington to work for the Navy. When several hundred United States Marines are shipped to Christchurch following the 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor, the lonely local women are flattered by the attention they pay them. When Evelyn invites Capt. Richard Bates (Charles Drake) to dinner, he declines the offer, but not without attracting Anne's eye.
Concerned about Delia, Anne sends Barbara to Wellington, where she discovers her sister is registered at the St. George Hotel under her maiden name. Shiner is now a prisoner of war, and Delia has become involved with an American lieutenant named Andy. She plans to divorce Shiner and emigrate to the United States. Andy introduces Barbara to his friend Jack Harding (Paul Newman), a Marine investigating the prospective New Zealand brides of American soldiers. Although Barbara intends to remain faithful to her husband, she finds herself attracted to Jack.
Back in Christchurch, Anne is outraged by the lewd comments made by American servicemen in the lingerie shop where she works and writes a letter of complaint to the local paper. Following its publication, Richard is sent to the Leslie home to deliver a formal apology on behalf of the Marine Corps. Anne invites him to dinner, and Richard arrives with a gift of perfume for each sister. Anne accuses him of trying to seduce them.
Soon after, Barbara and Anne learn of Mark's death in North Africa and Richard's departure for active duty. He eventually returns to New Zealand to recuperate from an injury, and a romance between him and Anne blossoms. He proposes, but before the required marital investigation can take place, he is given offshore duty, leaving Anne expecting their child and unsure of what the future holds for them.
Jack arrives at the Leslie home to conduct his investigation of Anne, and he advises her that wartime romances stem from loneliness rather than love. Barbara tells him his assessment is heartless. Shortly after she discovers Richard's name on the latest casualty list in. Weeks later, Jack meets Barbara at a local dance, where she suggests he uses alcohol to avoid intimacy. He breaks down in her arms, and a strong friendship between the two blossoms.
Jack celebrates Christmas Eve with the Leslie family, which now includes Anne's newborn son. When he announces his imminent departure, he and Barbara share an amorous embrace. Months later, Evelyn's sweetheart Tommy returns from war and proposes to her. Barbara sees an ad from Richard's mother in a newspaper column containing personal notices from American families and writes to her. Mrs. Bates sends money to finance Anne and her baby's move to Oklahoma to live with Richard's family.
As Anne's departure approaches, and the aftermath of the end of the war, Delia goes to Wellington to see her off, only to meet Shiner, who has just returned from war. He accuses her of infidelity and she demands a divorce so she can leave for America with her lover. Infuriated, Shiner kills his wife with a Japanese sword he brought back from the war.
Weeks later, during the murder trial, Jack is forced to reveal his investigation report detailing Delia's many affairs with American soldiers. Upset that her sister's infidelities seemingly have justified her savage murder, Barbara refuses Jack's invitation to leave New Zealand with him. Upon reflection, she packs her belongings and arrives at Jack's hotel to tell him she's ready to embark upon a new life with him. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0135114 | La vuelta al mundo de Willy Fog | As with every morning since he moved into Savile Row, Willy Fog awakens at 8:00 am and rings for his servant, only to remember that he fired him the previous day for his inability to follow Fog's precise schedule. He has already arranged an interview for a replacement – former circus performer Rigodon, who is even now rushing towards Fog's house to make his 11:00 am appointment. Rigodon is accompanied by his old circus colleague Tico, who hides within his travelling bag, and prompts him through the interview, which gets off to a bad start when Rigodon arrives four minutes late. Nonetheless, Rigodon is hired by Fog as his butler and soon departs for the Reform Club.
At the club, the main topic of conversation is the recent theft of £55,000 from the Bank of England which was discussed till the bank's governor Mr. Sullivan arrives and requests a change of topic. Sullivan's off-hand remark that the thief is still in London causes the elderly Lord Guinness to bring up an article in the Morning Chronicle, detailing how it is now possible to travel around the world in eighty days. The article states that one departs London by train for Dover, where one crosses to Calais, and on to Paris. From there, it is a train journey to Brindisi, and the Suez Canal, all within a week. Having rounded the Arabian peninsula, one would arrive in Bombay on day 20 and then a three-day railway journey to Calcutta. Hong Kong is reached on day 33, Yokohama on day 39, and then a mammoth three-week crossing of the Pacific to arrive in San Francisco on day 61, a week-long train crossing to New York City and then finally a nine-day crossing of the Atlantic back to London making it possible to circumnavigate the globe in eighty days. The other members of the club laugh at Lord Guinness's suggestion that he would take on the challenge if he were younger, prompting Fog to defend his honor by taking up the task himself. Sullivan bets Fog £5,000 that it is impossible, and additional wagers by three other club members increase this amount to £20,000. He then stuns the club by announcing that he will leave that very evening and promises to return to the club by 8:45 pm on 21 December 1872.
Rigodon is less than thrilled to hear the news of their impending trip, having spent his life travelling with the circus. However, he dutifully accompanies his master as they set out, with Tico still in hiding. Little do they know, however, that they are pursued by three individuals determined to halt their progress. Inspector Dix and Constable Bully of Scotland Yard are convinced that Fog is the thief who robbed the Bank of England, and the wicked and conniving Transfer, a saboteur, was hired by Mr. Sullivan to impede Fog's journey in any way. | romantic | train | wikipedia | Another childhood favourite....
"Around the World with Willy Fogg" is basically just Verne's "Around the World in 80 Days" anime-style with one or two characters added and Fog's named changed to something easier on the tongue.
This is one of my favourite childhood tv-series'.
Everybody (oh well, next to everybody) know the story, and if you find this series watch it.
It's dated but despite the artistic licence with the story is true to Jules Verne's spirit of adventure.
The English version even has a great song.
You'd have to be very stuck-up not to like it.
Oh yes, everybody's animals too.
So this is a nice little anthropomorphic spin on the tale..
This cartoon is one of my favorite one.
This cartoon is one of my favorite one.
I saw it when a child at the Spanish TV in the eighties.
Of course, it is adapted from Jules Verne's novel with animals.
Phileas Fog is a lion, his wife a nice female cat and so on.
But the adaptation introduces new characters and in particular a gangster who will follow Willy Fog (Phileas Fog) to make him fail in his mission.
We also find a new character as a little mouse, who is Rigodon's friend (Rigodon is Passe-Partout in the novel).
This makes the cartoon even more interesting than the original novel.
Indeed, when I read the book I was highly disappointed!
Jules Verne should have seen the cartoon before writing his book.
Moreover, the cartoon also introduces very nice songs during all the series.
I heard these songs and the emotion is still the same..
A very memorable series.
This is such a fantastic animated series (for everyone, not just kids!) for a number of reasons.
Firstly, there are obviously the lovable characters, the way we see them develop throughout the series is a joy to watch.
Secondly, the story lines are enticing, you just have to know whats going to happen in the next episode- take the jungle episode and the evil worshippers approaching as a great example of how great this series was at cliffhangers.
Thirdly, the music score is really fun to listen to.
Although it is distinctly '80s' sounding, each tune really tends to capture the atmosphere of the moments in the series.
For just a cartoon series there are so many 'true to life' things in this series- like morals, the evolution of friendships, romance, financial problems and solving problems.
Not forgetting the enormous geographical value of this programme- how many places do they visit throughout the series?
Point proved.
The only thing I have to say against it is repetition.
How many times do we have to hear them say they're hungry or they're late for a train?
Mind you this recurrence amuses rather than annoys me..
An absolutely brilliant series!.
"La vuelta al mundo de Willy Fogg"("Around the world with Willy Fogg") is one of my all-time favorite cartoon-shows.
I first rented all the episodes way back in 1988, and I saw every single episode again in 1992, and I was lucky to catch many of the episodes recently on the Spanish tv-channel TVE("Television España").
Thank goodness I`ve learnt Spanish instead of French!The series is based on a novel by Jules Verne, which is called "Around the world in 80 days"(I don`t remember the original French title).
The main character in the series is Willy Fogg, who was called Phileas Fogg in the novel.We follow Willy Fogg & co.
on a fantastic journey around the world against the clock, because Willy Fogg has made a bet that he`ll be able to travel around the world in 80 days.I think the series has got great atmosphere, nice animation, great characters, great music and quite a few "scary"(for the kids) scenes too.**"Plot spoiler"**My favorite episode is without a doubt the one where Willy saves a princess from being sacrificed in India.
Sadly I missed that episode when I caught parts of the series on TVE.
There are 26 episodes which are on 5 tapes.
The tapes are very difficult to come by, so buy them when you see them.
I know that I will!.
Grand adventures.
Around the World With Willy Fog combines the artistic talents of a French author, a Spanish production company, Japanese animators and pop music - a strange combination of ingredients to be sure, but it just works.As an adaptation of Jules Vernes' classic adventure novel, this series is pretty faithful, though it manages to differentiate itself in a few positive ways.
While all major plot points remain intact and only names were changed, additions include a spirited sidekick for Mr. Fog's butler and a villain who constantly tries to thwart the heroes.
The backgrounds and scenery are gorgeous and detailed, and are well-utilized by the series' diverse locations, although the character animation lacks fluidity, which is unfortunately typical for anime.
It has a great soundtrack as well, composed by Mocedades, a prolific Spanish pop group, and it shows, as the opening and closing songs are particularly pleasant ear-worms.
(But strangely, for the English dub at least, any mid-episode song is of much worse sound quality.) |
tt0081205 | The Music of Erich Zann | A university student is forced, by his lack of funds, to take the only lodging he can afford. In a strange part of the city he had never seen before, on a street named "Rue d'Auseil", he finds an apartment in an almost empty building. One of the few other tenants is an old German man named Erich Zann. The old man is mute and plays the viol with a local theater orchestra. He lives on the top floor and when alone at night, plays strange melodies never heard before. Over time, the student gains Zann's trust, and eventually learns of his secret, that the old man has discovered melodies and rhythms of sound of an almost otherworldly nature. Zann plays these sounds to keep back unknown and unseen creatures from Zann's window, which is said to look out into a black abyss, most likely another dimension. One night, Zann's music reaches a crescendo, and the student, staring out the window in hopes of seeing the normal world outside, instead stares into an infinite abyss. The window shatters, and an unnatural wind sweeps through the room, carrying away all of Zann's music notes into the darkness, despite the student's attempts at catching them. Fleeing the house after he finds Zann seemingly dead despite his body still playing the violin, the student escapes not just the house but the neighborhood entirely. Years later, he writes down his accounts, and tells that he has never been able to find Rue d'Auseil again, as it does not appear on any maps, and no one else seems to ever have heard of it. | paranormal | train | wikipedia | Weird fiction, well adapted.. This is a good example of how well things can turn out when a good little story is interpreted as a movie by dedicated artists on a tiny budget. It helps that the tale takes place in filthy little one-room apartments and that the action is pretty character driven, until the unknown vistas of space and time begin to make themselves felt. The special effects are not likely to amaze everybody, but the build-up to them will help you use your imagination to best advantage. Sticks really close to the story as I remember it, so this movie could lead the curious reader into the strange and varied world of one of the great pulp fantacists.. A Beautiful Film. This is an outstanding production of one of Lovecraft's best stories. I never would have thought it was possible to translate the story onto film, but John Strysik and his cast succeed with wonderful results. After years of obscurity the film has recently been shown at a few genre film festivals and appears on the first of the Lurker in the Lobby video compilations, meaning it is finally available for a wider audience to enjoy. I highly recommend seeking it out and seeing for your self how well Lovecraft can be adapted.. Lovecraftian darkness.. 'Then one night as I listened at the door,I heard the shrieking viol swell into a chaotic babel of sound;a pandemonium which would have led me to doubt my own shaking sanity had there not come from behind that barred portal a piteous proof that the horror was real—the awful,inarticulate cry which only a mute can utter,and which rises only in moments of the most terrible fear or anguish..."I always loved Howard Philip Lovecraft's short story "The Music of Erich Zann".This low-budget adaptation by John Strysik truly scared me.It easily captures extremely dark mood that Lovecraft is so famed for.The acting is exceptionally good and the conclusion is terrifying in its suggestive cosmic horror.8 out of 10.. Well...... It wasn't bad for a ultra-low budget movie, but disappointing none-the-less. The acting was adequate, but the special effects to show the horrors seen were god-awful. I hate to bash a movie, but unless you're a die hard Lovecraft fan (and even if you are), this film may disappoint you, too. There are a few better HPL adaptions out there, but sadly fewer than there should be. |
tt0279730 | Children of the Corn: Revelation | Jamie (Claudette Mink) comes to Omaha, Nebraska after numerous phone calls to her grandmother have gone unanswered. Her grandmother's apartment building, which is built next to a cornfield, appears to be empty, except for two young, mysterious children who roam about. Jamie discovers that her grandmother has received a notice of eviction. She goes to see Det. Armbrister, who is not much help. While at the local grocery store, Jamie has an encounter with the children from the building, but they do not speak to her. Outside, she sees a priest standing in the street, staring at her. She returns to her grandmother's apartment to discover a message: "Jamie go home."
Jamie questions the building manager, Jerry, who is of no help. Jamie investigates in the basement and finds a crop of carrots and tomatoes. She flees when she hears a group of children laughing. She runs into a man with a gun, who tells her to keep out of the basement. She later meets two more tenants, an old man in a wheelchair who swears at everyone and a young woman named Tiffany (Crystal Lowe), a stripper. Jerry invites Jamie to a BBQ on the roof, she agrees. On the roof, Jerry takes a bite of corn and discovers there is blood inside. He is then shoved off the roof by the two children. When Jamie arrives, he is nowhere to be found, and she sees the priest watching her from the ground.
Jamie has a nightmare in which her grandmother was lured from her house by a strange voice to railroad tracks. The next day, Jamie goes to see Det. Armbrister who reveals Jamie's grandmother was part of a religious cult when she was a child. The kids, who were led by a boy-preacher named Abel, committed suicide by entering a tent and setting it ablaze. Only Jamie's grandmother survived. Jamie's grandmother's apartment is built upon the site of the fire. This is ironic, because Jamie's parents were killed in a house fire.
Tiffany returns home and, while taking a bath, she is attacked by one of the children who uses corn to strangle her, before taking her body. Det. Armbrister and Jamie arrive at the apartment, but don't notice Tiffany's body lying nearby in the cornfield. Later, after Det. Armbrister leaves, the old man in the wheelchair is attacked by the kids and is pushed through a stair balcony and falls to his death.
Jamie returns to the grocery store, which is ransacked. She spots a girl wearing her grandmother's hat and chases after her, failing to notice the storeowner's severed head inside a drink cooler. Jamie returns to the apartment, where she runs into the man with the gun. He reveals that everyone else has disappeared and that he is leaving. As he makes his escape, the kids trap him in an elevator and scare him so much, that he has a heart attack and dies. The kids then drag off his body.
The priest arrives and explains about Gatlin, and He Who Walks Behind the Rows, who is apparently the devil. The priest tells Jamie that her grandmother is dead and that if she does not leave, she too will be killed. The priest then leaves. Some of the children arrive and take Jamie down to the basement, where there are now rows of corn growing. Abel appears and the children close in on her. One of the children reveals herself to be Jamie's grandmother and though she is a child, speaks in the voice of an old woman. Jamie flees, but Abel uses his power to prevent her from leaving. Cornered, Jamie faces Abel and the children, who ask her to join them. Jamie agrees, but it is only a distraction and she causes a gas explosion, but Abel is unscathed.
Abel uses corn stalks to tie down Jamie, but she is rescued by Det. Armbrister. They both manage to escape before the apartment explodes and destroys the corn as well. It is implied that the souls of the children were freed and Abel was killed. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt1129396 | Radio Free Albemuth | The story is set in an alternate reality America circa 1985 under the authoritarian control of President Fremont. It makes liberal references to the collected works of Philip K. Dick.
Berkeley record store clerk Nick Brady (Jonathan Scarfe) lives modestly with his wife Rachel (Katheryn Winnick) and their infant son. Nick has been experiencing strange visions and dreams. He confides in Rachel and his best friend, science-fiction writer Philip K. Dick (Shea Whigham). Nick calls the source of his visions VALIS (Vast Alien Living Intelligence System).
One recurring symbol that he has been seeing is an ichthys. While he and Phil sit at a table, an orbiting satellite shoots a pink laser directly into Nick's head. He rushes his son to the ER, convinced that he has an inguinal hernia. The skeptical doctor is stunned to find that Nick is right. Nick has subsequent visions that tell him that he should relocate to Los Angeles, where he lands a job at a record label.
Philip gets visited by two members of FAP (Friends of the American People). They press him for information about Nick's visions. The female FAP agent returns and sleeps with Philip. After their liaison, she pretends to be underage, hoping to coerce him into revealing what Nick is seeing from VALIS. Philip refuses to divulge anything about Nick.
Meanwhile, Nick has a dream where a woman (Alanis Morissette) is singing. During the dream, someone comments that there is something about her singing that seems subversive. Eventually, the woman turns up at Nick's record label, looking for a clerical job. She introduces herself as Sylvia, and Nick just assumes that she is a singer. Sylvia gradually reveals that she also receives visions from VALIS. She explains that there are several thousand people who receive transmissions from the orbiting satellite, and they are very loosely organized as a secret society.
The Russian government blows up the orbiting VALIS satellite, and Sylvia explains that it will take another 100 years for a replacement satellite to arrive. She writes a song with subliminal lyrics about VALIS. Nick forces The Fisher Kings to record the song, despite their total disinterest in it. When they debut the song at a club, Nick explains to Philip how the subliminal messages are encoded in the recording.
FAP arrest Nick and Philip. They waste little time in executing Nick, as well as Sylvia. The film ends with Philip in prison, writing about Nick's VALIS experience. While he is working in a field one day, some teenagers gawk at the prisoners and laugh. Their boombox is playing Sylvia's subliminal song, and Philip realizes that the secret society found a way to get the song out, despite FAP's best efforts. | violence, alternate reality | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0374583 | Comme une image | The protagonist, Lolita Cassard, lacks confidence and self-esteem because she doesn't look like the women who fill the pages of fashion magazines. Her father, Étienne Cassard, is a respected novelist, but rarely considers the feelings of others, only thinking of himself and worrying about aging. Pierre Millet, a younger writer, doubts he will ever be successful. Meanwhile, Sylvia Millet, a singing teacher, believes in her husband's talent, but doubts her own and that of her student, Lolita. When Sylvia discovers that Lolita is the daughter of Étienne, an author whom she admires, she befriends Lolita in order to gain access to Étienne for her husband's sake. Lolita does not believe or see that Sylvia is just another person being generous to her because her father is famous. She begins to confide in Sylvia about her father, love life, and self-confidence issues. Sylvia surprisingly takes a liking to Lolita and begins to see Étienne for the man he really is. Throughout the film Sébastien, a young journalist, befriends Lolita. He is the only one with pure intents, even after he finds out who her father is. He takes a liking to Lolita, but she refuses to show any interests and is only infatuated with another boy, Mathieu. Mathieu is everything Sébastien is not. Mathieu only has interest for Lolita because of her father and mistreats her. Lolita casts all of these same behaviors on Sébastien and does not realize that he truly does like her for herself. After a crazy weekend at Étienne's cottage, Sylvia leaves Pierre because he has become just like Étienne, Lolita goes after Sébastien because she realizes he has honest intentions, and Étienne is repeatedly reminded that he is an indifferent father to Lolita. | romantic | train | wikipedia | Lolita is a pudgy young woman with a very low self-esteem even though she's got a beautiful voice and passion for singing) who desperately craves her father's attention.
20 year-old Lolita (Marilou Berry) aspires to be a singer.More than this, she desperately wants attention - any attention - from her father Étienne (Jean-Pierre Bacri), a self-absorbed novelist whose neglect of his daughter and rudeness to those around him borders on the cruel.Overweight and lacking in self-confidence, Marilou isn't helped by her assumption that those who befriend her view her only as a route to her famous and successful father.
This certainly seems true of Lolita's singing teacher Sylvia (Agnès Jaoui), whose husband Pierre (Laurent Grévill) is an aspiring writer himself.And although Sébastien (Keine Bouhiza), whom Lolita meets by chance, seems genuine in his intentions, Lolita's fragile self-esteem and obsession with her father seem destined to thwart any future they might have.Emotionally damaged, self-serving or merely flawed, this ensemble of eminently believable characters is superbly played under Agnès Jaoui's fluid direction.
Add in an intelligent and witty screenplay (co-written by Jaoui and Jean-Pierre Bacri) and you have a poignant yet subtly comical film that goes to the heart of the issue of fame and the affect on those in and around its spotlight.
Lolita is a dedicated vocal student, whose most serious problem is that her father--played by Jean-Pierre Bacri--is too self-absorbed to pay much attention to her.
Étienne Cassard is a noted author and publisher, who cares about his work, his position of power, and, to some extent, his beautiful trophy wife and their young daughter (Lolita's half-sister).
She must be Wonder Woman!)Sylvia has true compassion and affection for Lolita, but she's not a saint, and is not above using her influence with Lolita to advance her husband's writing career.To my mind, Agnès Jaoui represents the perfect French film star.
Aside from the main father/daughter relationship, the film is full of types that are at once fresh and recognizable (the unctuous friend of the celebrity, the slightly defeated wife of an author, who has subsumed her own passions for music to his passion to be a famous author).
Agnés Jaoui, who co-wrote and directed, also has a major acting role in this story of several people who buzz around a self-centered, rich and famous writer and publisher.
Writer/director and star Agnès Jaoui (her co-author is her ex-husband Jean-Pierre Bacri who also stars) is obviously an intelligent, observant, caustic chronicler of contemporary French society who dotes on celebrities at the expense of their own self-respect.
Their interaction provides the venom that in Jaoui's hands raises the bar on the range of comedy.Étienne Cassard (Jean-Pierre Bacri) is a famous writer whose latest novel has been 'transformed' into a schmaltzy film about which he is loathsomely embarrassed.
Lolita's music coach is Sylvia (Agnès Jaoui) whose demands on her students reflect her frustrated life being married to an unknown author Pierre (Laurent Grévill).
Odd paths cross and it is through Lolita's influence as the daughter of a famous writer Étienne that Sylvia arranges for Pierre to join forces with Étienne and gain acceptance and popularity, but the consequences include Sylvia's increased tutelage for Lolita and her group of fellow madrigal singers.Lolita comes the closest to being a character about whom we care.
The film ends with Lolita's awakening to the richness of a sharing society, while the director announces where her sympathies lie courtesy of the father's hi fi player.Yet another French cultural swipe at Hollywood.
The title made more sense to me after I thought for a while.EVERYBODY in the film was saying, "Look at me!" which I think was the title of Pierre's book that he got accepted in the movie.Lolita, of course, is saying to her father, Etienne, "Look at me, your daughter," as well as to everyone else, "Look at me for more than the chubby adolescent.
I'm more than the daughter of the famous guy you want to curry favor with."Etienne is saying, "Look at me (and my beautiful wife young enough to be my daughter)" and always striving for recognition (well displayed at the party where he forces the mogul to come over to HIM).Sylvia, the music teacher, is certainly saying to her husband, Pierre, "Look at me, instead of obsessing over your 3rd book!
For crying out loud, the other books got published and were well-reviewed." She tentatively enjoys it when the party guy really DOES look at her and they dance.Pierre says, "Look at me," in his burning quest for publication and chasing the association with Etienne.Karine, Etienne's young wife, probably was saying, "Look at me," when she married the famous author but then doesn't get enough of his time/attention, particularly because he's always checking out the new potential trophies.
This is a film about disorientation and alienation between an impressionable young woman and her self centered father.Young Lolita is a talented girl.
Her music teacher, the kind Sylvia, has too much to do with all her students to pay particular attention to this plump, but pretty, girl until she hears about Lolita being the daughter of the influential Etienne Cassard.The problem with Etienne is that he has married a younger woman who apparently loves him, but Karine has definite ideas about what is to have BCBG (bon chic, bon genre) among her circle.
When at the end, during Lolita's triumphal recital, Etienne runs away from the church where the concert is being held, he does the ultimate coward act of his life; in a way he betrays the daughter who loves him and is trying to show she is worthy of his love.The film is well written, but the problem is that some of the characters appear to be one dimensional people.
Agnes Jaoui's Look at Me is an almost perfectly-pitched comic character study, a nimble, amusing and thoughtful portrait of flawed people and their unlikely relationships.
The principals form their attachments through a combination of accident and ambition: Lolita (Marilou Berry), the daughter of famous writer Etienne Cassard (Jean-Pierre Bacri), seeks the aid of an overworked music teacher, Sylvia (Agnes Jaoui), in rehearsing her chorale group for an up-coming performance.
Sylvia has no interest in helping Lolita, whom she considers a bit of a pest, until realizing who Lolita's father is; wishing to meet the famous Cassard, who might be able to help her struggling-writer husband Pierre's (Laurent Grevill) career, Sylvia agrees to coach the ensemble.
Things come to a head, however, during one of those beloved French weekends in the country (where would French cinema be without weekends in the country): Cassard demonstrates himself to be a jerk by dressing-down his young, attractive wife Karine (Virginie Desarnauts) in front of everyone; Lolita realizes that her boyfriend Mathieu (Julien Baumgartner) is only interested in her because she's the daughter of the famous Cassard; Sylvia realizes what a jerk SHE is for trying to use poor Lolita, etc., The central character, Lolita, has the misfortune of being the off-spring of a famous man; she seems doomed always to exist in his shadow, to fail in every effort to gain attention for herself (to get someone to look at her).
The other important relationship is that of Sylvia to Pierre; Sylvia seems a woman of integrity, despite her rather shameless use of Lolita to gain entrée into Cassard's circle, but Pierre, after years of struggle, seems all-too-willing to toss his principles out the window in the name of success (he appears on a ridiculous talk-show, confetti raining on his head and half-naked girls grinding in his face; Sylvia can only sit on the sofa and stare in astonishment at what her husband has gotten himself into).
Her father, Cassard, is played by Jean-Pierre Bacri as a man who has bought into his own hype so completely that he's forgotten he was ever anyone other than the eminent personage he's become (he's forgotten what it was like to be young and insecure like Lolita, and behaves thoughtlessly toward her).
As Sylvia, Agnes Jaoui finds a sort of middle-ground between Lolita's self-doubt and Cassard's arrogance; and as her confused husband Pierre, Laurent Grevill projects the right kind of blandness alongside the dynamic Cassard, whom he idolizes but doesn't measure up to (Cassard may be a creep, but he wouldn't be caught dead on a dumb TV show).
(In the beginning of the story, they don't, is the answer.) The film is directed by, and stars, a highly talented woman, Agnes Jaoui, and the original screenplay is written by her and Jean-Pierre Bacri.
Bacri has thus helped to create a mercilessly unflattering part for himself, which he plays in the film, of a man so obsessed with himself and his celebrity that he notices no one, least of all his daughter from a previous marriage to a woman he didn't love.
This film directed by Agnes Jaou who also played the voice teacher, Sylvia Millet, who is married to a third time novelist is quite a work of art not only as a female director but also as a supporting actress.
The actor who plays Etienne Cassard, the famous acclaimed French novelist, also deserves praise for his performance as the complicated, selfish, father and husband to a young bride, Karina.
The script is solid, believable, and near perfect as well as the acting performances here as well, Marilou Berry is fantastic as Lolita Cassard as is the supporting cast of characters..
The search for fame, attention, understanding and approval is the central preoccupation of the aptly titled "Look at Me." (This is one case where the translated title seems better than the originalit's certainly less pretentious.) It's a comedy-drama whose four main characters are Etienne (Jean-Pierre Bacri), a famous and egotistical novelist; Lolita (Marilou Berry), his pudgy, ignored daughter who has discovered a talent for singing; Sylvia (Agnès Jaoui), her voice teacher; and Pierre (Laurent Gréville), Sylvia's husband, an up-and-coming novelist.
The story uses the time-honored tactic of introducing the characters as they go about their lives in a busy city (in this case, Paris) then ratcheting up the tension by sending them all to an isolated country house, where they have more opportunities to irritate and influence each other.On a scene-by-scene basis, "Look at Me" works well enoughthe dialogue is sharp and the acting, especially from Berry and Jaoui, is very good.
(He's like a less complex version of the selfish writer/dad from "The Squid and the Whale.")"Look at Me" could have been much better with a more focused script and stronger ending, but there is also a good deal of wit, insight, and beautiful music to be found along the way..
In the film's other major plot strand, Lolita's voice coach, Sylvia, is also married to an author, Pierre, who has been having trouble getting published of late, until she uses Lolita to secure him an introduction to the young protégé's father.For the most part, "Look at Me" doesn't go for big flashy dramatic scenes but rather tells its story in a low-keyed way by having its characters interacting in traditionally continental social settings like restaurants, taxicabs and vacation homes in the country.
The film's other intriguing secondary character is Sylvia, the music teacher, who really seems to be the voice of conscience in the story.Despite that flaw, "Look at Me" succeeds more often than not at weaving a complex tapestry out of a variety of interesting and colorful characters.
To that end, the film features fine ensemble work by Marilou Berry, Jean-Pierre Bacri and Agnes Jaoui, who also co-wrote and directed the movie..
The English translation of this film's title conveys so much of what the film is about: Look at Me. The main character Lolita wants to be noticed by her father, a famous novelist and publisher, but he treats her with indifference.
As in their earlier film "The Taste of Others," Jaoui and Bacri do an excellent job of capturing little snatches of everyday life and common human interactions, notably the little squabble in the car between Sylvia and her husband over her driving.
After thoroughly enjoying 1999's "The Taste of Others", the first writing collaboration between the husband and wife acting team of Agnes Jaoui and Jean-Pierre Bacri, I couldn't wait for their next film.
For what it takes in 'Comme une image' to cast a compassionate look at others Bacri and Jaoui got the best parts - those smoothly cornering the movie to its end..
Truth is that she is thoroughly ignored by him in whatever she does, and this relationship will mark her attitude towards life and people.Director-writer Agnès Jaoui shines in the role of Lolita's singing teacher and the wife of a struggling writer.
Among those sucked into the vortex created by this man are: Lolita, a daughter who wants to be a classical music singer; Karine, a trophy wife; Sylvia, Lolita's voice instructor; Pierre, Sylvia's novelist husband; and Sébastian, Lolita's boyfriend.Those looking for a heavy plot or action should skip this - we drop in on the characters, get to know them, and then leave them pretty much as they were at the beginning.
Although the initial premise might look rather dramatic, the truth is that there's so much sense of humor in this movie, especially in the father's character.
"Look At Me (Comme une image)" is a sweetly wry cross between "Lovely and Amazing" and Woody Allen's "Celebrity." A two generational ensemble of obliviously self-absorbed Parisian intellectuals connected through a complicated roundelay of blended family, hangers-on, co-dependents and preening sycophants demonstrates that these types are not just found in Los Angeles and New York City.Co-writer/director Agnès Jaoui has already proved she can manage comically touching organized chaos in a script co-written and co-starring her ex, Jean-Pierre Bacri, with the marvelous "The Taste of Others (Le Goût des autres)" and she does it again here, while casting herself and he in the least flattering roles.
that get complicated by little white lies to protect each other's feelings until they become comically hypocritically committed.Marilou Berry (in a role that would probably be played in an American re-make by Sara Rue if the heart-stealing is maintained or by Nia Vardalos if they go for broader comedy -- and I doubt she'd be singing a cappella madrigals) is utterly charming as a woebegone and ignored daughter of the first marriage of a famous writer with a new younger family, with Bacri as a modern version of Moliere's "The Misanthrope." I'm not sure I've seen quite the same "meet cute" before as the adorable Keine Bouhiza falls down drunk at her feet.What would also be different from an American version is that the ensemble is almost all character actors, such that it adds irony to the guys constant girl-watching and commentary on passing women's looks.
A beautifully crafted and acted film where the director Agnes Jaoui, who incidentally plays a leading role in the film supporting and coaching, Marilou Berry as Lolita a budding singer, for me the star of the film, who has to come to terms with her father's and his immediate circle of friends individualism.As in all good films the pace is wonderful as the protagonists are slowly bought together, egos waxing and waning as they seek out what is best for themselves and to hell with everyone else.
A beautifully crafted and acted film where the director Agnes Jaoui, who incidentally plays a leading role in the film supporting and coaching, Marilou Berry as Lolita a budding singer, for me the star of the film, who has to come to terms with her father's and his immediate circle of friends individualism.As in all good films the pace is wonderful as the protagonists are slowly bought together, egos waxing and waning as they seek out what is best for themselves and to hell with everyone else.
I'm writing it up, of course; and there's something to be said for directors acting in their films, especially those that know and identify deeply with the character, especially as the focus around which others base their performance.
Not all the leads excel, but the arrogant father figure (Jean-Pierre Bacri) was played to a razor's edge precision (husband and wife team alert: a reprisal of his role in Le Goût des Autres, also by and with Jaoui).
The daughter is an irritating character, however - you just want her to make the most of herself - irritating but so true to real life.The music is absolutely beautiful, as long as you like baroque / early classical (which we do).
In Agnès Jaoui's ably written but weakly plotted comedy of manners Look at Me (Comme une image) Étienne (Jean-Pierre Bacri) is a famous French writer and publisher with a young, thin, beautiful blonde wife named Karine (Virginie Desarnauts).
His wife Sylvia -- ably played by Jaoui herself and ultimately the movie's most sympathetic and morally perceptive character -- is Lolita's singing teacher.
She puts her coat over him, and that's how they meet.My friend said Look at Me reminded him of Eric Rohmer's films because it had a lot of good French talk and not much action.
"Comme une image" might be the best French film I've ever seen.Also referred to as "Look at Me" in the United States, and is translated more closely as "Like an Image," it is the story of an aspiring opera singer who has to deal with the adversity of being overweight and having a famous father who is a really lousy parent.The thing that makes this film so good is the script and the acting.
Here if anything she underplays the cliché of the fat girl who wants to be noticed by her father and still believes that boys are interested in her for herself no matter how many times they make it obvious they just want to get next to pop (Jean-Pierre Bacri) a successful writer.
So there you have it, Bacri remains the same arrogant, unfeeling, talent, Jaoui's relationship with her husband has taken a large dent but young love is looking good. |
tt0800027 | Feast of Love | The movie deals with love and its various incarnations, set within a community of friends in Portland, Oregon. Harry Stevenson provides narration about how love can affect one's life.
=== Bradley ===
Bradley runs a small cafe in Portland. He has been married to his wife Kathryn for 6+ years. However, their marriage becomes strained. Soon enough Kathryn begins a lesbian relationship with a woman, Jenny, whom she meets playing softball, and leaves Bradley. The divorce affects Bradley greatly, but he soon finds love again in Diana, a realtor who also has a past with a married man named David. Though she ends her affair with David to marry Bradley, they ultimately declare they are in love with each other and Diana leaves Bradley, again devastating him. Now twice divorced, Bradley suffers a mini-breakdown and stabs himself in the hand. As he is getting stitched up in the hospital he falls for his doctor, Margit. In the film's conclusion the two are revealed to marry.
=== Oscar and Chloe ===
Oscar is a young man working at Bradley's cafe who soon meets and falls in love with a girl named Chloe. However, Oscar is revealed to be living with his alcoholically abusive father, Bat. When Chloe visits a fortune-teller, she is told that Oscar will die. Chloe, though upset at first, straightens her resolve about her love for Oscar and their future together. Coming home, she urges Oscar to get married to her immediately. At the wedding, Chloe reveals to Harry that she is pregnant, and plans to have another baby right after due to Harry's advice of having "two." In the film's conclusion everybody gathers for an afternoon in the park. While playing football, Oscar collapses; despite an attempt to get him to a hospital, congested traffic interferes, and he dies of a heart defect. Bat attempts to avenge his son's death by harming Chloe but Harry scares him off, and then asks Chloe if he and his wife Esther can 'adopt' her as their own.
=== Diana and David ===
Diana is a successful realtor and has been carrying on an affair with the married David. Though she asks him numerous times to leave his wife of 11 years, Karen, he cannot bring himself to do it. Their relationship becomes even more volatile when Diana begins dating Bradley and falls in love with him. David insists he loves Diana, but is unable to leave his wife. Diana marries Bradley and ends her affair with David. However, their love is later rekindled when Karen discovers her husband was cheating, leaving him. Free at last, David and Diana have an emotional confrontation in the park that ends with a kiss that Bradley sees, fueling their divorce and Bradley stabbing himself. In the film's conclusion Diana and David are shown as a public and functionally happy couple.
=== Harry and Esther ===
Harry and his wife Esther have been married a long time. Harry is a patron at Bradley's cafe and often provides the younger generation with advice on love. However, it is revealed that Harry and Esther are masking their own grief after the death of their adult son, Aaron. Harry reveals the nature of his son's death to Chloe, whom he and Esther grow very close to. Harry has also been struggling with the decision of going back to work as a professor at a university. In the film's conclusion, after Oscar's death, Harry and Esther offer to adopt a now widowed and pregnant Chloe, who tearfully accepts their offer. | paranormal, flashback, romantic, melodrama, home movie | train | wikipedia | Another good story line involved two young broken people who try to accept that life and love can be good.
Played well by Toby Hemingway and a stunning Alexa Davalos, the two lovers have overcome much in their lives and certainly appreciate the bond they have.The best story line in the film is the magic of Morgan Freeman and Jane Alexander, playing the oldest interracial couple I can remember seeing on film.
Two excellent performances.The center of the film is the lovable, clueless, hopeless-romantic played by underrated actor Greg Kinnear.
We see two relationships (Selma Blair and Radha Mitchell) end badly for him, yet he clings to his belief that LOVE is what it's all about.I like how the only kids involved in this real world mess are old enough to make their own decisions.
A well done movie on relationships and their complexity, but without the non-stop action young fans want in films this will likely only get a niche audience in theaters with most folks waiting for the DVD or cable to check this one out..
It did not go overboard in trying to make the viewers cry, like so many dramas tend to do and it managed to mix sad comedy with funny comedy - the way they mix in real life as well.Morgan Freeman is the veritable pillar that holds the whole thing together.
It tells you that most importantly, you need to be honest with yourself, but also you really need to find out what to look for in this great journey of life.I believe Morgan Freeman led a excellent cast of actors, but what I noticed more in the narrative was his distinct voice of reason that Mr. Freeman is so exceptional with in every film he does.
So, if you decide to take my advice and spend a couple hours away from your routine to take in this wonderful little film, try to view it from a perspective that its message of thoughtfulness, courage, and heart might endure long after its over.I also enjoyed some great acting efforts from the always good Greg Kinnear and the Aussie Radha Mitchell, which I think are worth mentioning separately, but the whole cast was good.
It's not like the other love stories, when the guy is heartbroken and the movie shows how miserable he is and than suddenly he finds the girl on his dreams and they live happily ever after.
In life doesn't happen like that, you met a lot more, before the right one and the movie shows it too.I'd never liked so much Morgan Freeman till now.
As with most movies with a huge cast, everyone's connected to one another through the inevitable six degrees of separation, naturally for convenience, but in this aspect, it played to the early monologue and we take on the role of the Greek Gods, who introduced the notion of love and see how each of our human creations scuttle around trying to make sense of it, and through their individual journeys, succeed or fail, laugh or cry, get spurned on to heights unimaginable, or get thrown into the depths of heartbroken despair.Morgan Freeman can almost sleepwalk through any wise, sagely character roles.
His best friend is a coffee joint owner Bradley Thomas (Greg Kinnear), who is just about the most unlucky bloke when it comes to affairs of the heart, with his female engagements being Selma Blair, Radha Mitchell and Erika Marozsan, who enter at different points of his life.
You have the young love at first sight, the tried and tested bonds between the elderly who fear about impending departure from one another through death, you have ugly divorces, and worse, if it's for a member of the same sex, you have adultery and the exploration what makes it worse - knowing that you're cheating on your spouse, or cheating on a potential spouse because you've led them to believe that you're in exclusivity, and of course, parental love and guidance given towards a child.Come to think of it, there're quite a number of negative emotions that get played through the movie, but ultimately, it's still provides a positive effect through the lessons learnt from succinct encounters that the characters go through.
Such as whether you'll find the courage to go through hardship and difficulties with the other half, knowing the consequence of it all, finding little happiness and blessings in your daily life despite setbacks that take a stab through your heart, and what I thought was a very, very apt reminder and an important lesson to be learnt, is to always open your eyes and not be blindsided by love just because of the endorphins that course through your entire body make it seem that you can tolerate shortcomings for the longer term.It's a reminder that in relationships, one has to be first honest with oneself, before seeking out that somebody else.
She gave us an excellent working translation of the book from which this film is based upon.I laughed at many points, cried at even more times and loved as much as the characters loved.
Well I think I will do as Bradley would and choose to taste the sweet and possibly close my eyes to the bitter, allowing me to remember this film for the obvious love that went into each performance and care in selecting every frame filmed!
The scene where Morgan Freeman wanders into the stadium to see two people getting it on actually made me laugh out loud, then I realized the only way to watch this film is to treat is as a joke, laugh and make Mystery Science Theatre 3000 style comments and you will have a good time..
There's Morgan Freeman the "wise old man", who is friends with Greg Kinnear, who is a bit naive when it comes to love despite his bad experiences, which make his character more enjoyable.
What can you say about a film where I didn't know that Selma Blair was Greg Kinnear's wife until Morgan Freeman said who she was, nor could I believe that no one, other than Freeman was picking up that she was falling in love with another woman, we're no more than ten minutes in and already I have having trouble accepting what I was seeing.
This film features a very impressive and talented cast with wonderful (and some very brave) performances by nearly everyone on screen (particularly from Alexa Davalos, Radha Mitchell and Billy Burke).
Morgan Freeman and Greg Kinnear were great as usual, and the cast of younger actors were unexpectedly good.
(I love the dogs!) Casting Morgan Freeman made the movie extra watchable but the original character wasn't quite as perfect.
Feast of Love is a satisfying movie about real life.
This movie contains absolutely no surprises.Morgan Freeman turns in a masterly performance as (no surprise) the world-wise gentlemen with a big heart.
For me, Freeman carried "Feast" and was the only bright spot.Greg Kinnear -- and I'm normally fan -- phoned in his performance as the good soul who still believes in loves but can't find the right woman.
The first "love-feast" in the film just sort of drops off the radar screen, after making one wish to know more about how that relationship went.
If you think things like places and people matter, you may find fault with this film..
Distinctly the director shows a lack of taste as far as the settings, props and the actors are concerned; half the time it looked like a documentary film, bad print quality and all, with cut scenes lacking continuity.
Apart from his lines, nobody says anything really worth hearing.It surprising that "a meaning of life" storyline comes from an American stable not many would take it as a movie and go watch it, but it has its own good moments.
In a rather harsh way, you are shown the meaning of like, love and lust the three things that rule life; from happiness to misery in three words, in that order (incidentally, the alphabetical order as well).If you're hungry for a really good movie, then this is definitely not the feast that you will look forward to.
And when film buffs begin to believe that the meaningful movies only come from foreign sources, out pops the DVD release of a jewel like this film, a story so well written (Allison Burnett), directed (Robert Benton), and acted by a gifted cast to show under scrutiny that it is the equal of the best of the 'sensitive films'.Based on a novel by Charles Baxter (and adapted by Allison Burnett, another extraordinary writer of his own novels CHRISTOPHER: A TALE OF SEDUCTION and THE HOUSE BEAUTIFUL), the story takes place in Portland, Oregon and examines the lives and love stories of myriad characters, each of whom is connected in some way to the father confessor of the town, one elderly professor Harry Stevenson (Morgan Freeman) who not only narrates the threads of the people's lives that round out this film, but also plays a significant role as a father of an only son who died in the recent past from a heroin overdose, a man bruised and experienced in the vagaries of life, supported by his wife Esther (Jane Alexander), both of whom cope with their loss by extending their love to young people.Bradley Thomas (Greg Kinnear) is an artist and an optimist who own Jitters, a coffee shop, and is married to Kathryn (Selma Blair) who loves sports...and leaves him for a woman who awakens her lesbian longings.
Searching for a place to live after his marriage fails, he meets real estate agent Diana (Rhadha Mitchell) who despite the fact that she is having an extended love affair with married David (Billy Burke), a relationship consisting solely of 'nooners' with wine and sex, sees the rare vulnerable goodness in Bradley and once again Bradley is in love, headed toward marriage.
And just when the playing field of love seems even, a major tragedy occurs which bonds all of the players surrounding the wise Harry and Esther and the resolution of all of the aspects of the feast of love come round.What makes this film so very successful is the gentle manner in which it is written and directed and acted.
At the core of this movie is the story of three couples and their loves, losses, toils and tears.Morgan Freeman and Jane Alexander play the older, wiser couple who are suffering a heartbreak which is revealed about 1/3 of the way through the movie.
Couple their interesting story with the fine acting that these pro's deliver and you'd have a great movie.Greg Kinnear and X are the second "middle-aged" couple.
On scene involves Greg Kinnear and his new wife Radha Mitchell (who just ended a long affair with a married man, but kept his shirt).
Rushed to the hospital by wise and kindly Morgan Freeman who continuously admonishes him to stop telling people he did it himself, Greg falls in love with the Doctor who stitches him up.
What was amazing was the Doctor falls in love with the crazy guy who just chopped his finger off.Oh and the movie had way too much nudity.
"Feast of love" (a book-adapted movie) is more pensive, and at times sad, although there is of course the lighter side.
The movie starts with Morgan Freeman playing a retired philosophy professor, sleepless in Portland (close enough to Seattle), walks pensively from his house, with voice over of his thoughts, something to the effect of: The Greek gods were bored, invented humans, still bored, invented love (which was not boring), tried it themselves and invented laughter so they could stand it.
In the second story we witness how a young couple meet (played by Toby Hemingway and Alexa Blair) , fall in love and dream about a wonderful future when they, leaving their poverty behind, build a beautiful family with lots of kids.
In a way, this movie suffers in not fitting neatly into a niche (as "Love actually" does) and therefore not pleasing some people.
Harry is friends with Bradley (Greg Kinnear), a man who deeply needs to love but is so oblivious to the people he loves he doesn't notice his first wife (Selma Blair) is a lesbian and his second wife is an adulterous bitch.
But then the movie focuses on Bradley's first wife and her yearning for a love she doesn't have.
But when supposedly traumatic personal events don't have any emotional consequences, they don't have any emotional significance either.As for Feast of Love's good points
Morgan Freeman gives another fine performance and, yes, he does narrate parts of the movie.
And Selma Blair, Rhada Mitchell and Alexa Davalos all look quite good naked, although there are moments when the movie is so gratuitously showing off their female forms that the only thing missing is a blinking neon sign that says "Nudes!
The last thing I took away from this film is that "there is a lid for every pot"...you may not find the right person the first time around, or even the second time around, but if you don't give up on love, some day you might find that one special person that was meant for you.Most of the above is pretty sappy, and I'm not generally a sappy person, but these are some of the feelings this movie brought out in me.
I would not want to see this type of movie on a consistent basis, but once in awhile I find it refreshing to focus on human nature and how we are all fumbling through life with our own problems and ways of dealing with them.Morgan Freeman and Jane Alexander were superb as the older couple profiled and I truly enjoyed Greg Kinnear as the guy that refused to give up on love.
Each new lover is rationalised as being one's sole "soul mate", until romance fails and, propelled by hope, lonely hearts go out into the world again with fishing rods in tow.Unintentionally cheesy, but unconventionally grim behind its Hollywood glitz, "Feast of Love" stars Greg Kinnear, Radha Mitchell and Selma Blair.5/10 – Worth one viewing.
It almost sounds comical but it is only that the unfortunate idea of tragedy saves this movie from being a disaster.Morgan Freeman and Jane Alexander play an inter-racially married couple whose doctor son has recently died of an overdose.
One of the two main characters, Bradley (Kinnear), is a kind and open sort who has no luck at love.
The other main character,Harry (Freeman) is nursing his grief over his own tragic loss of an only son.Another track follows the young couple, Oscar and Chloe (Toby Hemingway and the stunning Alexa Davalos), who marry and are happy until tragedy strikes them as well.
It is the kind of movie where you do not want it to end because Benton has made these people friends, who you care about.Good script, with very few holes.
There are other occasional scenes where the movie comes to life, like scenes between Diana and David--getting to know those two would also have proved interesting.
i thought it showed three amazingly realistic portrayals of how life can be when in love...three different types of love even...having a B.S. in Counseling Psychology i recognized sternberg's triangular love theory here...morgan freeman's companionate love, chloe and Oscar's consummate love and greg kinnear's characters fatuous love and then empty love...i have looked at IMDb.com for years but never felt compelled to join until i read the criticisms written for this movie, especially the ones calling it garbage and protesting that a love like chloe and Oscar's could not exist.
i loved the way morgan freeman appeared to know everything while greg kinnear seemed to know nothing and at the end of the movie, it was greg who schooled morgan.why did you all seem to miss this?
The simple question presented is whether 'love' is just nature's trick to get us to have children, or is 'LOVE' among two people the real purpose in life, that makes it ultimately worth living.Towards this theme the story looks at a number of couples.
Two other key 'love' characters are Radha Mitchell as real estate agent Diana and Erika Marozsán as physician Margaret Vekashi.After the movie was over my wife commented, "I liked it but was all that nudity necessary?" Which made me wonder, is any nudity necessary in film?
Part of the problem is Greg Kinnear, who ever since "As Good as it Gets" cant shake the gay image, but kidding aside really he plays yet another lost puppy dog cliché "good guy" with pal Morgan Freeman trying to give sagely advice while facing his own past mess.
More like "Feast of Lust", with a little real "love" at the end.
only good thing about this movie was Bradley because i connected with him and i feel like him most of the time, though maybe not quite as nice lol.
Morgan freeman was good as always but the movie itself didn't really have any kind of message.
In fact it felt more like the Kate Winslet movie "Little Children" which told the story of 2 couples living in Massachussets.
Morgan Freeman rarely makes a bad movie although not sure what he was thinking when he played "God".
Greg Kinnear is likable.But truly it's the feeling of community mixed in with believable relationships that makes Feast of Love a winner for me.
For the love of God, do not watch this movie.
Morgan Freeman does a great job at being a creepy old man who ends the movie by asking one of the main character's to come be his "little girl".
This film reminds me of why I generally don't like ensemble movies.
Not that there was anything wrong with any of the stories, but they all just didn't interest me.We start with Bradley (Greg Kinnear) who gets dumped by his lesbian wife and begins a relationship with a real estate agent. |
tt0097613 | The January Man | On New Year's Eve, Manhattan socialite Alison Hawkins returns home from the evening's festivities. As she feeds her fish before going to bed, she is strangled to death by an undetected intruder with a blue ribbon. It is the latest murder by a serial killer who has been terrorizing New York for 11 months.
New York Mayor Flynn is frustrated with the lack of progress in tracking down the killer, and tells NYPD commissioner Frank Starkey to "get [his] brother, and get him now," as they both know Nick is the only man brilliant enough to catch this killer. This is a controversial assignment for Frank, as two years ago, Nick was disgraced in a scandal, and expelled from the force. Frank goes to the scene of a raging fire to find Nick, who has become a firefighter. Frank talks Nick into returning, but only on the condition that he be able to cook dinner the next night for Frank's wife, Christine, who is Nick's ex-girlfriend. After a press conference announcing Nick's reinstatement, Christine and Nick have dinner. Old wounds are opened, including mention of a canceled check that had been evidence that Frank was involved in the scandal that got Nick fired.
Police Captain Alcoa is not happy with Nick's return, having despised his attitude but respected his abilities as a detective, but has to go along with the mayor's demand that he give Nick anything he needs to solve the case. After reporting for work, Nick takes a different office than the one he was assigned because the light was not to the liking of his painter friend, Ed. After getting Alcoa to add Ed to the payroll as his assistant, Nick begins work on the case. His first lead is to speak to the mayor's daughter, Bernadette, who was a friend of Alison Hawkins. After Nick and Bernadette visit Alison's apartment, Nick decides to let Bernadette stay at his apartment, because she is too frightened to return to her own.
Nick realizes that all of the 11 previous murders occurred on dates that are prime numbers, all of which are among the 12 prime numbers possible up to the number 31. Because 5 is the only one of the 12 prime numbers that has not been used, he knows that the next murder will take place the next night, the fifth of the month.
Nick appears to have been proven wrong when a woman is strangled one day ahead of Nick's prediction, after which the killer leaps out the window to his death. Nick believes that this is a copycat killing, especially when he learns that the man broke a window, as opposed to picking a lock to gain entrance as in the other murders. To Frank and Flynn, however, it is a closed case, and they are content to be done with Nick.
Nick and Ed figure out that the position of the victims' buildings, when seen on a map of Manhattan, forms the constellation Virgo. They also realize that all the rooms in which the murders took place have windows on the front of the building, and that when the exterior positions of the windows are lined up together according to which floor they are on, they correlate to 11 notes in the chorus of the song "Calendar Girl". This enables them to identify where "The January Man" will next strike.
Nick sets a trap with Bernadette as bait, outfitting her with a neck guard to prevent the killer from strangling her. The trio stake out the room in a supply closet and witness the killer picking the lock to get into the apartment. They intercept the apartment's resident and send Bernadette in, where she is attacked. Nick breaks in and, after a prolonged struggle with the killer, subdues him. He then wraps him up in the hall carpet and delivers him to the police outside the building. | suspenseful, neo noir, murder, romantic | train | wikipedia | January man is kind of a neat movie that is clearly a romantic comedy masquerading as a psychological thriller.
The serial killer (the January man) is almost ancillary to the actual plot of the movie.
But that could be said about some hugely successful blockbuster films as well.Underneath this is a good little crime thriller with some likable characters who are trying to work out the clues to catch a killer with a taste for strangling women in their city apartments.Kevin Kline is enjoyable, Susan Sarandon and Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio are classy, Harvey Keitel doesn't really do much and Alan Rickman kind of floats around to help loosen up the mood of the film.
Some of the dialog sounds like it was lifted from an adapted play or is better for an older, more mature generation.But, the stand out star of this film is Danny Aiello, who plays Captain Vincent Alcoa.
He has a filthy mouth, loves yelling and putting people down all the time and has to deal with a Kline as a difficult police detective who returns to the job.The film alone is worth seeing for his performance..
But if you're looking for a nice little movie with stellar cast, very good acting and silly story that'll amuse you for some 90 minutes, then try The January man.
It is silly - an absurd mix of thriller, comedy, romance, drama, good cop - bad cop, the story is full of flaws, but the movie itself is really well done.
Ostensibly about a serial killer, it is more of a quirky character study, except it is actually a multi-character study, with these characters being brought to life by the likes of Kevin Kline, Susan Sarandon, Harvey Keitel, and Rod Steiger, just to name a few (a very few).
An absurd mix of thriller, comedy, romance, and other things; the manic behaviour, strange dialogues, and weird/inconsistent mood-changes make this a very silly movie but also an enjoyable one.
Kline is entertaining as the detective-turned-fireman-turned-detective, Steiger - sporting silly blond hair - overacts like a lunatic in the role of the city's emotional mayor, Aiello plays the classic ever-angry cliché police boss, Keitel stands around looking rather bored, Mastrantonio shows that she's got terrific breasts, the model for the painting shows she's got even better breasts, and it's always good to have Susan Sarandon in a movie - though quite ironically of all actresses she doesn't show her terrific chest!
How do you go wrong with Kevin Kline, Susan Sarandon, Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio (I haven't liked her in anything else, but she was actually good here), Harvey Keitel, Rod Steiger, and Danny Aiello ?
Kline plays a former cop, now fireman, and brother of the New York City police commissioner (Keitel do these two look like brothers at all NO!), who is called back on the force to stop a serial killer.
Yeah, the film doesn't really chooses to be either comedy or thriller or just a who dun it but it's great fun to watch.Kevin Kline (who I never really cared for not even in A Fish Called Wanda) is playing one of his better roles as the reinstated cop although I do admit the whole sideline of the two cop brothers doesn't really add anything and could have been dropped all together which means dumping Susan Sarandon, so what.But give it a try keep an open mind and it is nice flick.
Even if you don't like mystery films tape the fight scene at the end of this, it is one of the funniest you will ever see.Just one more thing would somebody get Nick Starkey a cappuccino..
Alan Rickman was cute and extraneous, Susan Sarandon was there and Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio has large and attractive boobs for a small woman - she didn't have much of anything else to do in this film.Plot - stupid, ridiculous, complex and extraneous..
If you're looking for a good suspense movie, a few laughs or if you're just a Kevin Kline fan who wants to catch up on his back catalog give January Man a play.
This has to be one of the funniest movies not billed as a comedy.Kevin Kline and Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio are just superb and absolutely shine and Alan Rickman almost steals the movie.
it's the only mainstream serial killer comedy.In 'January Man', A-list actors took a stab at subject matter that had always been in the realm of B-movies, and suffered an undeserved critical drubbing as a result.'January Man' is a black comedy in which the murder mystery takes a backseat to a character study of the detective who solves it.
The story is an Us and Them comedy, with Kline, Rickman and Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio as the extremely likable Us, and Susan Sarandon, Harvey Keitel, Rod Steiger, and Danny Aiello acting up a storm to be unlikeable as Them.'The January Man' is a non-conformist favorite I have to slap into the player at least once a year.
Police commissioner Frank Starkey (Harvey Keitel) is under heavy pressure and Mayor Flynn (Rod Steiger) forces him to get his brother Nick Starkey (Kevin Kline).
When someone loaned me this on DVD, I couldn't believe I'd never heard of it - Kline, Sarandon, Keitel, Mastrantonio, Steiger, Rickman, Aiello - what a cast!
And the actors all look like they know this is going to be a huge waste of time - Rod Steiger, in particular, gives what has to have been the worst performance of his career.
My friends and I are holding an Alan Rickman Summer Film Extravaganza, and we've thus far watched seventeen of his movies.
Within each actor struggling on-screen to make yet another terrible line work, a emotion best characterized by the phrase, "Oh, what the hell..." I do not doubt that Kline, Steiger, Rickman, and Keitel--talented as they might be--knew they got cast in a good idea gone bad.
The result is a very bad movie starring good actors acting badly, reveling in their own badness: an accomplishment in postmodernism if anything ever was.So how does one rate such a situation (probably best not use the word "film" here)?
The acting isn't bad, it's just mediocre, which ends up making for a stunningly boring movie.I remember when this movie came out and watching Kevin Kline plugging it on Letterman.
Why on earth good actors like Kline, Sarandon and Co. agreed to appear in this rubbish is a mystery (Maybe the money??).
Except maybe for Alan Rickman, the cast gives really awful performances (especially Rod Steiger), not helped by a number of instances of some really terrible dialogue.
It's so odd in its changing tone, next to incoherent at times with its story, and packed with really bad performances by a normally talented cast, that you can't help but keep watching in order to see what next miscalculation will be displayed on the screen.
Alan Rickman was wasted, as well as the one-leveled voices of Danny Aiello and Rod Steiger whose only direction from Pat O'Conner was to yell.
From the poor acting, the cryptic story that needed some form of decoder ring to understand, the passionless actors, to the harshly branded word "comedy", January Man proves that not all films should be made and that an advanced screen process should be used regularly.
A film with Kevin Kline, Susan Sarandon, Alan Rickman, Harvey Keitel and Rod Steiger should have been good, but this film was so bad I had to close my eyes.What is suppose to be funny about someone who kills women.
a good script.Hay don't get me wrong, I like a good black comedy, as long it has comedy in it.I think the cast where working hard, and Kevin Kline, one of the best actors in the USA, was trying to do his best with the crap he was given.This film was written by John Patrick Shanley, who also wrote the very bad 'Joe Versus the Volcano' and won an Oscar for 'Moonstruck' (They must have had some left over that year), can the academy ask for the Oscar back?
Kevin Kline plays Nick Starkey, an ex-cop who gets drug back into the force to help find a serial killer.
This one toes the line between thriller and love story; I guess that neither is supposed to dominate.I would say that the movie's main strength lies in the various kinds of characters portrayed.
Aside from Kline's ex-cop and Sarandon as his wife, there's the new love interest (Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio), Nick's brother (Harvey Keitel), the tough captain (Danny Aiello), and the old-order mayor (Rod Steiger); Alan Rickman also stars.So, did I think that this was a good movie?
And that perspective is always welcome, especially here because it took the gambit of really not focusing on the killer at all.It was a bit like Manhunter in its approach.And the fact that an actor with great comedic timing was cast as the lead and supported by Alan Rickman in a nearly unrecognizable role made it even better.
Mayor Eamon Flynn (Rod Steiger), orders police commissioner Frank Starkey (Harvey Keitel) to get his brother Nick (Kevin Kline) back on the police force to solve the crime.
The characters unravel intriguingly but very fluidly, and it is easy to relate to almost all of them (I bet we can all think of parallels in our own lives.) Theme-wise it is ostensibly presented as a suspense movie where an ex-cop (Kevin Kline) is re-instated into a homicide detective role to solve a brutal murder spree by a NY psychopath.
But Kline is clearly the pivot of the movie, he turned what many might consider a very below standard screenplay and turned it into a very keepable film.The first hour though really doesn't know what it wants to be.
The comedy and thriller aspect of the film meld into one and work, and it turns into a half decent movie.Overall rating: 6 out of 10..
"The January Man" is a fairly offbeat, if thoughtful crime thriller set in Manhattan, where its main focus is on the characters leaving the serial killer elements to be secondary.
Personal dramas and friction lead the way, which are actually a lot more interesting than the slowly pitched out investigative angle of John Patrick Shanley's jarringly unsure screenplay where Kline's disgraced ex-cop character is hesitantly asked (by his police commissioner brother played with stern mentality by Harvey Kietel) to rejoin the police fore to help track down a serial killer that for every month has been killing a women for 11 months.
The concept had some promise even if the nature of it can be routine, but whenever it tackles Kline's character looking into the pattern of this serial killer, trying his best to work him out and beat the clock before the next murder.
Kline and Mastrantonio are reasonable but never electric as the central couple in what I saw billed as a "romantic serial killer thriller comedy" - and perhaps this is the film's major problem - it doesn't really know what it's trying to be.
The scattering of wacky characters - Kline leading as the "hilariously" oddball sleuth with a penchant for odd food and weirder decor, with his slow-talking computer-whizz artist buddy (?) Rickman in tow - sets up a comedy agenda reminiscent of real crime comedies such as "Foul Play" (except without the laughs), and some scenes fit this genre, the climactic fight scene in particular.
However, the other characters seem to think they are in an entirely different film, Steiger, Keitel and Aiello all playing straight as if they were in a Copland-style hard-talking psychological actioner and Sarandon flailing about in her bit-of-nothing part not really knowing what she's there for.
Harvey Keitel and Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio put in passable performances but really the whole cast simply deserves a better movie.The big problem is that the film tries to pack in too many ideas, the murder, government corruption, family relationships, and a bit of comedy and consequently skims the lot and doesn't do one of them really well.A passable movie but there are many better detective, action movies around to choose instead..
Cast: Kevin Kline: Nick Starkey Susan Sarando: Christine Starkey Mary Elizabeth Mastranton: Bernadette Flynn Harvey Keitel: Frank Starkey Danny Aiello: Capt.
OK, its nice to see Kevin Kline, Susan Sarandon, Danny Aiello and Alan Rickman together.
How can you make a bad movie when you have Rod Steiger, Kevin Kline, Harvey Keitel, Susan Sarandon, Danny Aiello and Allen Rickman in the cast?
How can you have Kline and Keitel, Steiger and Sarandon, Aiello, Rickman, Mastrantonio, and yet produce such a stinker?
I think maybe they had a hard time ending this one .I always try to rate movies more so on the actors performances because their the ones that bear the brunt of a bad movie if they can get me to watch a movie and enjoy it like this movie even though I have some problems with it it says more about how good they are and not how bad the script is and this script isn't bad it's just hard to believe sometimes especially the ending .I always find kevin kline fun to watch harvey delivered too they all did and loved seeing the actor from the exorcist again I apologize for my spelling I'm to tired to correct the errors..
There is, also, (in my opinion), an under text of bi-sexuality, for both Kevin Kline/Alan Rickman, and Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio/girlfriend victim.
Susan Sarandon, unfortunately, is given little to use as Kline's one-time lover and current wife of his brother, Keitel.
a Mysterious Serial Killer performs some Brutal Killings leaving Incredibly Complex Clues and Only One Cop Can Catch Him (a long-haired sneaker-wearing Rogue Cop), and that's the Kevin Kline character, temporarily a fireman, who enters the film bursting through a fence in the process of, what else, Saving a Child.
It has a peculiar charm that comes from seeing good actors (Kevin Kline, Susan Sarandon, Harvey Keitel, Alan Rickman) struggling with an screenplay from hell..
Alan Rickman's throwaway artist/computer geek character is apparently included only to supply an excuse for having a nude model, and Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio is the 23-year-old mayor's daughter who still lives with her father and seems not to have a job because she's always at Kline's apartment.As for the title, January Man, it doesn't make sense.
This might have been a fun film when it came out in 1989 but in light of all that has happened since then and how much we now know about serial killers it is embarrassing to watch today.
With Kline,Sarandon,Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio,Harvey Keitel, Danny Aiello,Rod Steiger,Alan Rickman.Problem is that everybody gets minimum of 5 minutes for showing himself, on account he or she is a movie star.
If you want to have a nice time, than don't ever try to watch this movie!
We were drawn to the fabulous cast, Kevin Kline, Susan Sarandon, Rod Steiger, Harvey Keitel, Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio, Alan Rickman & Danny Aiello.
A web that includes Frank's wife, bribery, and corruption all are in the background as Nick tries to uncover the secret of where the killer will strike next, and finally must lay a trap without the police....I'm still unsure of this movie, I've given it a seven because the last 30 minutes of the film really come into their own, and make up for the bizarreness of the preceding hour.The first hour though really doesn't know what it wants to be.
A murder, family drama, random eroticism, serial killer movie, comedy, thriller.
A murder, family drama, random eroticism, serial killer movie, comedy, thriller.
Keitel just seem bemused by the whole thing and spends the majority of it staring at Sarandon, who I turn spends the majority of the film staring at Kline and stalking him.The rest of the cast are thankfully brilliant.
Kline is as good as always, and is ably supported by Mastrantonnio, and another brilliant turn by Rickman.The film comes into its own when the Red Herring gets thrown in.
The comedy and thriller aspect of the film meld into one and work, and it turns into a half decent movie.Bizarre to say the very least, but interesting..
The film does have quite a few great moments of dialog (especially when Kline's or Rickman's character is involved), but the plot itself is contrived to the point of unbelievability.
Two years ago, a scandal forced Nick Starkey (Kevin Kline) off the NYPD, but now the mayor wants him back to find a serial killer.This is a terrible movie with a ridiculous script.
What a colossal waste of talent.There is no suspense or romantic tension and certainly no hint of real police work, just a lot of good actors looking foolish in a bad movie.
The only thing that kept me watching was the amazing star power of the cast - Kline, Sarandon, Keitel, Rickman, Steiger, Aiello, Mastrantonio, all of whom gamely try to pretend they are in a much better film.
Usually it's thumbs down at this point but this looked like it was going to be one of those movies that is so bad you have to watch it just to see how many clichés they'll wrack up.
Kevin Kline is a great actor full of charisma, and Steiger and Aiello are full fledge in support.
I'm not sure this contains a spoiler, but I certainly to de-construct some of the plot that I considered bad, so please don't read if you intent to see the film.loved watching Kevin Kline and Alan Rickman (excellent!) -- but the movie could have been so much more if they had spent a little time on the story.
I think honestly it is because of the character Alan Rickman crafted--and his relationship to Kline. |
tt3331846 | Stand by Me Doraemon | In 2004, Nobita Nobi is a fourth grader who constantly gets failing grades in his subjects due to his laziness and is always bullied by his classmates Suneo Honekawa and Takeshi Goda. His great-great grandson from the 22nd century (year 2136), Sewashi, who watches him every day, travels to Nobita's timeline while bringing along his robotic cat Doraemon. Sewashi reveals that if Nobita keeps up his act, he will have a disastrous future: he will marry Gian's sister Jaiko, have his private company burned down, and will be left with a great debt. To circumvent this, he orders Doraemon to help Nobita, modifying Doraemon's nose to prevent him from returning to the future unless Nobita gains a better future.
Being reluctant until the threat, Doraemon introduces his gadgets to help Nobita which helps him immensely. Though Doraemon warns Nobita not to be too dependent on his gadgets, Nobita asks Doraemon to help him woo his crush Shizuka "Sue" Minamoto whom Doraemon reveals is the one Nobita will marry if his future is corrected. However, all his efforts end up making Shizuka becoming closer to ace student, Hidetoshi Dekisugi. Nobita's attempt to be equal with Dekisugi by studying harder is futile and he decides to let go of Shizuka to make her happier. Mistaking him planning to commit suicide, Shizuka arrives at the Nobi residence and resists Nobita's people-repelling potion to help him which Doraemon reveals is the first step in Nobita and Shizuka's growing relationship to eventually becoming a couple.
Upon seeing his older self rejecting Shizuka's invitation to a mountain climbing, Nobita disguises himself as his older self to help Shizuka whom he thinks is separated from her group during a heavy blizzard. His efforts to help Shizuka do more hurt to himself, but this makes Shizuka feel that she has to accompany Nobita saying "yes" before collapsing from cold she contracted from her earlier conversation with Nobita. Forcing himself to remember the moment, the two are rescued by Nobita's older self who recalled the memory. Nobita learns from his older self that Shizuka was answering to the latter's proposition to marry her which means that the two will indeed marry. After hearing that Shizuka's father has also accepted his daughter's spouse, Nobita and Doraemon return to the present timeline.
As Nobita's future has changed for the better, Doraemon's programming commands him to return to the future in 48 hours. Noticing that Doraemon has a hard time to leave due to his worry for Nobita, Nobita confronts and have a brutal fight with Gian to prove that he is able to defend himself without Doraemon. Seeing that Nobita refuses to give up, Gian forfeits as Doraemon tearfully takes Nobita home before leaving in peace the next day. During April Fools, Nobita is tricked by Gian into believing that Doraemon has returned. In anger, he drinks a solution Doraemon gave to him which turns all lies into truth and vice versa. Finishing his retribution against Suneo and Gian, Nobita goes back home while lamenting that Doraemon will never return. To his surprise, Doraemon suddenly returns and tells Nobita that he got permission to stay with him because Nobita said that Doraemon would never return, still with the effects of the potion, and it became a truth. They both hug and cry in happiness. | cult, romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt1194612 | Into Eternity: A Film for the Future | This film explores the question of preparing the site so that it is not disturbed for 100,000 years, even though no structure in human history has stayed standing for such a long period.
"Every day, the world over, large amounts of high-level radioactive waste created by nuclear power plants are placed in interim storage, which is vulnerable to natural disasters, man-made disasters, and societal changes. In Finland, the world’s first permanent repository is being hewn out of solid rock – a huge system of underground tunnels – that must last the entire period the waste remains hazardous: 100,000 years."
Once the repository waste has been deposited and is full, the facility is to be sealed off and never opened again. Or so we hope, but can we ensure that? And how is it possible to warn our descendants of the deadly waste we left behind? How do we prevent them from thinking they have found the Giza pyramids of our time, mystical burial grounds, hidden treasures? Which languages and signs will they understand? And if they understand, will they respect our instructions?
Experts above ground strive to find solutions to this crucially important radioactive waste issue to secure mankind and all species on planet Earth now and in the near and very distant future." | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | Director and presenter Michael Madsden (not the same person as the actor of that name) has made a documentary film which may well be unique.
Everyone should see it, because it concerns the future of our species and our planet, and it is not a superficial film by any means.
He has adopted a moody Alain Resnais-style approach to the subject of the storage of nuclear waste for a necessary 100,000 years.
This is not a propaganda film against nuclear energy at all.
I cannot understand the bizarre, I might almost say mad, review by a Latvian who claimed that this film was hilarious.
This film is so far from being hilarious that how anyone could think so is inconceivable to me, and I am forced to doubt the person's sanity.
Perhaps the Latvian reviewer is one of those people who would laugh hysterically upon witnessing the end of the world.
Madsden evokes a powerful atmosphere in this film, showing haunting shots of the underground Onkalo ('Hidden Place') site in Finland where nuclear waste will be stored.
The most effective parts of the film however are the amazing interviews with the Finnish and Swedish scientists and technologists (all in English).
The things revealed in this film about this important subject are truly mind-boggling.
The film has an elegiac feel about it, as if it were a message to some future species about who and what the extinct humans once were.
The Finns should leave a copy of the film in their underground caverns, in case they are ever entered tens of thousands of years from now.
We should also put DVDs of this film into satellites which we send into deep space, as a kind of sad testament to a failed species, in the hope that some other species might find them one day and figure out how to view them, and learn the pathetic lessons of our inability to think sufficiently deeply, which is the fatal flaw of our human kind.
Meanwhile, this film should be shown in all schools all over the world with the utmost urgency, and screened on all serious television channels in every country.
I write as someone who has tried so far unsuccessfully to introduce crucial new technology into the storage of nuclear waste.
The monstrous complacency and stupidity which I have encountered forces me to face the possibility that our species may become extinct within 100 years.
Moody and haunting with music to match - gives an interesting feeling.
If you look only at the subject matter which is building a long 3 mile tunnels down 500 meters into bed rock it sounds more like a theme that you would see on a television series like mega structures filled with high-tech, how did they do it kind of thing.
Here, however, the technology to do this project is hardly mentioned as digging deep holes in the ground such are used in mining has gone on a very long time.
Of course we have a pretty remarkable project being constructed and then filled over a 100 year period named Onkalo.
As no one will be involved in both the start and the completion of the project when finished, the plan is to abandon the structure and hope that no one will attempt to enter for at least 100,000 years.
The deep moodiness of the film with its haunting music and barren forest scenes with gray landscape tries to force you into a mood of the vastness of time.
To put this into perspective, the pyramids were built about 4000 years ago, though we think cave dwellers lived 30,000 years ago and maybe humans have actually been around for 100,000 years.
When it is sealed in 2120 do we just forget about it or do you warn people about it?
Will warning people make them want to explore?
These are some of the things discussed in the film.
This work definitely gives you a feeling that you don't get from many films, but one not easy to describe.
Near the end of the film as two workers are just walking into one section of the tunnel it in itself is totally non-remarkable and could be shot in any mine or cave in the world but the mood of the scene and the music behind is effective and you get some feeling that it is actually quite difficult to create something you hope will last 100,000 years.
A unique film and the mood it imparts makes it worth more than one viewing..
A white and eerie endless tunnel blasted out of the rock leads us in to the sinister yet strangely lyrical world of nuclear waste storage.
Michael Madsen has produced and presents this film for the future with great love and concern for his fellow humans and the planet.
Striking a match from within the dark and deep tunnel, a permanent tomb for nuclear waste, his face partially lit by the diminishing flame, Madsen speaks like a prophet/poet as he addresses the future and explains the dangers of disturbing this alchemical product entombed beneath the rock.
He interviews the Finnish and Swedish scientists of the Onkalo project whose job it is to lock this stuff away and their philosophical dilemma about its whereabouts.
Should we leave a marker warning DANGER KEEP OUT or should the site be unmarked and forgotten in the hope that it will truly never be disturbed.
Filmed across a large shiny desk with harsh lighting these poor men look anguished and disturbed by their responsibilities, almost to the point of nervous collapse.
The footage of clear icicle-like rods containing the waste being lowered into shafts and water pools is like watching a ballet performed by gigantic molecules operated by an invisible hand.
I don't believe I am exaggerating when I claim that this is one of the coolest works of film I've ever watched.
It's a thought experiment packaged within a brilliantly paced, well directed, and aptly scored documentary.
The subject matter is critically important to anyone with half an eye on the distant future, and writer/director Michael Madsen does not fail to put matters into perspective.This won't be for everyone, since it doesn't spoon-feed the viewer easy answers, nor does it cater at all to those with little imagination.
But if you like thinking about topics that generally fall only under the scope of the science fiction genre, and you don't mind tackling questions that are both grand and open-ended, then this documentary will be time well spent..
Looking sometimes more like Ridly Scotts Allan than an environmental film this gentle documentary about the vast takes you through a sometimes surreal vogue of discovery.
Written as a video letter to future generations the direction, conceptual artist and filmmaker Michael Madsen, takes you through a visually stunning and thought provoking journey.
This may seem like a dry subject but his understated and sometimes playful approach to the subject draws you in keeping you engaged thought.The film includes interviews with nuclear scientists and government representatives which take you into the strange world of thinking further into the future than we have ever dared to venture before.
There is a candid honesty here that may alter your perception about our responsibilities.This haunting film may well become a testimony to our inability to see the real cost of nuclear power yet it remains totally non judgemental thought..
refreshing and singularly unique documentary style.
it's after 2am in the morning here and I actually signed up just to applaud the quality of the documentary and it's significance to the thoughts it may engender in you on the legacy that we leave behind and lastly to admonish a review of 1 star.this is a singularly unique documentary and well worth your time to view and review it in your own mind.the music is interwoven throughout the piece and until the end credits roll you find that you were unaware of the music though you'll find yourself scanning the credits for the music section as it adds so much to the piece.peace out.
Even if you have no interest in where energy comes from or in nuclear technology, this documentary is so beautifully filmed and produced that there is enjoyment in just watching it.The core question posed by this documentary is: how do you warn countless future generations, for 100,000 years to stay away from the radioactive waste?
The documentary maker asks questions of the people involved.
Their responses are often chilling.There is also some dark humor in it - the expressions on the faces of the nuclear power executives when asked what happens after hundreds or thousands of years have passed.An extremely important documentary for this moment in history.
Amazing visuals and sound merged with an intense documentary.
okay, I'm a huge fan of documentaries, but Into Eternity is just a killer.It's not the fact that it is well grounded and has it's facts together.what really really hit me was the visual work combined with the music.
this documentary is now my most favorite Sci-Fi film.
you feel a constant threat looming over your head while watching this amazingly beautiful film.
time unfolds as Madsen leads you into a project that wants to endure longer than the modern man.
and for the first time in my life I felt really small and grabbed the scope of the world we're living in.
100.000 years is an awful long time, and it is a bold move to try to achieve something this lasting.watch the film, relax and let it just take you away for 90 minutes.
If you want to be informed about the problems of nuclear energy in a clear, balanced and intelligent way, you've come to the right place.This film really opened my eyes and my conscience to what I and all my other fellow human beings are doing with our planet and the serious problems we pass down to future generations.
I felt the style of the film passed to the topic: slow shots, for example showing just how long it takes to build this underground nuclear waste storage facility.
And then this has to remain untouched for thousands of years!
This is a very necessary film for everyone living today.
I hope many people watch it.
The documentary 'Nuclear Eternity' poses some interesting questions about a fascinating project currently underway in Finland, to bury nuclear waste deep beneath the ground so that it can decay over 100,000 years.
On one hand, this can be seen as admirably far-sighted; on the other hand, our normal inability to see further than 100,000 seconds, and the very fact that Finland alone will fill this massive repository within just one century, might seem to point to the stupidity of producing nuclear waste in the first place, and to the certainty that humanity is doomed not to survive for so long a period (for sure, the species might be 4 million years old, but civilisation dates back less than 10,000 years).
The film shows us lots of pictures of nuclear facilities, and gives us thoughtful interviews with serious sounding (mostly Finnish) scientists; but ultimately, all they can do is ponder the same unanswerable questions as the rest of us.
Bad at NOT pointing to the only available alternative to gas and oil: 100% energy generated solely by wind and solar power..
Good at warning against dangers of nuclear waste.
Good at warning against dangers of nuclear waste.
Bad at NOT pointing to the only obvious available alternative to oil and gas: 100% energy generated solely by wind and solar power.If one for whatever reason should doubt that nuclear waste isnt a problem, then one will be immediately cured of that illusion by watching this documentary.HOWEVER, what is totally lacking in this documentary is mentioning the only available longterm alternative to oil, coal and gas: 100% energy production by wind and solar power.What would you prefer right NEXT to your house: a nuclear plant or solar panels on your roof?
Who in their right mind would ever choose for a nuclear plant situated next to their house?
There isnt even enough uranium available to last for future generations.
Nuclear power is history.
Wind and solar power are the future.
And the future is NOW.ANYONE who is not yet conscious of the possibility to run the entire planet on 100% wind and solar power must have been living in a cave or must have been glued to the television screen for the last 10 years, without ever having read a book on wind and solar power.
Because only the uninformed masses would still believe the gigantic LIE that we should need nuclear power for the future.
Only short term use (10 to 20 years) of nuclear power and gas is needed to transform the entire world to 100% wind and solar power.Worldwide action MUST be taken the coming 10 years in order to keep global warming under 2 degrees.
If we dont achieve that we will have damaged future generations for ever...The solution to this energy problem is simple, effective AND profitable: massive investments for wind and solar power..
what a defeatist attitude throughout the whole movie, I'm just sad looking at these people..
the problem is not weather this is right or wrong - the problem is out there already and no amount of defeatist discussions about how bad this all was, is and will be is going to change it!
So the engineers solving this huge problem are all bad - but you still love the energy and consume it everyday, so now all the people who need the energy and the society is bad - so know your problem grew from physics into politics and morals - what did you solve?
Pondering the future with one of the best films at the Tribeca Film Festival.
One of the better films screening at this years Tribeca film festival is a meditation on what we should do with the nuclear waste that's left behind.
More specifically it's what Finland is doing with their nuclear waste.
What the country is doing is digging a miles deep tomb in which they hope to bury all of their waste so that it will hopefully remain undisturbed for the 100 or more thousand years it will need to decay and become safe.The film, which is more an essay in the form of a letter to future generations, is a trippy affair with some of the most haunting marriages of image and music you are likely to find.
The film masterfully ponders what are our options for waste such as this and how do we protect our children's children's children from its dangers.
I love how filmmaker Michael Madsen draws you in as if it's a fairy tale and forces you to think.
He also scores many pints for presenting the people who are responsible for the project as human beings who are far from certain, but trying the best they can.
Its nice to see a bunch of experts with the willies scared out of them.If there is any flaw in the film its perhaps that its 75 minute running time is a couple minutes too long.
This is a film that should be seen, preferably on a big screen in the dark where the imagery will work its way into your brain.Okay- how good is the film?
Out of the 11 films I saw at Tribeca so far this was the first and only film where no one moved when the end credits rolled.
rather dull, ponderous and pedestrian documentary.
This rather dull, ponderous and pedestrian documentary from Danish conceptual artist Michael Madsen looks at Onkalo, a massive nuclear waste storage facility being built 500 metres underground in a remote area of Finland.
As nuclear waste needs to be stored somewhere safe for the next 100,000 years, the facility needs to be secure and remain uncompromised by future generations.
Neither sending it into space or burying it deep under the oceans practical solutions to the problem of nuclear waste.
Storage facilities above ground are temporary at best, as the Earth is unstable.
Despite the important subject matter, the ominous warnings sounded and the numerous questions raised, Madsen (who also made the short documentary To Damascus, etc) seems to lack the same sense of urgency as the recent nuclear doco Countdown To Zero.
In fact, Masden seems to be addressing his film to future generations, and this gives the material a quasi-science-fiction feel.
There are lots of talking head interviews with government officials, scientists, doctors, theologians and specialists in the field of nuclear waste management, but these are fairly dull.
The film has been shot on high definition video, and the images are quite crisp and clear, especially when Masden takes his camera deep inside the cavernous site itself.
It's a pity that the film itself is rather prosaic, occasionally repetitive, visually unexciting and unimaginative in structure.
Into Eternity would have been better served as a tightly constructed 50 minute documentary which would have been more effective..
Michael (no not that one) Madsen's fascinating and thought provoking study of the problems of long-term storage of nuclear waste material could be presumed to fall into one of two documentary formats.
Surprisingly it resembles neither of these so much as it does the stately and poetical science-fiction of Andrei Tarkovsky.Taking as his subject, the huge and potentially world-leading Finnish project to bury their waste in permanent underground storage caverns, the focus of the story swiftly moves on from preliminaries such as the logistics of construction, to the unexpectedly rich philosophical question of how we communicate the meaning and danger of such a place over its unimaginably vast intended lifespan of a hundred-thousand years.
Michael frames his entire presentation as a message to some far- flung civilisation, twenty times more removed from our own than we are from those who built the pyramids. |
tt0102456 | Mississippi Masala | In 1972, dictator Idi Amin enacts the policy of the forceful removal of Asians from Uganda. Jay (Roshan Seth) his wife, Kinnu (Sharmila Tagore), and their daughter, Mina (Sarita Choudhury), a family of third-generation Ugandan Indians residing in Kampala reluctantly and tearfully leave their home behind and relocate. After spending a few years in England, Jay, Kinnu, and Mina settle in Greenwood, Mississippi to live with family members who own a chain of motels there. Despite the passage of time, Jay is unable to come to terms with his sudden departure from his home country, and cannot fully embrace the American lifestyle. He dreams of one day returning with his family to Kampala. The effects of Amin's dictatorship have caused Jay to become distrustful towards Black people.
Mina, on the other hand, has fully assimilated to the American culture and has a diverse group of friends. She feels stifled by her parents wish to only associate with members of their own community. She falls in love with Demetrius (Denzel Washington), a local African American self-employed carpet cleaner. Mina is aware that her parents will not approve and keeps the relationship somewhat secret. The pair decide to spend a romantic clandestine weekend together in Biloxi, where they are spotted by members of the Indian community, and the gossip begins to spread. Jay is outraged and ashamed, and forbids Mina from ever seeing Demetrius again. Mina also faces both subtle and outright dislike from the Black community. Demetrius confronts Jay, who reveals his experiences and racist treatment in Uganda, causing Demetrius to call out Jay on his hypocrisy. Ultimately, the two families cannot fully come to terms with the interracial pair, who flee the state together in Demetrius's van.
Jay's wish finally becomes reality when he travels to Kampala to attend a court proceeding on the disposition of his previously confiscated house. While in the country however, he sees how much it has changed and realises that he no longer identifies with the land of his birth. Jay returns to America and relinquishes his long-nurtured dream of returning to Uganda, the place he considered home. | romantic, flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0110265 | Killing Zoe | Professional safe-cracker Zed comes to Paris to help a childhood friend, Eric, with a bank heist. In the cab on the way to his hotel room, the cabbie obtains a prostitute for him. He arrives at his hotel room and is soon greeted by the prostitute, Zoe, who also confides that she is studying art, and has a "very boring" day job. After having sex, they talk with each other amiably, then fall asleep. Their reverie is soon interrupted when Eric barges in and brusquely sends Zoe out of the room, so the two men can get on with their business.
Eric takes Zed back to his residence where Zed meets Eric's friends. Eric explains his plans: the following day is Bastille Day and virtually everything is closed except for the bank they plan to rob, which is a holding bank and is open on holidays. Zed forgoes his rest time to spend the night partying with Eric and his friends among some of the less reputable people of Paris in a cavernous jazz club, which Eric refers to as 'the Real Paris'. During the binging, Eric confides to Zed that he has AIDS, which he contracted through IV drug use.
The next day, Zed is awakened by Eric as they prepare to enter the bank. The team dons carnival masks to hide their faces before bursting into the bank. They quickly kill those who do not cooperate as they escort Zed (who has not witnessed the killings) to the safe so he can get to work. Their plans soon start to disintegrate as the police show up and they're faced with the possibility of going to jail for life or having to shoot their way out. Eric throws an explosive into a vault and enters it (mortally wounding a guard in the process - Zed himself shoots the guard as an act of mercy), finding a large supply of gold bars — but the thieves can't leave the bank alive with their fortune. Tensions become even higher when Zed recognizes Zoe (who coincidentally works at the bank) and attempts to protect her, to the fury of Eric, who viciously slashes Zed's cheek with a knife.
A vicious gunfight between the police, Eric, and the rest of the gang begins—with Zed caught 'innocently' in the middle. Eric's men are killed by the police as they rush the bank, and Zed and Eric begin to fight each other. The police shoot Eric to death. He falls on Zed, splattering great amounts of blood on him in the process (possibly exposing Zed to his HIV-infected blood). Injured, Zed is led away quickly by Zoe, who covers for him, stating he is a bank customer. They drive away in her car, where Zoe promises Zed that when he gets well she'll show him the 'real' Paris.
While some have speculated the title of the film derives from the assumption that Zed contracted HIV from Eric during the bank shooting and will pass it on to Zoe, Roger Avary has stated, "Zoe means 'life' in Latin, so the title of the movie can be interpreted as 'Killing Life.' " | cult, murder, violence | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0073694 | Shao Lin men | During the Qing Dynasty the Shaolin disciples are hunted down by a powerful warrior who wants to rid the Shaolin men from China. At a remote training camp a group of Shaolin train together, their best student Yun Fei is given the task of taking down Shih Shao-Feng and his reign of terror. Along the way he befriends Chan Yuan-lung's character named Tan Feng, who is a blacksmith.
Yun Fei arrives at Shih's camp and tries to take him, but fails. His Shaolin techniques are useless against Shih's "extended iron claw". When Shih beats him, he leaves the rest to his eight bodyguards, who each have weapons such as swords, shields and spears.
Yun Fei escapes with the help of the blacksmith, goes to a village and discovers Shih's men are taking apart the village and pillaging anything they can to scare the villagers into submission.
Tan befriends two people along the way, including a brilliant swordsman who has never drawn his sword after he accidentally killed a prostitute he loved.
The team forms a coalition to defeat Shih Shao-Feng.
With battle plans laid and the heroes trained, they prepared themselves for the battle ahead of them. After their training, Yun Fei's friends cut off his pigtail. Yun Fei and all the heroes will create a diversion, where they will assail Shih's headquarters in separate groups.
The diversion and ambush on the following day is ultimately successful. Luring away Shih's lieutenant Tu Ching (Sammo Hung) Tan Feng is the first to act in the climatic act. Arriving at the gate where the pagoda which is the stronghold of the main villain, he proceeds to kill off several guards, including two of Shih Shao-Feng's elite fighters. Whilst the rest of the characters reached a grassland where four more elite fighters under Shih's command comes by. Leading to a prolonged, lengthy fight between the heroes and four more of Shih's elite warriors.
Unfortunately for Yun Fei's gang, the battle went on longer than anticipated, and Shih realised their plans. Tan Feng went back to rendezvous with his friends and assist them in battle, but is mortally wounded whilst killing another elite. Yun Fei and the other heroes managed to kill the rest of the elites and they escapes, with Shih, Du and a small troupe of their men in pursuit.
More and more of the heroes are killed as the film reaches its end, while nearby a beach Yunfei beats Tu to death and kill off Shih's last elite fighter.
In the end, Yunfei faces off against Shih and his remaining soldiers. All which he defeats single-handedly, then he fights Shih and wins.
The movie ends with Yunfei strolling past the graves of all his friends, paying his respects. | violence | train | wikipedia | The Hand of Death aka Countdown in Kung Fu (1976) is a vastly underrated early work by director John Woo. The film stars Dorian Tan (Tan Tao-liang) and features Jackie Chan, Sammo Hung and James Tien in significant supporting roles.
This is not a Jackie Chan film, Dorian Tan is the star but Jackie gives one of his best (most serious) early performances.The Hand of Death is about a Shaolin disciple named Yunfei (Tan) who is sent on a mission to assassinate a Shaolin traitor named Shih Xiaofeng (Tien) and protect a revolutionary named Zhang Yi (Woo).
Along his journey Yunfei meets up with a young woodcutter named Tan (Chan) and a disgraced sword fighter (Chang Chung) known as "the wanderer." Both men have suffered at the hands of Shih and want to take revenge.
The three team up to defeat Shih and his eight bodyguards and escort the revolutionary to safety.The martial arts action is above average under the direction of Sammo Hung.
Dorian Tan uses his trademark high kicks very effectively as the "Northern eighteen styles kicks" along with some "Southern five styles boxing." Sammo Hung and Jackie Chan provide excellent martial arts performances as well.
Some of the early fights are a bit slow and seem over choreographed but the final showdowns featuring Chan, Tan and Hung are very good.Director John Woo provides plenty of interesting character development in the film, which is refreshing.
Hand of Death is not Jackie and Sammo's usual kung fu comedy.
The film is one of the best artistically of its time and a preview of the great things to come from Jackie Chan and Sammo Hung.
Hung's great choreography is put on display here before his directorial debut and Chan's early charisma and talent can be clearly seen.Hand of Death is a solid, stylish old school kung fu film and a brilliant early work of the legendary John Woo.Kung Fu Genre Rating 7.5/10 Wanderer to Tan (referring to his new weapon): "The Little Eagle Wing God Lance." Tan: "Just a knickknack.".
Only John Woo Feature with Chan/Hung/Biao.
Made during the martial arts period of his career, John Woo came up with one of his best films from this early Woo era.
Shao Lin Men/Hand of Death(1975) features one of the early and most impressible performances from future Hong Kong action hero, Jackie Chan.
The main actor Tao-Liang Tan has faded out of the Hong Kong film scene after appearing in this movie while Chan and Hung would go on to become big stars.
The fight scene in the beach would be repeated by John Woo in both Heroes Shed No Tears(1985) and Mission:Impossible 2(2000).
At a remote training camp the last few shaolin men train, their best student (flash legs tan) is given the task of taking down James Tien and his reign of terror.
Along the way he befriends Jackie Chan who appears as a farmer however Jackie disappears (reappearing later on).He arrives at the main arena (Where James Tien is) and tries to take on Tien, but fails dismally - his shaolin techniques are useless against Tien's extended iron claw.
When Tien beats him, he leaves the rest to his eight bodyguards, each mastering different weapons such as swords, shields, staffs, etc.Half-beaten, Flash Legs Tan goes to a village and discovers Tien's men are taking apart the village and pillaging anything they can to scare the villagers into submission.Tan befriends two people along the way, including a brilliant swordsman who has never drawn his sword after he failed to protect his wife.The two men meet up with Jackie again and they convince themselves to stop Tien now or not at all and start training (which I found the best part of the film).The film as a whole is a good one, though pretty slow in places, the fight sequences are on a par with later movies - though expect overly long fight sequences..
This early John Woo movie stars Dorian Tan as the good guy and has an supporting appearance from Jackie Chan as a blacksmith who was a Shaolin disciple.
The structure of the fight scenes in the last half-hour showdown were later used in films such as Mission:Impossibe Part II.The two flaws this movie has is the fight scenes are shot at awkward angles, making them look fake.
Early in John Woo's career as a director in Hong Kong, he had the auspiciousness to direct three of the seven fortunes in Yuen Biao, Jackie Chan and Sammo Hung in their first movie together Hand of Death (1976: Chinese Title literally means Shaolin Gate) though much was not made of this at the time because they were all struggling to make a career.
An interesting point, in hindsight, is that the star of the film is none of the three (it is hard to spot Yuen Biao as his role is of a stunt double and bit actor) but Korean export and Tae Kwon Do expert Dorian Tan Tao-Liang.Dorian Tan Tao-Liang stars as Yun Fei a Shaolin trained fighter looking to find Zhang Yi (John Woo) and escort him through White Stone town and across the White River.
He can get a hold of Zhang by contacting pupil Chiu Guo. However, when he is found, he has already been arrested and ready to be beheaded by the Manchus led by a traitor of the Shaolin Shih Xiaofeng (ubiquitous bad guy James Tien: Fearless Hyena, Winners and Sinners) who has taught himself White Crane Soul Chaser Style (he is the titular Hand of Death).
Even though his Kung Fu is superior, he has the additional help of Eight Bodyguards with different styles and two top ranking guards in Smiling Fox and Du Ching (Sammo Hung who also does the stunt coordination) whose overbite is quite preposterous and resembles a "hopping vampire" though he is trained in tiger and crane styles.Yun Fei gets the assistance of a woodcutter Tan, who helped him earlier to get past a roadblock and dispose of a body (a true friend helps you get rid of a corpse).
Tan also obtains the help of "The Wanderer" (Yeung Wai) an expert swordsman who accidentally killed a prostitute he was in love with also because of Shih and would have given up his sword for good if it was not for Yun. These men will help Zhang Yi get across the river to get the plans to help once and for all defeat the Qing Empire and restore the Ming Dynasty (the plot of the Qing Dynasty as bad guys is one of the staples of Hong Kong martial art movies like Heroes Two, Royal Tramp and Iron Monkey).Many will have bought, borrowed or rented this movie because of the presence of Jackie Chan.
He originally was only supposed to have a stunt man role (helped hired onto the film by his "big brother" Sammo Hung) but as John Woo found one of the Korean actors lacking in the physical department, he replaced his part with Jackie Chan and expanded his role according to an interview with Lee Server in "Asian Pop Cinema" he stated he "changed the whole script to focus more on him and show his great skill." though there might be some fraudulent hindsight with that statement.
Jackie originally had been the stunt coordinator for Woo's first film Young Dragons (1975) that came out a year earlier.
Jackie did get hurt on the film, getting knocked unconscious after being pulled by a cable while being kicked by Dorian Tan and landing and hitting his head on a rock (though this would not be as bad as his most famous accident in Operation Condor where he almost lost his life).Others might watch this because it belongs in the oeuvre of John Woo. It is still very early in his career (his fourth film in two years of being a director), but you can see traces of his talent.
There are some nice hand-held scenes, a little use of slow motion and hints of "heroic bloodshed" elements (though this would come to blossom in Last Hurrah for Chivalry (1979)) like an early scene when Jackie Chan and Dorian Tan first meet which seemed to hint a certain homoerotism (or else those were some of the most strange smiles I have ever seen), but then failed to capitalize on it later in the film.Overall, this is a decent, yet unspectacular film.
The direction is solid, yet it does not feel like a John Woo directed movie.
Jackie Chan is also awesome with his fighting and you get to see him use a spear the Little Eagle God Lance as it is called in the film (which that and the staff are the traditional weapons that Jackie is best with).
The highlight fight scenes of the movie are when Jackie fights several of the Eight Bodyguards and later when Dorian fights Sammo.
The latter is especially impressive because of Sammo's willingness to hurt his body to make Tan look good.
James Tien is not much of a martial artist, though his acting if fine as he is the consummate Hong Kong bad guy, so his hand-to-hand combat scenes are a bit pedantic though he has one scene wielding a sword that was good..
Old-school martial arts 'classic' Hand of Death has a rather formulaic 'men on a mission'-style storyline, its high-kicking hero Yun Fei (Tao-Liang Tan) teaming up with several other skilled fighters to deal a blow to the evil Ching dynasty by killing traitor Shih Shao-Feng (James Tien), while protecting a revolutionary named Zhang Yi, who is carrying a map vital to the anti-Ching cause.But although the plot isn't all that inspired, the film will undoubtedly still prove of interest to avid Hong Kong movie/kung fu fans thanks to its director, Wu Yu Sheng, better known as John Woo, and the involvement of several performers who would go on to be major players in the Asian martial arts movie scene, most notably superstar Jackie Chan, who appears in a supporting role as vengeful brother Tan Feng, and Sammo Hung (sporting hilarious fake buck teeth) as Ching henchman Lord Du.Eagle-eyed viewers may also spot Yuen Baio as the guard killed with an arrow by Shih Shao-Feng, and Yuen Wah (my favourite martial arts villain of the 80s) as a bodyguard.
I didn't.As far as the action is concerned, Woo handles his fight scenes competently but with few of the stylish touches that he would later become known for (there's minimal use of slo-mo and absolutely zero doves in churches).
The martial arts involves a variety of styles and weaponry, enough to ensure that boredom never sets in, but in the end it won't be the fighting that most people will remember this film for, but rather the burgeoning talent involved.6.5 out of 10, rounded up to 7 for Sammo's teeth..
Before the era of heroic bloodshed John Woo the master of gun-fu make some martial arts movies and the one i particular interest in is The hand of Death starring Jackie Chan and Sammo Hung.The movie is quite genetic with a plot has been done many time before and even when it featuring a young Jackie Chan he not even the main character.Fan of old school martial arts will enjoy this movie.
Funny how most of the DVD covers for "Hand of Death" has Jackie Chan all over it, despite him only having a supporting role in the movie.
But his face sells.Regardless, then "Hand of Death" is one of the more interesting movies to Jackie Chan's impressive movie list, prior to making it on an international scale.The story in "Hand of Death" is fairly simple, yet straight to the point.
And, of course, the sound effects here are hilarious - as they tended to be in many of these old action movies.Tao-liang Tan was doing quite a good job in this movie, and it wasn't Jackie Chan who was in focus in this movie.
As much as Sammo Hung Kam-Bo used to make great movies back in the day, then the buck-teeth he had to wear in this movie was just a bit too over the top.
It was also good to see Wah Yuen in the movie, despite a very small and brief appearance only, not to forget about Biao Yuen as well."Hand of Death" is well worthy of a place in the movie collection of anyone who is fan of martial arts movies (or Jackie Chan's movies).
Jackie Chan and John Woo learning their trade.
From the 'Golden (Harvest) age of kung fu comes this old school period style film from a bunch of young guns lead by director Wu Yu Shang (later to become famous as John Woo) featuring Tao Liang Tan (Dorian Tan) James Tien, Chan Yuan Lung (Jackie Chan), Hung Kam Bo (Sammo Hung) and Biao Yuen (Yuen Biao).
James Tien is far more charismatic in the lead villains role, with Hung providing trademark support as a semi comedic henchman.
Jackie Chan fills one of the two main friend of the hero roles and gets a couple of spots to show his wares, including what may be the best fight sequences in the film, as one of his adversaries has the most interesting weapon in the movie, a sort of sword blade on the end of a chain.
(Credit IMDb) Superkicker Dorian Tan Tao-liang plays a Shaolin student who must find a Manchu traitor responsible for the murder of the abbot.
Jackie Chan is a spear fighting expert who decides to help Tan because the traitor killed his brother.
Part of their mission is to help a scholar make it safely across the river without getting killed from the Manchus.I've been checking out Jackie's older works as of late.
The movie doesn't look dated at all but you can tell how old it is when you see the young Jackie Chan and skinny Sammo Hung, with some strange looking teeth.
I was expecting hard hitting action from this John Woo movie but I was quite disappointed.
Anyway, an ex-Shaolin student, Shih (James Tien), leaves the temple and creates his own clan called the Manchu.
Yun Fei (Tao-Laing Tan), who is the most promising Shaolin student, goes on a mission to kill Shih but he knows that he can't do it alone because he is heavily guarded by the Manchu army, led by officer Tu Ching (Sammo Hung), who was also an ex-student at the Shaolin temple.
Yun Fei recruits Tan Feng (Jackie Chan) who is seeking revenge after the Manchu killed his brother.
Its a well put together storyline which is pretty intense throughout but the action scenes really did let the movie down.
There isn't any silly comedy throughout the movie, thank God but the sound effects were pretty bad during the action scenes and some of the fighting seemed to go on forever.
With that aside, I have seen worse Kung Fu movies and I was quite impressed with Jackie Chan and Sammo Hung.
Watchable!Round-Up: This is the 4th major release from John Woo, 69, who has become famous for his detailed action scenes and unique gun movement styles.
He then started to make films for the western market, like Broken Arrow and the great Face/Off. In 2000 he made Mission Impossible II, which does have some impressive action scenes and he made Windtalkers, with Nicolas Cage and the poor Paycheck with Ben Affleck.
Personally, I think that he is definitely one of the best action directors because of his unique style but now that he has been out of the picture for some time, I can't really see him coming back to the Western market anytime soon.I recommend this movie to people who are into their action/martial arts movies starring Jackie Chan, Sammo Hung, Biao Yuen, James Tien, John Woo and Wah Yuen.
THE HAND OF DEATH most definitely rates a ten on a scale of one to- due, in no small part, to John Woo's masterful direction, coupled with Kat's superb cinematography: some of the leisurely tracking shots alone are worth the price of a rental; there are moments when this one borders on becoming an art-house film.
Both James Tien and Sammo Hung make for the kind of villains you can't help but love to hate.
Sammo's goofy "buck teeth" only make an already unsavory character seem even more flawed; that he also happens to be a skilled martial artist makes him even less likable- in a villain you love to hate kind of way.
Jackie Chan appears briefly (early on and late in the going) as a blacksmith, and I believe I actually glimpsed Yuen Biao somewhere along the way.
This movie gets funnier by the second--like when Jackie Chan's character finally dies in his final fight scene.
If you're looking for an amazing film in the realm of great production value, good or even mediocre acting, and good special effects...this is NOT that movie.
It is also the only movie where Jackie Chan has been killed on screen.Basically an evil emperor is banning all Shou-lung warriors and one particular warrior has betrayed the order and has joined the emperor.
He tries to sneak into the order but he is found out and swiftly beaten, but he manages to escape, builds up his force, and then returns to kick butt.The plot is basic and has no interesting character developments and interactions as the later Woo movies, though one of the characters refuses to fight because he accidentally killed his mistress.
This movie does not have any of Woo's dazzling camera effects that become obvious in later movies, nor does it focus on minor things that bring out the characters more, but it does show a side that we rarely see, and that is that a great filmmaker must come from somewhere.Though it is not the best, it is a start for somebody who goes on to become a famous, and much admired film-maker. |
tt0120133 | A Simple Wish | Oliver Greening is rejected from a coveted performance in a musical version of A Tale of Two Cities for simply not being a bankable performer. After Oliver's 8-year-old daughter Annabel attempts to get her 12-year-old brother Charlie to believe that the tooth fairy exists, Murray, a clumsy fairy godmother, appears after Charlie has gone to sleep. Annabel wants to wish for her father to get the role, but Murray suddenly remembers he is late for an important engagement and promises to return to grant her wish later.
Hortence (Ruby Dee), the head of all fairy godmothers, is holding the annual meeting of the North American Fairy Godmothers Association (NAFGA). Due to Hortence's rule, all the fairy godmothers must check in their wands before the meeting. Claudia, a former fairy godmother turned evil witch, has shown up at the meeting uninvited and intends to steal all the wands. She gives Hortence's receptionist, Rena (Teri Garr) a witch's apple that puts her to sleep, casts a spell on Hortence turning the head fairy paper-thin and binding her mouth with bricks, and locks all the fairy godmothers downstairs on her way to stealing the wands. Murray, however, arrives at the meeting late and never checks his wand, leaving it as the only wand Claudia doesn't have.
Annabel realizes that Murray has left his magic wand behind and decides to return it to him, but Charlie breaks it. The two disappear to Nebraska, by way of a misconstrued spell cast by him to get out quickly. After he tries and fails to turn a selfish motel owner they meet there into a giant rabbi. The two end up back in Central Park. Because of them disappearing in an unexplained way, the school closes early. Charlie finds them. Annabel begs Murray to try to grant her wish now that they are close to her father, but due to yet another mishap by him, Oliver is turned into a statue. To fix the problem, the three of them go to NAFGA and ask for the help of Hortence, who is still under the effects of Claudia's spell. While Murray, Charlie and Rena who has awoken from Claudia's sleeping spell fix Murray's wand, Hortence tells Annabel of Claudia's plot and explains that the awry spell must be lifted before midnight, or Oliver will be doomed to remain a statue forever. Claudia, meanwhile, has been looking through the wands, searching for hers. After going through, she realizes it is missing and now belonging to Murray, and is determined to obtain it.
Annabel and Murray head to the theater and see Tony Sable, the selfish and conceited actor who is auditioning for Oliver's part. Knowing this could ruin her father's chance of being in the show, she asks Murray to sabotage the audition any way he can. First he tries to make it rain on the stage but it is dismissed as a simple technical problem and the audition continues. Then she asks him to give Sable a frog in his throat to impair his singing. He takes this wish too literally, and frogs start hopping out of Sable's mouth, shocking the cast and crew. Annabel and Murray celebrate but Sable gets the part since Oliver has not shown up. Boots, who has been looking for Murray, finds them. Murray mentions the story of Brer Rabbit to Annabel and they beg her not to take them to Claudia's lair so she will.
Claudia catches them, and demands them to tell her where her wand is. When Murray tries to persuade Annabel otherwise into not telling her, as punishment, Claudia changes her and Murray into ballerinas and makes them dance uncontrollably until Annabel agrees to tell her. Murray, Charlie, and Annabel return to Central Park and restore Oliver just in time. He is given the part of Sable's understudy thanks to a producer who enjoyed his audition. In order to finally grant Annabel's wish, Murray appears backstage and causes Sable to slip on a bucket, and twist his ankle. The resultant temper tantrum gets him fired and Oliver, his understudy, is cast in his place. Charlie and Annabel watch the show with Murray and the other fairy godmothers including Hortence who is now free from Claudia's spell. | revenge, fantasy, satire | train | wikipedia | An amusing little tale.
This was a fun film, and part of what made the film amusing was that the actors/actresses really seemed to be enjoying themselves.
The story is cute, about a bumbling male fairy godmother (Martin Short) who screws up a wish to the first child under his care and has to help set things straight by rescuing magic wands from a former fairy godmother turned witch (Kathleen Turner) and her dog turned human, Boots (the great Amanda Plummer).
It's a very original idea, which is rare amongst family films these days which all seem to be remakes or rehashed films.
The only real downside to this film (keeping in mind, of course, that it is aimed towards kids) is that some of the dialogue is *really* cheezy and unbelievable (The 10 year-old I was watching over while watching this film kept said 'gimme a break' and 'yeah, right' at a couple of points in the film...and it's one of her favs;) The effects were fun, Martin Short was funny (most of the time...he tends to overdo it at certain moments) and Amanda Plummer really shines..all in all, a good film to watch with one's children.
Yes it's a family movie and a good one!.
This movie made my daughter (7) laugh so much ..
From the opening scenes Murrey shows us what kind on stooge he really is and it just develops from there as the film moves through it's plot.
It's not a bad plot as family movies go.
Kathleen Turner puts in a wicked performance as a villainous witch.
The special effects are good and used in a way that compliments the funniness of the scenes and aren't just there to dazzle or put there arbitrarily.
I saw a comment on another Short movie that fits the bill here too.
There's some very funny scenes here and a decent plot so I'll rate this family comedy for what it is at a solid 7 stars..
A Fun And Smart Kids Movie!.
> This is a very good kids movie, that is fun and entertaining.
Martin Short makes a hilarious Fairy Godmother, or should I say "Fairy Godfather" to Mara Wilson, who only wants her dad to be in a broadway show, but gets mixed up and must stop an evil witch played by Kathleen Turner, or her dad will become a statue!
This movie was smart and fun, and the "frog in your throat" scene was gross-out funny!
Simple, nice and amusing family film, with a charming performance from Mara Wilson.
A Simple Wish isn't a perfect family film, but it is a nice, simple and amusing one.
Of course the story is a tad messy and predictable, it's all a bit basic and the script on the weak and cheesy side.
But kids will definitely like it, and adults might too.
The special effects are decent, there is some nice photography and costumes and the pacing is good, nice and skippy as I like it.
Plus there are some fun moments, one of the funniest ones was the frog-in-your-throat scene, gross but quite amusing.The acting wasn't that bad either.
Martin Short does overact a bit, but he is clearly having fun as Murray.
Mara Wilson, who I really like, gives a typically charming performance.
Robert Pastorelli is giving little to do though, but Ruby Dee and Francis Capra give entertaining performances.
All in all, this is a nice underrated film.
7/10 Bethany Cox. Basic but enjoyable little family film.
Anabel's father is a New York horse-drawn carriage driver but hopes to become a Broadway star.
Anabel wishes for her fairy godmother to help them but, because the majority of them are tied up at the annual conference she has to make do with the failing trainee Murray.
She quickly finds that Murray is not quite as good as he has told her and most of their time is spent trying to correct his mistakes.
Things are more complicated when they are pursued by witch Claudia, who has trapped all the other godmothers and only needs Murray's wand to finalise her attempts at total power.Although I taped this film in error thinking it was something else, I still ended up watching it as it was a bonus family film to act as distraction.
Normally I wouldn't bother with such a thing but on this occasion I did and the end product was a basic but quite entertaining film that had enough to stop it being boring for me and enough silliness and energy to make it enjoyable for children.
The narrative is a bit messy, for a while it is about Murray's weakness as a Fairy Godmother but then it becomes a big finish around a plot by Claudia to get all the power for herself.
However, it is quite amusing along the way and children will enjoy the mix of silliness, effects and magic.The cast are OK and are a good part of this working.
Short is a bit irritating but he does overplay the silliness well enough to provide distraction.
Turner seems to enjoy herself even if her role is a bit smaller than I'm sure she expected; meanwhile Plummer does her usual "slightly unhinged" thing but this time as a dog.
Pastorelli has little to do but Wilson and Capra are both engaging without being like the very sickly All-American kids that US family films can be dripping with.Overall this is a family film and therefore not the sort of thing any adult would really chose to watch alone because there isn't much just for them, even if it isn't bad as such.
The energy, silliness and pace of the film will make it a winner for children and it serves well as a distraction if hardly a great film for the ages..
Fun little episode.
Martin Short is very funny, as always, and Mara Wilson is a wonderful child actress whose acting caliber could compare to many adult actors/actresses.
Kathleen Turner is delicious to watch as a bad apple witch, who's bent on revenge.
Her deep yet sultry voice and beautiful looks present the perfect image of a goody-goody witch gone bad.
For a simple yet smart comedy, rent this film..
I am sick and tired of people criticizing films just because they happen to be family movies, or G-rated, such as SCTV Fan did in the front page User Comments to this movie.
I am well into my 50's, and just happen to enjoy well made family movies!
My simple wish is, hopefully, that this is a trend away from the profanity and gore that makes up 75% of today's films.
These movie producers are making such movies because: 1: they are allowed to, 2: the public is gullible to buy tickets to see them, 3: they can't take the time to make an intelligent film with language the whole family can listen to and understand, and action that is within limits of decency.
My Simple Wish is not quite up to the quality of the movies I've listed above, but I thank the producers for making it, and thanks to IMDb for letting me have my soapbox..
One of the smartest recent movies for kids.
"A Simple Wish" is one of best children movie I've ever seen, alongside Miracle on 34th Street (the original), A Bug's Life and a few others.
It's really easy to screw up when making a film for kids.
They don't expect much and amuse themselves with a little dosis of real humour and no story at all.
But when the movie is really well done, it can become a classic.The movie is about the male fairy-godmother Murray(Martin Short at his best), who's having a little trouble making Anabel's (Mara Wilson) dream come true because of his little experience in "godmothering".
And above all that, they have to fight the evil ex-fairy-godmother Claudia (Kathleen Turner), who wants to rule above all her ex-mates.The plot sounds a little common?
It might even be, but here it has been so well structured that we are carried to Anabel's life and we feel the helplessness of Murray, who's trying so hard to save the day, even though he don't have the skill to do it.
He has a good heart and that's all that it takes.The characters are lovable.
Amanda Plummer is especially funny, as Claudia's sidekick.
The dialogues are clever yet simple, perfect for kids and for grown ups who enjoy real pure fantasy and delightment..
Well worth renting: kids will LOVE,& adults can enjoy acting.
This is really worthwhile; the Kids I showed it to (Boy,8 & girl,5) LOVED it, even to the extent of asking me to rewind/reshow certain parts.
I really enjoyed the acting---lots of famous talent--the score---and the "inside" theatre stuff.
Also it kept to its "G" rating without any of the violence or language found in SOOOO many purportedly "kids flix" lately.
I've watched it without kids and loved it, too!.
Pretty good, but starts way too slow for a family film..
DOUBTFIRE) wishes for her cabbie father Pastorelli to win the leading role in a Broadway adaptation of Dickens' A TALE OF TWO CITIES, and Short (still called a "fairy godmother" despite being a male) arrives to (attempt to) grant it to her.
Fans of Short's comedy will get it, and even if you're not a fan of his work there are still some worthy moments; however, the story takes way too long to get going for a movie targeted at children.
Capra's character also slows the movie down as Wilson's stereotypical punk older brother who's protective of his younger sister but is too cool to show it.
The musical numbers in the theatre scenes are a nice touch, but it's difficult to give the movie brownie-points for it since the film itself is not a musical.
one of the Fairy Godmother's (Bunty Webb) was the 'Ay Caramba' Lady in TOMMY BOY!** (out of four).
This was a fun film, and part of what made the film amusing was that the actors/actresses really seemed to be having fun..
This was a fun film, and part of what made the film amusing was that the actors/actresses really seemed to be having fun.(Mara Wilson)Anabel's Dad,(Robert Pastorelli)Oliver is a horse carriage rider and takes auditions to become a singer and Anabel meets a male fairy godmother,(Martin Short)Murray and Anabel's wish is for her father to actually become a singer.
When the wish is granted it all changes.Anabel's father turns into a statue because Murray casts the spell wrong because he has not had that much training.A witch,(KLathleen Turner)Claudia wants Murray's wand because it is the most powerful.Join in the fun and watch how Anabel's father is turned back..
Anabel (Mara Wilson) will be forced to move away from home unless her dad wins the lead role in a new theatre production of Two Cities.
Teased by her older brother for her love of fantasy books like Cinderella, she is overjoyed to discover she has a fairy godmother.
Unfortunately, it turns out to be a rather camp Martin Short...
After a few wasted wishes cause her dad to be transformed into a statue by our feckless fairy, she discovers the only way to return him to his former self is to help the Head Fairy save the world from an evil witch (played by Kathleen Turner) and her canine-turned-human accomplice called Boots (Amanda Plumming) who seeks to steal all the fairy's magic for herself by nicking everybody's wands.
Can they succeed in their mission or will Daddy remain a target for pigeons and fanatical Japanese tourists for the rest of his life?I'd been looking forward to seeing this film for quite a while.
The plot sounded kinda interesting and Mara Wilson was so good in 'Miracle on 34th Street' that how could possibly fail?
Let's start the analysis with the plot, which has no clear direction and despite the meagre 86 minutes running time, takes too many aimless detours (Like the little trip to Pawhuska, for instance) The special effects are fine, even the computer generated frogs and birds which are obvious fakes have a kind of charm to them.
However, I could have done without the 'comedy stylings' of Martin Short at his hyperactive worst, or Amanda Plumming who chews one too many shoes for my liking in this role.If you're babysitting one night and you find yourself shoved in front of the box with this playing, I'm afraid the only consolation is some good one-liners from Turner and a few mildly diverting magic spells.
Needing far more work at the screenplay stage and a bit of restraint in the performances too, I rank this forgettable, strictly-for-the-kids production a 4 out of 10..
Why does everyone insist on dissing this movie.
Its way cool, and a great way to entertain the savage kids while you take a break.
Short is funny, Wilson is fun, and Turner is a riot, in fact the best reason to see the movie is because of Turner.
Liked the music very much.
I thought that this was a very enjoyable family movie and my young neice was quite captivated.From a personal standpoint, I thought that the music was excellent!
I know that the musical of "Two Cities" was fictitious but very much liked the song "Far Far Better" (?)Would anybody know if this song is available on sheet music and if so where I can get it from?
if i can go one step further to suggest that the reason that those 'gore', etc movies get made is that the majority of the human species is addicted to adrenaline...and i'm using the word addicted intentionally, of course...
some would be considered healthy(let's say sports?), some not(acting on anger reflex(once again i use a word, 'reflex', intentionally.
even a 'good' kids action/adventure produces that adrenaline...
I thought this movie was wonderful.
It had all the elements of a good fairy tale.
The acting was excellent and while the special effects could've been better, for a movie aimed at a younger audience I can't complain.
While I'm not much of a fan of children's movies, seeing a Simple Wish made me reminisce of my fairy-tale filled childhood and left me with a happy feeling after it was over.
Predictable ending of course, but the quirky humor and great cast makes this film worth seeing..
This film about a little girl's wish for her dad starred Kathleen Turner, Mara Wilson, Amanda Plummer, Ruby Dee, Robert Pastorelli and Martin Short -- a good cast but only fair execution.
Unfortunately, the filmmakers waited until the end of the movie for most of the witchcraft/special effects so the film seemed long.There were some good performances, however, and the best scenes actually took place in the theater.
Frankly,the Tale of Two Cities music, written by Lucy Simon, sounded glorious and better than what's on Broadway, and was excellently sung.
Actually the music was the best thing about "A Simple Wish." More theater scenes, spread out the witchcraft, and they may have had a film..
Good story and acting.
It's only down side is that it's a family movie.
A Simple Wish Would Be the Extermination of This Film..
A Simple Wish (1997): Dir: Michael Ritchie / Cast: Martin Short, Mara Wilson, Kathleen Turner, Amanda Plummer, Robert Pastorelli: Simple film much like many of its kind but it contains glorious visual images that are amongst its few praises.
It stars Martin Short as a fairy godmother who accidentally turns Mara Wilson's father into a statue.
They must retrieve the wand from an evil witch by midnight.
Simple plot with numerous happenings that showcase massive production values.
Children may not relate to Broadway musicals and auditions.
Then again, what element of this film can a kid possible relate too?
Director Michael Ritchie has fun with the magical elements.
This is somewhat similar to one of his earlier films, The Golden Child.
Short is basically the bunt of a bad joke looking ridiculous, and Wilson provides the ever familiar wholesome innocence.
Kathleen Turner is a superb actress but playing this witch is so beneath her talent.
Amanda Plummer plays her sidekick who belongs on a dog leash and marched around central park.
Robert Pastorelli plays Wilson's father who more or less should be a statue considering the role.
Are adults suppose to sit through this with their children and suffer along with the talent involved?
Satire of fairy tales that had potential yet one might wish for a better screenplay.
Martin Short is this movie..
Sometimes, in a film like A simple wish, it takes one celeb to make a movie work.
That was kind of the case with Pirates of the Caribbean.
I similar sort of thing goes for A simple wish.
Martin Short is great, as usual.
And probably couldn't have made the film better.
He is mostly why I enjoyed the film.
The film is kind of silly.
Though it has a good cast.
Kathleen Turner as the villain.
And a somewhat silly performance by Amanda Plummer from Pulp fiction as her assistant.
Though i'll admit it is kind of silly, it is still fun.A Simple wish:***/****.
A Fun Little Movie.
Martin Short(Muarry) was pretty funny in this film.
And he always acts as if he has done magic so many times before, but always screws up.
Mara Wilson was really cute in this film, just a little girl who believed in magic and the tooth fairy as we all did as children.
And then Francis Capra(Charlie) is the typical older brother.Overall, I did enjoy this movie.
Made me laugh a few times(like when he just sneezes so loud and acts up during the test).
And then the part with Dwayne, and his shirt and the way Muarry(Martin Short) tries to stand up to him.
^-^ Yes, good family movie too, and the tiny tykes will really enjoy it. |
tt1830522 | Bulletstorm | Bulletstorm takes place in the 26th century, where the universe is run by the Confederation of Planets. Grayson Hunt (Steven Blum) is the leader of Dead Echo, a black ops team under command of Star General Sarrano. Following Sarrano's orders and assassinating alleged criminals, Dead Echo kills a man known as Bryce Novak. Immediately after, they discover Novak was a civilian reporter, documenting civilian deaths caused by Dead Echo. Realizing they have been tricked by Sarrano, Grayson and his team desert and become space pirates on the run from Sarrano's forces.
Ten years later, Grayson commands a ship with his old teammates, Ishi Sato (Andrew Kishino), Rell (Chris Cox), and Doc Oliver (Robin Atkin Downes). He spots Sarrano's battlecruiser, the Ulysses near the planet of Stygia. In a drunken rage, he attacks and rams the Ulysses. The ships collide and crash land on the surface of Stygia, critically wounding Ishi.
To save Ishi, Grayson and Rell leave the ship to find an energy cell for the ship's medical equipment. On the planet, a former popular tropical-like resort, the population has mutated into feral tribes and carnivorous plants. Grayson reaches one of the Ulysses escape pods, and retrieves the pod's energy cell, and a device called an "instinct leash." The leash provides him with strange tactile information, such as points for each enemy he kills. Grayson and Rell return with the energy cell, and Doc begins replacing several of Ishi's body parts with cybernetics, including an AI processor for parts of his brain. In the middle of the operation, the mutants attack their ship, killing Doc, Rell, and leaving Ishi a disfigured cyborg.
Grayson and Ishi decide to work together to get off the planet, despite Ishi's disapproval of Grayson's thirst for revenge. Throughout the game, the AI processor in Ishi's brain takes over several times, fueled by his anger at Grayson's selfish and reckless actions which killed their teammates and put them in danger.
The instinct leash leads Grayson to another escape pod, where they find Trishka (Jennifer Hale), a Final Echo soldier. She agrees to work with Grayson and Ishi under the condition that they rescue Sarrano. As they battle through the ravaged city, Trishka explains that Stygia has been used by Final Echo as a training ground. The instinct leash is a means of ranking the user. Only by scoring kills can the soldier get more ammunition and supplies to survive. Upon learning that Trishka was Novak's daughter, Grayson tells her that Sarrano was responsible for her father's death, but lies about his involvement.
The three fight their way to Sarrano's escape pod, which landed on a skyscraper. Trishka accuses Sarrano of her father's death, but he pushes her off the building. Sarrano then warns Grayson and Ishi of an armed "DNA bomb" on the Ulysses that will wipe out all life on the planet. He urges them to disarm it as his rescue ship will not arrive in time.
As they travel to the Ulysses, Sarrano explains that prison convicts were used as the labor force to maintain the planet. They rebelled when toxic byproducts, created by the planet's solar radiation shields, were dumped in the underground prison. The convicts destroyed the shields, exposing the entire population to mutating radiation. Aboard the Ulysses, Sarrano tricks Grayson and Ishi into arming what was actually an inert bomb, and leaves. As fire breaks out aboard the fallen ship, the two are saved by Trishka, who survived the fall.
The three race to Sarrano's rescue ship and get on board. They fight through Sarrano's elite troops and eventually confront him. Trishka demands to know who killed her father, and Sarrano reveals Grayson's squad carried out the order. As the heroes argue, Sarrano hijacks Ishi's computer systems and forces Ishi to turn on his friends. Grayson manages to break Sarrano's control, and Ishi sacrifices himself to save his teammate. Enraged, Grayson impales Sarrano on the debris on the wall. Sarrano, still alive, ejects Grayson and Trishka out of the rescue ship.
Grayson and Trishka race back to the Ulysses and board an unused escape pod. They launch it into low orbit, then the explosion of the DNA bomb propels the pod into space. Inside the pod, the two talk about Grayson's revenge, the loss of his team, and Sarrano's escape. Trishka asks Grayson what he is going to do about Sarrano escaping, and the screen fades to black.
In a post-credits scene, it is revealed that Sarrano was revived as a cyborg. Ishi also survives and is now taken over by the AI processor. | revenge, comedy, violence, flashback | train | wikipedia | Worth It. I put a 9 on this because it was not long enough.
but besides that i cant find anything wrong with the game.
The game has good graphics, its funny, its EXTREMELY violent but in a good way, awesome guns, good characters and a good story.
Overall it was good and worth the money and i recommend getting it.Bulletstorm takes place in the 26th century.
The story follows space pirate Grayson Hunt and his cyborg partner Ishi Sato, who were both dishonorably discharged from Dead Echo after they were betrayed by their commanding officer, General Sarrano.
Ten years later Hunt's and Sato's ship crash-landed on the planet Stygia, a former resort planet now overrun with meat-eating plants, feral mutant tribes and criminals.
Along the way, they're joined by Trishka Novak, a foul-mouthed woman with a dark past who also knows her way around a gun..
What Duke Nukem Forever should've been and sadly wasn't..
Bulletstorm is everything DNF wasn't and more.
While DNF was a long-delayed, sloppily-put together, incoherent mess that should've been stuck in development hell, Bulletstorm is in a class all by itself.
You play as Grayson Hunt, a former soldier-turned space pirate who is out for revenge against his commanding officer by the name of General Sarrano.
However, during an epic space battle between Hunt's crew and the General's forces, Hunt and his comrade, Ishi Sato, crash land on a seemingly deserted resort planet.
As Hunt and Sato try to make their way off the planet, they get more than what the bargain for.Not one to spoil plots or anything, but for Bulletstorm it's a must.
Despite the title(which is really neat by the way) the story is surprisingly deep and well-written.
Grayson Hunt may be a douchebag, but he's a lovable douchebag and that's what separates him from the usual gruff and serious video game heroes.The biggest star of Bulletstorm is it's gameplay which is based on a new game mechanic known as the skillshot.
By dispatching enemies in creative and highly entertaining ways, you rank up points to upgrade your weapons and getting a higher score.
Never before has a game been this innovative in it's approach to killing your enemies and Bulletstorm rightfully earns that respect.
Unlike most FPS, Bulletstorm has lush and colorful landscapes which is both strange and fascinating despite the fact that Bulletstorm is an extremely violent and bloody game.
In that respect alone, that's a good thing.
A VERY good thing.Even though there is a story, Bulletstorm is filled to the brim with crass, black humor, that's actually funny that really caught me off guard as I played the game.
Rarely does that ever happen, but I for one was laughing out loud at the darkly humorous lines being spout out of the characters; particularly Hunt and Sarrano.
Kudos to People Can Fly and Epic Games for giving these characters heart and charm amidst the bloody carnage.There are some flaws.
For one, the game is too short and there's no multiplayer modes to fiddle with after you complete the game.
There are some time-attack modes where you race against the clock to kill enemies, but the lack of multiplayer really hurts the competitive edge of most FPS out there in the market.
But that shouldn't stop you from playing this game at all.
In fact it's much more fun than DNF.I know Bulletstorm isn't selling that well which is a shame.
The game is highly polished and more sophisticated in gameplay compared to what's out there in the market.
If more time was spent on making the single-player campaign longer and with more multiplayer options, than this would've made more sales.
I hope in time more and more people buy this game because it actually brings something new to the table.
C'mon guys, support originality.
We need the diversity..
I wasn't expecting much but this is surprisingly good.
The cover design , the look of this game did not sell it to me , whoever commissioned the artwork didn't want you to buy the game as it no only doesn't reflect the game but it's uninspiring at the same time.
If you like the feel of Rage and enjoy the Borderland games , then you will love this.
It's funny, quirky , bit odd and brilliant fun at the same time..
Bargain bin fodder at the very least..
First off I play all my games in full 3d.
This game took a full three nights!
(around two hours each) to get it working but even then it was shadowy and just not worth even trying.
Once the 3d was pushed aside the decision to play in normal 2d went ahead to discover that even then it was a waste of time.
Bland graphics and no sense of adventure.
So now the developers have gone from extremely short games to long games with nothing special to see.
If you are the competitive type and enjoy racking up the point scores then go ahead and have a blast.
'People can Fly' should have released this as Painkiller 3 instead of this Bonestorm!(a game Bart played in an early Simpson's episode).
It seems as though they are aiming for a less mature audience such as 25 year old males or younger to sell this game but honestly I saw nothing original and the Hugh Jackman try-to-lookalike didn't do it for me either even though I am Aussie...
Is what I would have said if I did not give it a fair go.
As you venture further into the game the graphics do not get much better but clever design in your ordinance and the multitude of weapon choices, upgrades and fancy maneuvers you can use pull you in to a reasonably enjoyable experience.
The balloon type messages advising you of your point score remind you that this is not a serious adventure with sci-fi sensibilities but another grand shoot em up from the PCF team.
Valve, the makers of the Half-life series created special cues to make a player look in a particular direction so as not to miss an off screen event, Example - a monster running past a gate.
This game actually tells you to look by pressing RMB (right mouse button).
When you do you will instantly face the direction of where the action lies be it a Monster/boss/attacker/quick getaway.
Obviously this led to much less work in the game development as the makers did not have to spend ages to work out a way to get your attention.
Graphics - 4/10 storyline - 3.5/10 fun score 7.5/10 just another run and kill shooter but worth playing nevertheless.
Overall six rubber chickens..
Fun, violent and crazy!
Don't miss out on this one!.
Bulletstorm is a first person shooter in which you play as Grayson Hunt, a space pirate, and have to escape from the hostile planet you've just stranded yourself on.
Sounds Generic, but trust me when I say it isn't.
This game is totally different to any of the other shooters I've played.
This is all thanks to the balls to the wall weapons and the skill point system.So, the Campaign is about 7-9 hours of non-stop carnage.
There's only about 30 minutes of the entire game where you don't shoot stuff.
The weapons vary from the standard carbine to cannon-ball shooters, shotguns, flail guns and even a drill gun.
Each of these weapons has a charged shot which makes it super powerful.
For example, the charge shot for the carbine shoots 100 bullets at once, completely annihilating the enemy leaving only a glowing skeleton behind.
You also have a 'leash' which can be used to pull your enemies toward vicious environmental hazards or your boot.
Once you've kicked an enemy, you can either shoot them or watch them die in all manor of painful traps littered around the levels.A huge part of the game is the skill point system, the game's tag line is "kill with skill" and this is the basis of the point system.
You get rewarded various amounts of points for killing in special ways which can then be spent on new weapons, upgrades and extra ammo - including the brutal 'Charged' ammo.
The game explains why you get these points but it's not really important.
What is important is the fact that these skill kills are satisfying and fun to perform.In case you can't already tell, the game is extremely violent.
Blood splatters the walls and floors around you and each foe can be dismembered.
You can even go so far as evaporating them into a bloody mess.
The game also boasts a heavy amount of swearing as well as some crude sex references.
But if you're fine with all that stuff then I would definitely recommend this game.I had a blast playing this game and would recommend it to anyone comfortable with heavy levels of violence and crude profanity.
The fact that it's price has been reduced just seals the deal.
Do yourself a favour and pick it up..
TBH It can't get any worse.
My friend began cutting himself in the arm, me too.
I tried out an overdose, but woke up at the hospital next morning...
I jumped out 2nd floor but woke up after a short period of time.
After this review am i hopefully deadPS: The spoiler, yeah...
it's true |
tt2513092 | The Monkey's Paw | The short story involves Mr. and Mrs. White and their adult son, Herbert. Sergeant-Major Morris, a friend who served with the British Army in India, introduces them to a mummified monkey's paw. An old fakir placed a spell on the paw, that it would grant three wishes to three separate men. The wishes are granted but always with hellish consequences, as punishment for tampering with fate. Morris tells the Whites of his comrade, who used his third wish to wish for death. Morris, also having had a horrific experience upon using the paw, throws the monkey's paw into the fire but Mr. White retrieves it. Before leaving, Morris warns Mr. White that if he does use the paw, then it will be on his own head.
At Herbert's suggestion, Mr. White wishes for £200 to be used as the final payment on his house, even though he believes he has everything he wants. The next day his son Herbert leaves for work at a local factory. Later that day, word comes to the White home that Herbert has been killed in a terrible machinery accident. Although the employer denies responsibility for the incident, the firm has decided to make a goodwill payment to the family of the deceased. The payment, of £200, exactly matches the amount Herbert suggested his father should wish for.
Ten days after their son's death and a week after the funeral, Mrs. White, almost mad with grief, asks her husband to use the paw to wish Herbert back to life. Reluctantly, he does so. Shortly afterward there is a knock at the door. As Mrs. White fumbles at the locks in an attempt to open the door, Mr. White, who had to identify his son's mutilated body, and who knows the corpse has been buried for more than a week, realizes that the thing outside is not the son he knew and loved, and makes his third wish.
The knocking suddenly stops. Mrs. White opens the door to find no one is there. | violence, murder | train | wikipedia | This should not be called "The Monkey's Paw." This has nothing to do with the original story.
I highly suggest for viewers who like the original story NOT to view the movie.
The Monkeys Paw is a tale that has been covered cinematically several times over the years including as far back as the early 30's.
It tells the story of a paw that grants wishes but the twist is that it corrupts whatever it provides.The original story always told of a parent who wants a deceased child returned from the dead, this version tweeks that slightly but is still loyal to its source material.Stephen Lang brings life to the rather dull cast and brings forth a performance only rivalled by his in Don't Breathe (2016) Not the best version and a tad slow this is one of those premises where you could do a lot with it but here they fail to do so.Perfectly watchable but perhaps should have been somewhat better.The Good: Stephen Lang The Bad: Oddly boring Things I learnt from this movie: Monkeys Paw would make a great television series!.
W. Jacobs, but if you didn't know that and you read the message board for this film, you'd be tempted to think it was originally a Simpsons or Goosebumps episode.While so many iconic stories like the one Jacobs penned lend themselves to parody or adaptation, the writers of this version actually created something original - which is why, I would guess, the ratings here are so much lower than they should be.Instead of giving us one more pass through of the "be careful what you wish for" scenario, the filmmakers take us in a different direction.
Saying much more would ruin the story, so I'll only point out that it's not only the protagonist who suffers for his choices.All aspects of this film are competent or better.
You may not always agree with my reviews, but you can sure as hell know they are honest and not because I had something to do with any particular film one way or another, good or bad.
Chiller Films' remake of THE MONKEY'S PAW is a very good movie with an original story.
If "Heart-Shaped Box", ever gets made into a movie, I would like it to have a little bit of the feeling I got from "The Monkey's Paw", that without being a great accomplishment, delivers with a little twist; making it as one wanted sequel for the original story of W.
W. Jacobs and this time unleashing the evil we don't get to read on the original story.I kind of venture to say, that some may want to compare it with Stephen king's "Pet cemetery", or "The Serpent and the Rainbow" but, at least on my case I wouldn't dare to.
Even though this is not a for the big screen of a movie theater, the film stands on its own, giving the obvious answer of what it would have happened after the mother opens to his dead son?
Among the advantages of the story is that it doesn't play the main character as a dumb guy, just, naive and ingenuous man that unfortunately under the influence of alcohol and not having a good life, makes the wrong choices.Unlike other horror, slasher movies, the cliché, (like the phone ringing at the most inopportune moment) becomes a necessary element.
Because we feel like it shouldn't have happened to them, meaning that we get to care for the characters, regardless of them being of secondary importance on the story, I would say that at this point is about "family" it gets way more personal.
Also I really liked the use of the street cars, and the location of New Orleans, it gave the little touch for a little "Vodou".The acting is fairly good, the ambiance, music and camera work let you appreciate the effort of the filmmakers,regardless of being a little slow between some of the scenes,and the appearances of the always welcome Charles S.
I am familiar with the myth of the magical powers of the monkey's paw, and that was sufficient enough to make me pick up the movie and give it a go.I was pleasantly surprised to see that Stephen Lang was in this movie, because he usually performs quite well in the stuff that he participates in, and it turned out that the 2013 "The Monkey's Paw" was also one such feat.
But it was alright, because the movie was entertaining enough to sustain the predictability without suffering under it.To quickly summarize the storyline, then it is about Jake Tilton (played by C.J. Thomason) whom is given a monkey's paw and the three wishes that come with it.
But when one wish turns his friend Tony Cobb (played by Stephen Lang) into a soulless husk of his former self, things turn foul and bad things start to happen.The atmosphere that director Brett Simmons managed to set up during the course of the movie was quite good, because it was quite becoming for the storyline and the movie as a whole.This isn't a horror movie that relies heavily on special effects, so don't get all worked up and hope for a grand CGI and practical effects show, because it just ain't there.
Sure, there were special effects in the movie, and the effects that were there were to the point and functioning very well."The Monkey's Paw" is the type of horror movie that is driven by a good and entertaining storyline and have some well-rounded characters in the character gallery to help bring the story to life on the screen.
In New Orleans, Jake Tilton (C.J. Thomason) works in transportation business as assistant of the supervisor Gillespie (Daniel Hugh Kelly) with his friends Anthony "Tony" Cobb (Stephen Lang) and Catfish (Corbin Bleu).
When the manager Kevin (Andy Favreau), who got married to Jake's former girlfriend Olivia Corbin (Michelle Pierce), fires Gillespie, Jake and Cobb meet him drinking in a bar and Gillespie gives a magical monkey's paw to Jake telling that it grants three wishes to the owner.
Jake does not believe in his words but he wishes a nice car that is parked at the bar.
Cobb decides to kill everyone connected to Jake to force him to use the monkey's paw to grant his wish.
W. Jacob published the supernatural short story "The Monkey Paw" where the owner of a monkey's paw is granted with three wishes with tragic consequences.
"The Monkey's Paw" is a horror movie with a good version also based on this short story with the idea that you shall be careful with what you wish for.
The creepy and gore story takes place in the mystical New Orleans and does not disappoint fans of horror.
I didn't know what to expect going into The Monkey's Paw, but I was not disappointed!
The film basically takes the classic tale, turns it on it's head and expands it into a twisted, often surprising story.
A man receives a Monkey's Paw from a fellow co-worker and is granted three wishes.
C.J. Thomason left me scratching my head as the lead character, but he was just good enough to not ruin the story.
I definitely went into this without any expectations and though the story is not new, and the characters did do some dumb things with stilted dialogue at times, I think the very interesting setting and the performance by Lang makes it worth watching..
The acting is good, especially from Stephen Lang, who made the film happen (my opinion), the death scenes are more than OK I'd say, and it has a nice pace.
I was out with friends looking to see a movie and have a good time for the night.
Also the monkey's paw granting a wish was a strange concept to see considering it is usually a rabbit's foot which is considered lucky.
It was nice to hear their opinions about the movie and was crazy to hear about how short of a time they had to film it.If you are looking for a great thriller movie, then this one will definitely be for you..
Also, you actually care for the characters which really bumps this movie up from your average horror.
So, that night at the bar, he entices Jake (Thomason) over and proceeds to tell him the story of the monkey's paw, which is sitting on the table.
When Jake and Cobb (Lang) leave at the end of the night the car is in the parking lot...
All of this anchors the viewer in the here and now and gives them enough drama to keep them interested.Add to this the element of horror, the supernatural, and murder and you have a good film.
However, I did like the fact that Simmons cut away from some of the goriest parts of the film, letting the viewers imagination fill in the messy bits.The acting is above average, though there are times when things get a little messy.
It's a shame that Dutton, who plays detective Margolis, isn't around a little more either.I'd recommend this to horror lovers who like their macabre curses and evil manipulated wishes gone awry.
A monkey's paw talisman has the power to grant three wishes but they come with a heavy price.
I watched this on the Horror Channel and it is very typical of many of the movies that they screen - it's not good, but then it's not bad either.
Apparently this film is based upon an old story which I confess to being unfamiliar with and it has given me good cause to seek out the 1948 version..
"The Monkey's Paw" will provide some entertainment for horror hounds.
As many of you may know, "The Monkey's Paw" is an updated version of W.W. Jacobs' supernatural short story from 1902.
Unfortunately, the wishes come with a terrible price.Director Brett Simmons and Writer Macon Blair did a great job of establishing a group of engaging personalities through quick character development.
The solid camera-work for this independent genre piece also came as a surprise."The Monkey's Paw" boasts an ensemble cast of stars to help draw in their individual fans.
He might be in the movie for a sum total of ten minutes at the most.Corbin Bleu continues to shake his Disney stigma by taking on a more mature role for "The Monkey's Paw." He plays a blue-collar factory worker named Catfish.
This isn't Bleu's first genre film, as he was also in "Nurse 3D" and "Scary or Die.""The Monkey's Paw" is unrated, although I would consider it PG-13.
The one thing we don't get surprisingly is any nudity.If you like supernatural thrillers, "The Monkey's Paw" will provide some entertainment for horror hounds looking for an old-fashioned tale in a new package.
The biggest issue here is easily the fact that there's just no way to take the plot seriously or even find a great deal of creepiness from it as the majority of the time here is spent on doing nothing but the two arguing over whether or not the resurrected friend should have the paw in question, resorting to bullying and tormenting tactics to get it but never showing anything that deserves why he should have it.
J. Thomason) is given a monkey's paw that grants three wishes.
After the first two wishes leave his friend Cobb (Stephen Lang) undead, Cobb pushes Jake to make a final wish.There have been many films based on the short story of the same name by author W.
"The Monkey's Paw" is a short story published by the English novelist William Wymark Jacobs in 1902.
In the original, a man is given a monkey's paw and told it will grant the owner three wishes.
You see where this is leading?If you were thinking this is the origin of the phrase "Be careful what you wish for", that predates not only W.W. but the Great J.C. You are however on the right lines.This 21st Century adaptation brings the story right up to date transferring it to the Deep South.
Apart from the paw and the three wishes, there is little in common with the original, but this is a truly superior psychological/mystical effort of which the long dead Jacobs would surely approve..
Now don't get me wrong, not a bad movie by far, however the trailers and hype brought this movies potential to be one of the best horror films in years.
You may choose mildly interesting place like New Orleans if you prefer to make the story somewhat exotic.Get rid of original characters of the story and replace them with good looking young folks.
This will also explain why the folks use powerful magical devices with an incredible level of stupidity: They just do not believe it actually works.And now for the real "American twist of the original story": The story is usually about the device itself and the ways how the main character plans to use it without the backfire as it was advertised by its seller.
The more people are killed the better - you need a lot of blood in the horror stories these days.
That makes him different from the young lovable characters.In the end please do not forget to show the plot device for about 5 seconds so the viewers can know that if they pay a lot for a tickets and DVDs they may have a whole series made in this very manner.
What's even worse I do love original American horror stories.
The story: The film centers on Jake Tilton, who acquires a mystical "monkey's paw" talisman that grants its possessor three wishes.
Jake finds his world turned upside down after his first two wishes result in co-worker Tony Cobb being resurrected from the dead.
First off granting wishes, voodoo story is a little overused, there have been oodles of films about this topic and if that's all they were about they didn't really stand out of the crowd.
The whole story and atmosphere would work great in say a Tales from the Crypt episode, but not in a feature film.
Animal was a kind of pointless, but watchable once, mediocre horror and so was Monkey's Paw. I think the whole thing took a left turn at Albuquerque when they picked out the basic story.
Three wishes on a monkey's paw lead to terror and tragedy for a young man, his family, and his zombie friend.
Three wishes to make your dreams come true, what could go wrong?Guy looses his friends and family to father figure turned zombie killer, blonde takes stab wound to chest (her best feature), drunk and bitter gets drunk and dead and young and innocent spawn of drunk and bitter gets the next rack of wishes from the monkey's paw.If this sounds like a bad horror movie to you, you are not imagining it.
This is the familiar old story of be careful of what you wish for.
A guy working at a factory is given a monkey's paw and told that it will grant him three wishes.
Bad things happen to the wish master, all due to the monkey's paw.
This is a good old-fashioned "horror" movie.
This would've been a better movie if Cobb killed Jake's annoying brother(which he eventually did) instead of his mother.
Jake uses the paw in W.W. Jacobs fashion and disrupts the lives of everyone he knows.The film is fairly straight forward.
For those who are not familiar with the story, the movie might seem a little better than three stars.Parental Guide: No f-bombs that I recall.
THE MONKEY'S PAW is less an adaptation of the famous ghost story by British writer W.W. Jacobs and more a typical supernatural slasher flick with a generic Hollywood feel.
Gill received a monkey's paw as a kid after his father died, and he decides as revenge to give it to Jake, knowing that if wished upon bad things were most certain to happen.
And they do.As the old story goes, Jake wishes for a nice ride, and a wreck caused by a gator in the road throws his bar/work buddy, Tony Cobb (Stephen Lang), through the windshield, killing him when he hit the ground.
Unwisely making a second wish on the paw to resurrect Tony, what happens is he's brought back, but the soul is "poisoned" and he becomes a remorseless killer.
What Tony wants is to have his son and sees the monkey's paw as the means to do so.
You see how the paw really takes Jake down a dark road: no good really comes of it.
This will perhaps be judged by Lang's mission of terror, because the paw story is old hat..
I found what I wanted in watching this movie, and so I would recommend it to anyone who likes a bit of fantasy mixed in with your psycho killer, slasher thriller..
Though it is flawed by the general clichés, I think there is actually a clever mini-plot behind it.Even though Voodoo is a religion that celebrates life and death and has very little to do with black magic and considering that you can't revive a dead guy even if you had a mountain of monkeys with 4 paws, the movie leaves an open alternative.
"The Monkey's Paw" is a movie for in between and looks like a movie version of one of Stephen King's short stories.
The story is based on the well-known 3 wishes which are granted to someone.
In this movie the paw of a dead monkey can achieve this.
The wishes are carried out but you have to pay an extremely heavy price because you are tampering with fate.The basis of the original story is mostly retained in this film.
It actually sounds a bit corny and feels like an old-fashioned ghost story to read to children at Halloween.Despite the fact that I didn't expect much of it, the movie was still reasonable.
A typical horror story and an enjoyable entertaining movie. |
tt0043278 | An American in Paris | American World War II veteran Jerry Mulligan (Gene Kelly) is now an exuberant expatriate in Paris trying to make a reputation as a painter. His friend and neighbor, Adam Cook (Oscar Levant), is a struggling concert pianist who is a longtime associate of a French singer, Henri Baurel (Georges Guétary). At the ground-floor bar, Henri tells Adam about his cultured girlfriend. Jerry joins them later, before going out to sell his art.
A lonely society woman and heiress, Milo Roberts (Nina Foch), finds Jerry displaying his art on the street and takes an interest in him and his art. She brings him to her apartment to pay for his works, and invites him to a dinner party she is throwing later that night. After singing with French children on the way home, Jerry shows up to Milo's apartment. He quickly finds out that the "party" is actually a one-on-one date, and tells Milo he has no interest in being a paid escort. When he attempts to leave after giving her money back, she insists that she is only interested in his art.
They go to a crowded bar, and she offers to sponsor an art show for Jerry as a friendly gesture. Some of Milo's friends arrive, and while sitting with them, he sees Lise Bouvier (Leslie Caron), a French girl seated at the next table. Jerry ignores Milo and her acquaintances, and instead pretends to know Lise already and dances with her. She is standoffish and gives Jerry a wrong phone number, but she is innocently corrected by someone at her table. Heading home, Milo tells Jerry he was very rude cavorting with a girl he does not know while in her presence, but he gets out of the car and bids her farewell.
The next day, Jerry calls Lise at her work, but she tells him to never call her again. Jerry and Milo meet at a cafe, and she informs him that a collector is interested in his paintings and she arranged a showing later that day. Before going to the showing, he goes to the parfumerie where Lise works and she consents to dinner with him. She does not want to be seen eating with him in public, but they share a romantic song and dance on the banks of the Seine River in the shadows of Notre Dame.
Later, Adam humorously daydreams that he is performing Gershwin's Concerto in F for Piano and Orchestra for a gala audience in a concert hall. As the scene progresses, Adam is also revealed to be the conductor, other members of the orchestra, and even an enthusiastic audience member applauding himself at the end.
Milo gets Jerry an art studio and tells him she has planned an exhibition of his work in three months. He initially refuses the studio because he does not have the money for it, but eventually accepts it under the condition that he pay Milo back when his art proceeds allow him. Roughly a month later and after much courting, Lise abruptly runs off when she and Jerry arrive by taxi at his apartment. When Jerry complains to Adam, he is shocked to realize that both Henri and Jerry are involved with the same woman. Henri and Jerry discuss the woman they each love, unaware she is the same woman.
That night, Jerry and Lise reunite in the same place on the banks of the Seine close to Notre Dame. She informs him that she is marrying Henri the next day and going to America. Lise feels a sense of duty to Henri, to whom she feels indebted for keeping her safe during World War II. She and Jerry proclaim their love for each other.
Feeling slighted, Jerry invites Milo to the art students' masked ball and kisses her. At the raucous party, with everyone in black-and-white costumes, Milo learns from Adam that Jerry is not interested in her, and Henri overhears Jerry and Lise saying goodbye to each other. When Henri and Lise drive away, Jerry daydreams about being with Lise all over Paris to the tune of the George Gershwin composition An American in Paris. His reverie is broken by a car horn, the sound of Henri bringing Lise back to him. They embrace as the Gershwin composition (and the film) ends. | romantic | train | wikipedia | The idea of the film originated with Kelly who wanted simply to do a film with a lengthy ballet sequence involving George Gershwin's tone poem An American in Paris.
My favorite number in the film however is Tra-La-La which Kelly sings and dances all over the apartment with Oscar Levant playing the piano.
At one point Kelly dances on top of the baby grand piano.In a book about Arthur Freed, I read a quote where he said in the American in Paris ballet sequence was to be done with the background of the French impressionists which he felt the public would take to rather than a realistic setting on the streets or back lot.
Still does in my opinion and that includes some of Gene Kelly's later films.In a surprise upset at the Oscars, An American In Paris was chosen best picture for 1951, beating out the heavily favored A Streetcar Named Desire.
Big budgets also have an upper hand in these things as well.Still An American in Paris is one of the best movie musicals ever done and since the studios no longer have all that creative talent under one roof, something less likely to be repeated..
Gene Kelly was also at the height of his powers in this film, though it could be rightly argued that this movie was just the warm-up for his best work in Singin' in the Rain (1952).
Oscar Levant is hilarious as Kelly's stoic pal, who gets two of the film's best moments: during the end party sequence (which I will not give away for anyone who hasn't seen the film), and one of the film's most memorable musical numbers which couples his incredible piano skills with state-of-the-art (for the time) special effects.Less memorable are Georges Guetary as Kelly's romantic rival, though he does get a few musical highlights, and Nina Foch as Leslie Caron's romantic rival.
But in American IN Paris, we're to somehow believe that Gene and Leslie are a perfect couple from their very first glance, even though it means trampling all over the feelings of the two people genuinely in love with these two (and Lord only knows why).
act.But somehow, 'An American In Paris' manages to come through it all as a polished, first-rate musical--largely on the basis of Gene Kelly's incredible dancing talent and choreography, and the truckloads of charm he seems to be importing into each scene with Caron.
It makes fantastic use of some of the best music and songs by the greatest popular composer of the twentieth century (George Gershwin) and features the greatest male (Gene Kelly) and female (Leslie Caron) dancers in Hollywood history.
After absolutely falling in love with 'Singin' in the Rain (1952)' a film that singlehandedly ignited my newfound passion for musicals I, perhaps unreasonably, expected to enjoy Vincente Minnelli's 'An American in Paris (1951)' just as much.
Gene Kelly, of course, brings an incredible energy to his role as always, and his character exhibits a likable arrogance that gives way to unabashed exuberance once the music starts playing.As is unfortunately the case in many musicals, the filmmakers seem to have dedicated all their efforts towards the extravagant musical sequences and forgotten that there is ultimately a story to be told.
The romance between Jerry Mulligan and Lise Bouvier (Leslie Caron) is one that we've seen many times before, and its mundaneness is amplified by the fact that nineteen-year-old Lise is neither as beautiful nor as charming as the film's characters appear to find her {though, in Caron's defence, this was the French actress' debut performance, and she may be acting in a language with which she was uncomfortable}.
This film's most ambitious sequence is undoubtedly a wordless, seventeen-minute ballet set to Gershwin's "An American in Paris." Costing a staggering $500,000, the extended dance number is audacious, elaborate and extravagant, effectively earning my admiration despite my inclination towards singing over dance {I typically prefer being able to sing along when I'm watching musicals, which is impossible when they are performing a ballet}.
Gene Kelly was so interested in putting groundbreaking dance on screen in this 1951 musical extravaganza that he forgot to include a story or characters while he was at it.
The "Gotta Dance" fantasy ballet sequence in "Singin' in the Rain" is considered by many to be the only thing wrong with that movie; the entire running time of "An American in Paris" feels like that ballet.
This little gamine is as bland as an unsalted pretzel, and I just simply didn't care a whiff about her or Kelly or whether they were going to get it on or not.Some memorable musical numbers distinguish this film, but I think people are wrong to consider it Gene Kelly's choreographic masterpiece.Grade: B-.
Did that guy even have a point in the story other than to annoy?An American In Paris might be worth checking out for two reasons: 1) Kelly's song and dance number with the little Parisian kids, and 2) the final flourishing dance sequence, which nicely encapsulates everything the movie had been trying to say up to that point but in less time.
In some ways "An American in Paris" is Kelly's "Pal Joey", except Frank Sinatra managed to carry off that film by dint of his acting skills.Part of the plot revolves around his being a painter whose "talent" has been discovered by wealthy patroness Milo (the lovely Nina Foch in an unsympathetic role).
But if you want to see Gene Kelly at his best, I recommend watching "Invitation to the Dance" instead, where his considerable dancing skills and charm are unhindered by the very things that cause "An American in Paris" to fail..
For this viewer, I've never been able to sit through the entire movie in one sitting, so assembling the pieces in my head usually sends me running for a bottle of aspirine.MGM made a number of classic musicals, but AAIP isn't one of them, despite the best picture Oscar it garnered.
A fairly obvious Best Picture win in 1951 coupled with suave, acclaimed leading man Gene Kelly in the starring role of a musical and you have a film that was bound to be a feast for your eyes that you could enjoy with your ears, as well.
The film doesn't seem to have any interest in concluding its story with any kind of assured statement or seriousness, and instead goes full Broadway for a slight and outrageously expensive (well over $500,000 apparently) dance number that grows tiresome after a few minutes.An American in Paris gets considerable points for costume and set design, as even a mediocre script can't eclipse the majestic look and feel Paris always seems to ooze.
However, with everything this film had going for it, there's little evidence of anything in the way to make this admittedly safe and harmless musical anything other than standard fare that was fortunate enough to get praised a bit too much by far too many people.Starring: Gene Kelly, Leslie Caron, Nina Foch, Oscar Levant, and Georges Guétary.
Even more amazing to me is that "Ace in the Hole" lost for Best Writing, Screenplay to this film--even though "An American in Paris" had hardly any story to speak of and was mostly driven by dance and song..
It probably won Best Picture by benefiting from a split vote between A Streetcar Named Desire (1951) and A Place in the Sun (1951).It does have a great, if long, dance sequence with Gene Kelly and Leslie Caron.
Director Vincente Minnelli received his first nomination (he later won for Gigi (1958), another questionable Best Picture winner).Kelly is a struggling American artist, working in Paris, until he finds a "sugar daddy" (er, "sugar mommy"?) in Foch.
It was an ordeal just sitting through it, and here's why:Gene Kelly and Leslie Caron had no chemistry whatsoever...he was too old for the part, and she was very unattractive (though in later years she blossomed into a real looker, I admit).Oscar Levant was as humorous as a graveyard, and served no purpose, at all.This was obviously filmed on the back lot of the studios, and doesn't in any way resemble Paris.All in all, it's much-a-do about nothing, and remains (to me) the most overrated film of all time.Before avid fans start screaming that I must hate musicals, I don't.
She had yet to develop as an actress (her later films include "Gigi" and "The L-Shaped Room", much better performances) but her dancing is great and that is enough for now.But there are several good things about "An American in Paris".
Released two years before I was born, this Oscar-winning movie has it all - lavish Technicolor sets and costumes, breathtaking cinematography, superb wall-to-wall Gershwin music, superior choreography, a lighter-than-air screenplay, and great performances by Kelly, Levant, Foch, Guetary, and Caron.
The performers in this movie are a top-notch tap dancer / singer (Gene Kelley), top-notch ballerina (Leslie Caron), awesome pianist (Oscar Levant) and a great singer (Georges Guétary).
The film deals with a young American artist (Gene Kelly) in post-World War II France who falls in love with a very young woman (Leslie Caron) during his stay there.
One year earlier, Gene Kelly starred in and choreographed another film, An American in Paris.
Charming, lovely, "s'wonderful!" While I wouldn't say it's the best ever, An American in Paris is still a great musical!
What's important is that the tone of the song and the way it is presented fit into the structure of the film.An American in Paris was the first of three Freed musicals (the other two being Singin' in the Rain and The Band Wagon) which took existing classic numbers out of their original context and made them work in a completely unrelated story.
So, when Gene Kelly sings I Got Rhythm, he hasn't even got a girl yet, but the way it's done with the French kids joining in is a great bit of characterisation, and the upbeat tune and dance gives the movie the little lift it needs at this point.
An American in Paris also uses the rule-breaking allowed in the genre to add little unconventional flights of fancy to tell the story, such as the series of dances which accompany the description of Leslie Caron's character.And what better director for this project than Minnelli, himself a painter and a pianist?
The colorful settings and costumes and some good musical numbers help make "An American in Paris" an entertaining movie despite some noticeable weaknesses in the plot and the characters.
It is often quite creative as well, especially in the music and dance sequences, with Gene Kelly, Leslie Caron, and Oscar Levant all getting some good chances to use their talents.Kelly makes Jerry, his rather shallow character, work all right just by more or less being himself, and letting his talent take over.
Gene Kelly, who was a magnificent tap-dancer, also shows his balletic skills in "An American in Paris." One example of this is in the dance at the fountain scene, one of the most famous from the movie.
This is your typical cheerful and colorful MGM musical from the early '50's and it's definitely on of the better ones to watch out there.The movie got directed by the genre expert Vincente Minnelli and stars Gene Kelly in the main lead.
The 97 minutes that precede this finale are not as exciting, not by a long shot, but there are certain charms to be had in viewing the entire 1951 Oscar-winning musical.Director Vincente Minnelli and screenwriter Alan Jay Lerner have fashioned a surprisingly sophisticated if rather slight romantic story focused on Jerry Mulligan, a former G.I. who has remained in Paris after the end of WWII trying to make a living as a painter.
The best part of An American In Paris is the lengthy ballet sequence at the end, where Gene Kelly and Leslie Caron are the living personification of several major painters.
Kelly has earlier been established as a pavement artist in Paris, so the sequence is the logical ending to a musical bursting with life and energy, Gershwin tunes, and cast members like Georges Guetary and Oscar Levant.
I love "An American in Paris." That is especially true about the Gershwin musical score for the movie.
While I concede Gene Kelly is a great dancer and is so smooth and in control of his body it is like he dances on ice, the film itself is painfully weak in nearly all story telling respects.
She also gave a very convincing performance as a sweet young girl who is supposed to marry out of responsibility rather than love.The movie also demonstrates the luxury of meticulous artistic design, costumes, coloured sets, great dancing scenes, numerous dancers and musicians offered by MGM.
When you watch An American in Paris,you will not be in awe of its' story.It is your basic boy meets girl story and not unlike many films of its day in that regard.What you will be in awe of is Gene Kelly.Few could sing and dance as well as this man.The makers of this film knew this and the result is a grand showcase of Gene Kelly's talent.Again,you will be in awe as you watch Kelly pull off the hardest of dance moves without even breaking one bead of sweat,and to top it off,he sang like a bird.Naturally,you would want songs written by the best of composers to support such a voice.You can't go wrong with George and Ira Gershwin.Don't look for a strong plot here,just a whole lot of great singing and dancing..
But Lise Bouvier is as mysterious and fascinating for him as the "Mona Lisa."And in case anyone is interested, I am with those who prefer "Singing in the Rain." Still, Gene Kelly dancing for the French children, or singing "Our Love is Here to Stay," Leslie Caron's charming smile, Oscar Levant's freaky orchestra scene, and those fabulous light-up stairs in "Stairway to Paradise" are all highlights!.
The absolute best part of the movie is the "American in Paris" 18 minutes dance which Gene Kelly is at his best.
The music is all by George Gershwin (yipee!) and includes 8 musical numbers...including, Embraceable You, By Strauss, I Got Rhythm (couldn't be any cuter!), Love is Here to Stay (you know, Gene and Leslie dancing on the bridge?), Stairway to Paradise, Concerto in F, S'Wonderful (if ya don't know that one, I feel sorry for ya!), and of course, THE BALLET!!!!!
The story and music (George Gershwin!) are wonderful, as are Levant, Guetary, Foch, and, of course, Kelly.
It's a very simple guy-meets-girl story, just with a great setting, padded with heaps of song and dance numbers.Pity is that the more the movie goes on, the more the music takes over from the plot.
Like CITIZEN KANE or THE WIZARD OF OZ, it towers as one of filmdom's grandest experiences---and qualifies easily for inclusion in the top 10 of Hollywood's highest artistic achievements.Trivia: Only two movie musicals won the Academy Award for Best Picture of the Year in the 1950's: An American In Paris and GIGI-- both MGM productions and both orchestrated within the 'Fried Unit.'...Leslie Caron has said she wanted nothing to do with Hollywood when she was contacted to make a screen test at the age of 18.
There's more to it than that, of course, as the plot draws in various strands such as painting, a love triangle, and Parisian nightlife, and it all comes together very well.Whenever I watch a Gene Kelly movie I always compared it to SINGING IN THE RAIN, which isn't just my favourite Kelly film but also my favourite musical, full stop.
If you looking for the perfect romance musical, then the Oscar-winning "An American in Paris" is really the right movie for you.
This is the story of Jerry Mulligan {Gene Kelly}, a former American GI living in Paris making paintings and making friends with pianist Adam Cook {Oscar Levant} and singer Henri Baurel {Georges Guetary}.
with lots of talented unknowns all dancing their Paris-loving hearts out."An American in Paris" is a great film if you like watching Gene Kelly dance.
17 minutes of wonderful music, dancing, symbolism, art, and it all captured Paris and love perfectly.One of my favorite scenes is when Gene's friend, the pianist is imagining his own concert.
Gene Kelly is Jerry, an "American in Paris" in this 1951 film directed by Vincente Minnelli and also starring Leslie Caron, Oscar Levant, Nina Foch and Georges Guetary.
Gene Kelly-Leslie Caron dance up a storm in Paris, France.
The reason to see this film that won the Academy Award for Best Picture, Best Story, Best Screenplay, Best Cinematography, Best Scoring, Best Art Direction, and Best Costume Design is for the dancing of Gene Kelly and Leslie Caron, and the colorful sets and costumes.
The dancing is great and serves to put motion to George Gershwin's rhapsody, An American in Paris, that ends the film.
Sure it is a funny movie, Gene Kelly is amazing and some of the sing & dance-numbers are great, but the love-story is, well, not flat, but un-interesting and I simply didn't belive it.
A movie with incredible dancing, the music of Gershwin, the premier of Leslie Caron, and some of the most interesting graphic stuff for its time.
The dream dance sequence at the end of the movie is the greatest in film and is lasting testimony to the genius of Gene Kelly..
"Singin' in the Rain" receives the highest praise for it's unique comedy and perfect union of story with song and "West Side Story" is a landmark in choreography, but it's the Oscar-winning best picture of 1951, "An American in Paris" that towers above all others with it's brilliant choreography put together by the film's star, the incomparable Mr. Gene Kelly--the greatest male dancer of all time--it's stunning costumes and it's beautiful sets.
Oscar Levant's short role in this film gave it just what it needed, someone who doesn't look like Gene Kelly. |
tt0041452 | The Heiress | Catherine Sloper (Olivia de Havilland) is a plain, painfully shy woman whose emotionally detached father, New York physician Austin Sloper (Ralph Richardson), makes no secret of his disappointment in her. He is terribly bitter about the loss of his charming and beautiful wife, whom he feels fate replaced with a simple and unalluring daughter. Catherine is devoted to her father, however, and too innocent to fully comprehend his mistreatment or the reasons for it. When she meets the charming Morris Townsend (Montgomery Clift), she immediately is taken by the attention he lavishes upon her, attention she so desperately seeks from her father. Catherine falls madly in love with Morris and they plan to marry.
Dr. Sloper believes Morris is an idler who is courting Catherine only to get her inheritance, and his interview with Morris' sister only reinforces his suspicion. He tells the young couple his opinion of Morris and takes Catherine to Europe for an extended time, but she cannot forget her betrothed. When they return to New York, Dr. Sloper threatens to disinherit his daughter if she marries Morris. Catherine does not care and plans to elope with him but not before telling him about her father's decision. On the night they are to elope, Catherine eagerly waits at home for Morris to come and take her away, but he never arrives.
Catherine is heartbroken. A day or so later, she has a bitter argument with her father, who makes his disdain for her abundantly clear. Soon afterwards, he reveals he is dying. She tells her father she still loves Morris and challenges him to change his will if he is afraid they will waste his money after he dies. He does not alter the will and dies a short time later, leaving her his entire estate.
A few years later, Morris returns from California, having made nothing of himself but still professing his love for Catherine. He claims that he left her behind because he could not bear to see her destitute. Catherine pretends to forgive him and tells him she still wants to elope as they originally planned. He promises to come back for her that night, and she tells him she will start packing her bags.
Catherine coldly plots her revenge upon Morris. Her aunt asks her how she can be so cruel, and she responds, "I have been taught by masters." When Morris returns, Catherine calmly orders the maid to bolt the door, leaving him locked outside, shouting her name. The film fades out with Catherine silently ascending the stairs while Morris' despairing cries echo unanswered in the darkness. | revenge, atmospheric | train | wikipedia | However, even the coiffures excel in "The Heiress." De Havilland's hair looks authentic 19th century and underscores Wyler's fastidious attention to detail.With an award-winning de Havilland performance, a handsome Montgomery Clift on the brink of stardom, and an engrossing Henry James story, "The Heiress" is one of the finest films of the 1940's.
Usually, Hollywood eliminates any of the subtlety of a great author's voice (see the recent remake of "Washington Square" if you want to see a real Hollywoodization of a novel – it actually depicts a young Catherine peeing her pants in public – an inane "Animal House"-type Hollywood requirement that degrading a woman by showing her peeing is an erotic boost for any movie).
Olivia de Havilland is perfect as James' unlikely heroine, going from an awkward gawky girl eager to please her beloved father, to a simple, loving young woman who steadfastly stands by her lover, to an embittered middle-aged woman who understands that, as Henry James says, "the great facts of her career were that Morris Townsend had trifled with her affection, and that her father had broken its spring." If you liked this movie, read the novel.
Listen to James' descriptions of Catherine and her father and see if this isn't exactly what Ralph Richardson and Olivia deHavilland portrayed: "Doctor Sloper would have liked to be proud of his daughter; but there was nothing to be proud of in poor Catherine." "Love demands certain things as a right; but Catherine had no sense of her rights; she had only a consciousness of immense and unexpected favors." " 'She is so soft, so simple-minded, she would be such an easy victim!
This movie should be played in every acting class ever taught to show the brilliance of subtlety and range of expressions possible when one is conveying a character's inner emotions.Olivia De Havilland is a beautiful woman, but you believe she's an ungainly bundle of shy awkwardness in the role of Catherine Sloper.
On stage the father was played by Basil Rathbone, and in his memoirs ("In And Out Of Character"), Rathbone makes a case that Dr. Sloper (his role) was not the villain in the novel - it was Sloper who was trying to protect his naive daughter Catherine from the clutches of fortune hunting suitor Morris Townshend.
Catherine is deeply in love, but her fiancé will forever change her view of herself, of her father and of human nature as a whole.William Wyler directs Augustus and Ruth Goetz's adaptation of their own play, suggested by Henry James's "Washington Square," and it's a fine job by all.
Montgomery Clift a young and rising star, Olivia de Havilland already famous for earlier roles (including a supporting one in "Gone with the Wind"), and the terrific stage actor Ralph Richardson, who received an Oscar nomination for his role.
Combine a wonderfully told story with a masterful director (William Wyler), and add to that superb cast, and you have the formula for a masterpiece as we do here.Olivia de Havilland gives the performance of her life as Catherine Sloper, the socially awkward and homely daughter of surgeon Dr. Sloper (played by Ralph Richardson).
At the same time, there is a hint of fatherly love below the surface trying to protect his daughter from what he perceives is a fortune hunter in the suitor of Montgomery Clift's character, Morris Townsend.The photography in the film is amazing as it conveys the deep emotions in the film so adequately.
But the best aspect of this film is Olivia deHavilland's portrayal of the tragic, pitiful Catherine Sloper who, denied a life of being loved by her resentful father, falls in love with the first man who shows her kindness.
A handsome, icy film adaptation of Henry James's novel "Washington Square." Olivia de Havilland is a far cry from Melanie Wilkes as Catherine Sloper, a socially awkward ugly duckling who becomes the target of a gold digger, the dashing Morris Townsend (Montgomery Clift), who loves the idea of Catherine's inheritance more than he loves her.
An inheritance her father will take away from her should she progress further with the shifty Townsend.A novel written by Henry James {Washington Square}, and a successful Broadway play by Ruth & Augustus Goetz {responsible for the film's wonderful ending}, The Heiress adapts perfectly to the big screen due to the almost peerless work from all involved in the adaptation.
Ralph Richardson plays the father brilliantly, fusing a trio of character traits with wonderful results, and William Wyler's direction is right on the money, it's no surprise to learn that de Havilland requested Wyler for the project, for she must surely have known that he was the man to bring out such a majestic two fold performance.Montgomery Clift gives a rather more safe than great performance as Townsend, perhaps at times too aware that de Havilland and Richardson were shining bright on set, Clift none the less is one of those actors who's average shows were still better than some of his so called peers best.
But one only has to view the film now to see that the off screen tensions lifted de Havilland to another acting level, well, also helped by the gifted hands of one William Wyler of course.A smashing, dramatic, and engrossing picture, The Heiress is a must see for those looking for artistic deftness, with an ending that is a fittingly memorable piece of class.
Montgomery Clift is great and Ralph Richardson gives a fantastic performance, as a father that just can't love and feel proud of his daughter.
That's why it becomes a source of frustration for Catherine that her father, Dr. Austin Sloper (Ralph Richardson) is constantly belittling her character by judging her through his vision of the ideal woman, his deceased wife, throughout the film.
While it's true that at times Montgomery Clift invokes an acting style that falls somewhere outside the time of the character, he never loses step with the scene, or with the other actors.One of the most touching scenes in the film occurs when Morris is playing a song for Catherine on the piano.
I said that for a movie about poverty but boy, does it also apply to Catherine Sloper, the fortuned yet unfortunate titular heroine of William Wyler's adaptation from the play of the same name, based on Henry James' novel "Washington Square".
If I can find any criticism at all it would be with Montgomery Clift's character, not that he is at all unconvincing but purely because he is up against the almost unbelievable achievements of Olivia de Havilland, Ralph Richardson and Miriam Hopkins all giving performances, seldom, if ever, surpassed in the history of cinema.
It's a rarely acknowledged and little understood facet of film-making, but a truly excellent performance is to some degree a collaboration between the actor and the director.In the Heiress, we see Olivia de Havilland in what is probably her finest work.
Dr Sloper and Catherine's father/daughter relationship is somewhat the core of the film and is played with brilliant passion by both Richardson and de Havilland.
Olivia de Havilland gives a stunning performance as a shy, socially awkward young woman named Catherine, who stands to gain a fortune when her father dies.
Catherine's father (well played by Ralph Richardson), a man gifted with great insight into people but a person who also has a cruel tongue, acknowledges Morris' charm and social grace, but is nevertheless suspicious.The most engaging angle to the story is the change that comes over Catherine, as the plot moves along.
The reason why his subtle, hidden handling of Augustus Goetz and Henry James's material is without the auto-pilot connection an audience often has with even enormously entertaining films, why The Heiress's every scene virtually speaks to you with passive-aggressive mystery, is because Wyler, in terms of purely emotional familiarity, the thoughts that go through his mind, the personalities with which he can relate, knows the story's themes all too well, and I can see him signing on at the helm of this ruthless work of noninvasive craftsmanship, saying under his breath, "We'll just see whose calls resound unrequited into the shadows of the New York streets.".
The Heiress - is an outstanding movie - adaptation of the play by Augustus and Ruth Goetz, based on the novel "Washington Square" by great writer, Henry James, The drama of a young, shy, sweet, open to love, rather plain in her appearance but very rich girl takes place in New York City in the mid-1880s.
Olivia de Havilland is excellent as Catherine, the heiress of the title, who fells in love with a very good looking young man Morris Townsend(Montgomery Clift in the role that had propelled him to the stardom), who may or may not be after her extraordinary wealth.
Using his trademark shadowy cinematography and decidedly murky view of 19th century America, Wyler and star Olivia de Havilland (in her most brilliant, triumphant performance) help bring to life this chilling tale of a woman scorned.It is 1849 New York, and Catherine Sloper is the only child of the fabulously wealthy Dr. Austin Sloper (Ralph Richardson) and heir to a $30,000 a year fortune.
Besides, if you had a father like Dr. Sloper and a fiancée like Morris, how do you think you would turn out?The Heiress is a reminder of a time when many movies were treated like plays, where performance mattered just as much, if not more than, box office clout.
Nominated for eight Oscars and the winner of four, including Best Actress (for Olivia de Havilland), "The Heiress" is an adaptation of the play, which was taken from a novel by Henry James.Ms. de Havilland plays the central character, Catherine Sloper--a socially awkward young woman who is immature and without artifice.
Suddenly a suitor appears--Morris Townsend played by Montgomery Clift in only his third big screen appearance--and Catherine's father fears that Morris wants her only for her fortune.All of the acting performances in this film are excellent.
William Wyler directs Olivia de Havilland and Montgomery Clift in two very excellent performances to steady a disturbingly powerful story of a plain, simple woman Catherine Sloper, who has almost no relationship with her father (Ralph Richardson in a frigid role) due to the untimely death of her mother.
The film was meticulously cast, with Ralph Richardson as Catherine's father, Miriam Hopkins as her aunt, and of course, the gorgeous Montgomery Clift as that bounder, Morris.This is a beautifully produced and directed film.
Olivia De Havilland,(Catherine Sloper),"Hush..Hush, Sweet Charlotte",'64 played a rather homely young lady who fell deeply in love with Montgomery Clift,(Morris Townsend),"Red River",'48, who managed to sweep Catherine Sloper off her feet and stole her heart strings and completely over powered her with his great charms.
I can't decide who gives the most overpowering performance, whether it's Olivia de Havilland as Catherine, or Ralph Richardson as Dr. Sloper, her unsympathetic father.
Olivia de Havilland, Montgomery Clift, Miriam Hopkins and Ralph Richardson star in this perfectly executed film, directed by William Wyler, based on a play adaptation of the Henry James novel.
Olivia De Havilland would win her 2nd Oscar in 3 years for 1949's "The Heiress."In this film she sacrificed her beauty to turn in a power-house performance as a woman victimized by her father, a nasty but truthful Ralph Richardson and gold-digger suitor, Morris, played well by Montgomery Clift.
Richardson received a well deserved supporting Oscar nomination for his performance.Based on Henry James' "Washington Square," the film tells about Catherine, a plain looking woman, who is courted by Morris.
A young naive woman falls for a handsome young man who her emotionally abusive father suspects is a fortune hunter.Stars: Olivia de Havilland, Montgomery Clift, Ralph Richardson.
One of the great moments is when, after Dr. Sloper tells his daughter that she is both plain and good at nothing, you see Catherine with her back turned and, cleverly using a mirror, you see the growing distance between her and her father, as the latter walks away.The screenplay, a very literary adaptation from Henry James' WASHINGTON SQUARE is, to me, one of the best ever.
That exceptional screenplay is brought to life by sublime performances by Sir Ralph Richardson (pity he didn't get the Best Supporting Actor Oscar) and de Havilland, a beautiful woman who manages to look plain for most of the film, and who, as she drops her humane qualities and becomes vindictive, becomes physically beautiful, heightening one's perception of the extent of Townsend's loss.
Clever, punchy, profound ending.Superb performances by Olivia De Havilland as Catherine, Montgomery Clift as Townsend and Ralph Richardson as Dr. Sloper.
Catherine Sloper (Olivia de Havilland) is a put-upon girl dominated by her father (Ralph Richardson), who falls in love with ne'er-do-well Morris Townsend (Montgomery Clift), but discovers to her cost that Morris, like her father, simply treats her as a convenience.
But while Clift is the leading man so to speak aside from de Havilland the most memorable performance comes from Ralph Richardson in the role of Catherine's father.
...to all young actresses who want to learn about their job:watch Mrs De Havilland whose performances are close to perfection;an actress who did not think twice when it came to make herself look ugly.And the rest of the cast is admirable too:Monty Clift was perhaps the most gifted actor of his generation and sir Ralph Richardson is equally powerful as the selfish resentful father.How is it possible that there are still "critics" who despise William Wyler,maybe the best story teller of the whole American cinema?His directing is BY NO MEANS academic .Nobody films a ball like Wyler used to do:everybody remembers the fabulous scenes in "Wuthering Heights" , "the letter" and of course "Jezebel".Here he outdoes himself and his filming of these people dancing is a feast for the eye.I also love the way Wyler introduces his male lead.Besides,Clift is so subtle an actor he makes us believe he might not be a fortune-hunter.Another stroke of genius is the use of the stairs .All along the movie,Catherine goes downstairs then upstairs ,till the impressive final sequence.The cast and credits appear on a tapestry which become a picture of the street.A tapestry Catherine will be making during the whole movie too.It represents an ossified society where time stood still .Catherine on her stairs is like a squirrel in a cage.A remake ,called "Washington square" ,was made by A.
Miriam Hopkins and Montgomery Clift give tremendously adept performances as Aunt Penniman and Morris, but the film is carried to completely different heights by Olivia de Havilland and Ralph Richardson.As Catherine walks up the stairs after being abandoned by Morris, it is wholly possible for the viewer to feel the weight of her pain and the burden of her struggle.
William Wyler directed the Henry James adaptation of the short story, "Washington Square" with musical score by Aaron Copeland and starring Oliva de Havilland as Catherine Sloper, Ralph Richardson, Dr. Sloper her father, Montgomery Clift, the fortune hunter Morris Townsend, and Mirriam Hopkins, Aunt Livenia.
As a lamp's light marks her movements up the staircase through a transom window and to the intimate family bedrooms upstairs, Morris is shut out from Catherine's heart, money, and the house he'd brazenly announced to Aunt Penniman was his "home." It is a masterful scene that is one of the most chilling in film history.Oliva de Havilland won an Oscar for this performance which is matched by the exceptional performances of Ralph Richardson, Montgomery Clift and score of Aaron Copeland.
The Heiress is directed by William Wyler, is based on the novel by Henry James and stars Olivia De Havilland, Montgomery Clift and Ralph Richardson.This adaptation of Henry James novel Washington Square,is nothing less than a masterpiece.Filled with subtle but powerful performances this is a haunting story of psychological cruelty and a deeply moving love story.
Olivia De Havilland won a well deserved Oscar for her unforgettable portrayal of a jilted and emotionally broken woman.It's 1849 and in the wealthy city block Washington Square young,shy and dreadfully plain Catherine Sloper(Olivia de Havilland)is the dutiful and deeply undervalued daughter of the respected Dr.Austin Sloper(Ralph Richardson).Austin bullies her emotionally and is forever putting her down and telling her to be more like her beautiful dead mother.Because of this she is dreadfully shy and dislikes social occasions.It falls to her kindly,romantic and highly excitable aunt Lavinia Penniman(Miriam Hopkins)to try and get her married.At an engagement party for her cousin,Catherine meets the handsome Morris Townsend(Montgomery Clift)he is attentive to her and for the first time in her life she falls in love.Dr.Sloper objects to their plans for marriage on the grounds that he believes Morris to be after Catherines thirty thousand dollar fortune.After many struggles Morris abandons Catherine.Once this happens Catherine transforms into a hardened and cold woman who refuses to have anything to do with love and now feels all compliments directed towards her are false or jokes.One of the most unforgettable portrayals of the effects of psychological cruelty ever put onto either paper or film.The Heiress is an experience which once seen you'll never forget.A special mention must go to Edith Head's costumes and Aaron Copeland's Oscar winning score..
Excellent film with Olivia de Havilland giving a stunning performance as spinster and heiress Catherine Sloper (though I still think she was even better in The Snake Pit).
Ralph Richardson is also brilliant as her cold, cruel father, and Montgomery Clift...well, you shouldn't trust Morris Townsend for a second, but when he looks LIKE THAT, you can forgive him anything!
Directed by William Wyler and based on the stage play by Ruth and Augustus Goetz, which was in turn an adaptation of the Henry James novel WASHINGTON SQUARE, this is an acute character study that demonstrates that the right thing may not always be the most loving thing.De Havilland plays Catherine Sloper, the only daughter of a distinguished New York doctor (played with waspish dignity by the great Ralph Richardson). |
tt0078976 | City on Fire | William Dudley (Leslie Nielsen) is a corrupt mayor of a nameless Midwestern U.S. city who has allowed an oil refinery to be built right in the center of town, far from any river, lake or reservoir. On one typical hot summer day, Herman Stover (Jonathan Welsh), a dangerously disturbed employee at the works has been denied an expected promotion and in addition, finds himself fired. He then decides to take his revenge against the works by opening the valves to the storage vats and their interconnecting pipes, flooding the area and sewers with gasoline and chemicals. It doesn't take long for this act of petty vandalism to start a fire, which starts a chain reaction that causes massive explosions at the refinery, destroying it and spreading a mushroom-cloud of flame that soon engulfs the entire metropolis. The drama focuses on a newly built hospital which, like the refinery and all civic buildings that went up during the mayor's crooked administration, is shoddily built and poorly equipped where the head doctor, Frank Whitman (Barry Newman), and his staff treat thousands of casualties from the fire while the city fire chief Risley (Henry Fonda) keeps in constant contact with the fire companies fighting a losing battle against the fires, and Maggie Grayson (Ava Gardner), an alcoholic reporter, sees it as her chance to make it nationwide with her coverage of the story of the "city on fire".
A major subplot of the film involves Diana Brockhurst-Lautrec (Susan Clark) a wealthy socialite who is currently and secretly involved with Mayor Dudley to further advance her rank up the social circles and whom also finds herself, along with the mayor, at the hospital assisting the head nurse Andrea Harper (Shelley Winters) with treating the large number of casualties. The womanizing Dr. Whitman also becomes smitten with Diana after meeting her during the hospital's dedication ceremony prior to the fire. Herman Stover also arrives at the hospital having left the refinery before the explosion to stalk Diana, having known her since attending high school. No one ever finds out that Stover is the one responsible for the citywide fire, and on top of that, Stover is not sane enough to understand or regret his actions.
When the hospital becomes surrounded by the fire, Chief Risley orders his son, Harrison (Richard Donat), assemble a fire company to create a "water tunnel" composing of firemen creating a channel across a burning street to evacuate the hospital. Despite some casualties of the hospital staff and patients, the evacuation is successful. Stover is one of the casualties when, distraught and in a daze after Diana rejects him, is killed by falling debris from a building. Nurse Harper is also killed when she attempts to rescue Stover. Diana, Mayor Dudley, and Dr. Whitman are the last ones to make it out of the hospital.
The final scene is set the following day at a quarry outside the city which is set up as a makeshift camp for the thousands of people rendered homeless by the fire as it is finally brought under control. There, Dr. Whitman and Diana acknowledge their love for each other, while Mayor Dudley gives a press statement about his actions and of his intention now to run for governor. Maggie Grayson, still reporting from the studio, signs off her broadcast and leaves with her assistant Jimbo (James Franciscus) on a date for assisting her throughout her coverage. The final scene shows Chief Risley leaving his headquarters with his staff telling them that it takes only one man to set fire and destroy a city. | revenge, violence | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0037248 | The Scarlet Claw | Holmes and Watson are in Canada attending a conference on the occult, when Lord Penrose receives a message that his wife Lady Penrose has been murdered in the small village of La Mort Rouge. Holmes and Watson are about to return to England when Holmes receives a telegram from Lady Penrose, issued before her death, asking for help as she fears for her life. Holmes decides to investigate her death.
Holmes and Watson arrive at the village and discover that the inhabitants are all convinced that the murder is the work of the legendary monster of La Mort Rouge, which roams the marshes around the village. The "monster" is even later seen by Dr. Watson, who describes it as "a ball of fire spitting flames in each direction".
Holmes, however, is skeptical, and recognizes Lady Penrose as Lillian Gentry, a former actress, who was involved in a famous murder case several years before when actor Alistair Ramson killed another actor in a jealous rage over her. Ramson was believed to have been killed in a prison escape two years before, but now Holmes believes that Ramson - a master of disguise - is living in the village, having created a new identity, perhaps several, for himself.
Holmes then turns his attention to Judge Brisson, another inhabitant of the village with a connection to the case, as he passed sentence on Ramson. Despite Holmes' warnings Brisson is murdered. Holmes tracks Ramson down to his hideout and discovers there is a third person that Ramson is preparing to kill. However before Holmes can discover who it is, Watson blunders in and Ramsom escapes.
Holmes learns that the third victim is to be Journet, the local inn-keeper, formerly a prison guard. However Journet has gone into hiding. Ramson then kills Marie, Journet's daughter, for not revealing her father's hideout. Holmes finds Journet and convinces him to spring a trap for the murderer.
Holmes and Watson announce that they are returning to England, and Journet comes out of hiding and lets it be known that he will be going to a church across the marsh to offer a prayer for Marie. Ramson attacks Journet out in the marsh, only to find that it is Holmes disguised as Journet. The two men struggle, but Ramson escapes only to be killed by Journet with his own weapon, a five-pronged garden weeder. | revenge, murder | train | wikipedia | The film was a critical and box office flop and Universal saw fit to alter the series' direction from that point on.Though still taking place in the 1940s, the subsequent films did their best to place Holmes back in his proper role, solving intricate mysteries with deductive reasoning...rather than the pure chance and intuition that often guided him in his forays into international espionage.
This may (or may not) be accredited to the director Roy William Neill (who directed all but the first entry in the series), who, with the fourth film, Sherlock Holmes Faces Death, became the associate producer...a title he would retain throughout the series' run.
Sherlock Holmes Faces Death was easily the best of the first four entries, and subsequent films topped one another until peaking with The Scarlet Claw.Oddly enough, the film is set in a French province of Canada...for no discernible reason.
Crisp direction, beautiful cinematography (particularly for a B-film), plenty of twists and turns along the way, and no small amount of deductive reasoning from Holmes, make this the strongest entry in the Universal series.
A plea from a dead noblewoman propels Sherlock Holmes towards a confrontation with a phantom murderer known as THE SCARLET CLAW.Holmes & Watson are faced with a real thriller in this moody, atmospheric little film set in Québec.
This just might be the case which changes Holmes'mind about the reality of the supernatural...As ever, Basil Rathbone & Nigel Bruce are perfect in their roles, like two favorite old uncles, eccentric and a bit crotchety, that one still welcomes to one's fireside.
Bruce is a bit more lively this time, getting to indulge himself a bit with an extremely humorous inebriated scene.A sturdy cast of character actors make up the very frightened inhabitants of the bog-girded village of La Morte Rouge: Paul Cavanagh as the occult-studying peer; Ian Wolfe as his alcoholic butler; Arthur Hohl as the brutal innkeeper; Kay Harding as his unfortunate young daughter; Gerald Hamer as a nervous postman; Miles Mander as a terrified old judge and Victoria Horne as his disquieted housekeeper.With the war against the Axis still continuing at the time of production, the film concludes with Holmes pithy patriotic paean to Canada.This film follows SHERLOCK HOLMES AND THE SPIDER WOMAN (1944) and precedes THE PEARL OF DEATH (1944)..
The setting in this Sherlock Holmes adventure is Canada, and features a nice tribute to my neighbors in the north at the end of the film with a quote from Winston Churchill.I was glad to see a movie debunk all this occult nonsense that the film world usually embraces, or at least is fascinated by.
Turns out it's one of the very best entries in the series, up there with THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES and THE ADVENTURES OF SHERLOCK HOLMES as essential Holmes films.It has all the atmosphere one would want in a Sherlock Holmes story and a mystery that deepens as the plot goes forward but resolved in a very satisfying way by Holmes.
GERALD HAMER as a nervous postman and VICTORIA HORNE as a frightened housekeeper are also fine, as is MILES MANDER as a judge whose life is in danger from a serial killer.Although this one takes place in Canada, it might just as well have taken place on the Dartmouth moors in Devonshire--that's the kind of atmosphere it has with plenty of mist and fog to add to the Gothic ambiance of the tale.Well worth watching for Sherlock fans.
Convinced that it is the work of an otherwordly being, he does not welcome the arrival of Sherlock Holmes (Basil Rathbone), who is convinced that there is nothing ghostly about the matter in the least.The Universal films counted a great deal on the chemistry between Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce as Holmes and sidekick Dr. Watson, and indeed that chemistry is on full display in this particular title.
Just while Lord Penrose, who's a 'scientific' supporter of the supernatural, gets into an argument at a debate in Quebec with realist Sherlock Holmes about a horrible myth about a monster with a strange 'claw' killing people in a small village called 'La Morte Rouge' nearby, the news reaches him that his wife has just been found dead - with her throat cut out with something like a monster's claw...Of course, Holmes at once decides to take a closer look at that strange myth - and of course, he doesn't believe it's a myth at all.
And an ordinary garden weeder, as well as the true identity of the late Lady Penrose, soon confirms his theory: she was once an actress, and a member of her group had been murdered - and the murderer escaped from jail and hasn't been seen anywhere in the past few years; so he could have assumed anyone's identity in that sleepy little village in the meantime...And he's out for revenge, as Holmes soon discovers: a retired judge is the next victim - but there still seems to be somebody else on the murderer's 'list'...This is quite a gruesome entry in the series, almost as atmospheric as "The Hound of the Baskervilles", but with an even more reckless and cunning murderer.
Universal's updated series of Sherlock Holmes movies were an odd bunch of sublimely Gothic mysteries and banal espionage run-arounds that were always entertaining if only for the great Basil Rathbone as the ultimate sleuth.
A genuine whodunit, with plenty of suspense, atmosphere and the usual number of endearingly eccentric performances from the supporting cast, all handled with great aplomb by Director and Producer Roy William Neill.The story owes a little to The Hound Of The Baskervilles with its plot device of a supposedly supernatural creature stalking the marshlands, but manages to be its own beast (pun intended) by weaving around the premise an intricately plotted mystery.
This is an excellent entry in the Basil Rathbone/Nigel Bruce series of Sherlock Holmes movies, combining a couple of elements from "Hound of the Baskervilles" with some imaginative new details.
The village atmosphere and characters are interesting, and the story is told at a good pace by Roy William Neill.The story of "The Scarlet Claw" is more of a mystery than are most of the other movies in the series, which usually let the audience know the identity of Holmes' adversary relatively early.
Indeed, many fans of the series consider this to be the best of them, and it's hard to argue with that.The village atmosphere, and even the scene in Quebec, work well with the Holmes characters.
The theatrical film series of "Sherlock Holmes" continues with Basil Rathbone (Sherlock Holmes) and Nigel Bruce (Doctor Watson) starring in THE SCARLET CLAW (Universal, 1944), as produced and directed by Roy William Neil.
Acquiring an original story by Paul Granglin and Brenda Weisburg certainly was a welcome change in this modernized series, yet, intentionally or not, has more of Doyle's 1890s period setting feel to it, resulting to the best, if not, one of the best of this Universal/Holmes entries.Though none of the 14-film Rathbone-Bruce "Sherlock Holmes" franchise never resorted to remaking itself from its earlier works, THE SCARLET CLAW comes close to being Universal's own contribution to Rathbone/Bruce's introductory roles from THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES (20th Century-Fox 1939).
In true essence to the Doyle character, and Universal as well, Holmes does encounter some strange admiration, forming great admiration for followers of this series.A brief prologue opens in a small French village of La Morte Rouge (The Red Death), outside of Quebec, Canada, where at Journet's Tavern, townspeople gather together, talking about a ghost-like glowing image roaming about at night connected with a series of brutal murders involving a claw-like weapon tearing the throats of its victims.
As Watson remains at the tavern to mingle with the guests while keeping an eye on a prime suspect, Holmes risks his own life roaming through the foggy marshes alone; races against time to prevent the murder of a frightened Judge Brisson (Miles Mander) living a reclusive lifestyle with his mysterious maid, Nora (Victoria Horne), before finding evidence leading to the unmasking of the phantom monster.Running ten minutes longer than the usual standard 65 minutes, THE SCARLET CLAW, strictly a second feature "B" product, is pure "A" murder mystery material with entire cast in fine form.
Be aware this being a motion picture release during World War II era, audiences would get to listen to the master detective, as he did in SHERLOCK HOLMES IN WASHINGTON (1943), recite a passage from a speech by British Prime Minister, Winston Churchill.Distributed to home video in the 1990s (later DVD in 2006), THE SCARLET CLAW, formerly part of "Sherlock Holmes Theater" on broadcast television, turns up occasionally on various cable stations, notably Turner Classic Movies (TCM premiere: December 26, 2009), with its restored print taken from the UCLA Film and Television Archive.
When Holmes gets a note sent by the dead woman before her death saying her life is in danger, he realises that it is murder and stays in the town to investigate.Although I prefer the Holmes adventures that occur in his own time this is a good example of how well the characters and mystery works no matter the setting.
Overall, great entertainment and of the Universal Sherlock Holmes films stands out as the best(Pearl of Death from memory was also excellent).
My favorite Sherlock Holmes film from the Basil Rathbone-Nigel Bruce era is The Scarlet Claw.
A ghostlike apparition or monster has been terrorizing the inhabitants of a small village near Quebec but the sceptical Holmes is not entirely convinced the human factor is not somehow involved in a series of gruesome murders that appear to have been committed with some kind of claw.THE SCARLET CLAW is not only one of the best entries in the Holmes series with Basil Rathbone, and certainly my favourite so far, but also a terrific murder mystery that works fine on its own terms, a genuinely engaging movie that manages to transcend its low budget limitations.
For its fantastic performances by Rathbone and Nigel Bruce (much maligned for his interpretation of Dr. Watson but I think he's perfect counterbalance to Rathbone's Holmes), for the beautiful black and white cinematography, for the intricate plotting, for a great SFX scene that involves a glowing man running through the woods that hasn't dated one bit 60 years later.
This is by far the best of all of the Basil Rathbone/Nigel Bruce's Sherlock Holmes Mysteries.
"Sherlock Holmes & The Scarlet Claw" was produced in 1944 as Universal was experiencing a major boost in popularity - and to its coffers - because of the tremendous success of its horror films & monster movies.As such, this Rathbone & Bruce entry, the eighth of their 14 films in the series, is downright chilling!
One particular scene that I won't detail is among the flat-out scariest scenes I have ever seen in any film.This has been considered by many to be the finest of the 12 Universal production, after the initial two 1939 20th Century Fox classics, "The Hound of the Baskervilles" and "The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes." I'll go even further and say that "The Scarlet Claw" is at least as good as those first two.The cinematography by George Robinson is striking for a noir-ish use of shadows, slightly tilted close-ups and dark lighting that is unique to the series.
Producer-director Roy William Neill returns to helm the sixth entry in Universal's Holmes series and, for the first time, to collaborate on an original screenplay based on the Conan Doyle characters; the results are stellar.
That same day, Holmes receives a letter from the deceased Lady Penrose, in which she enlists his help, because she feels her life is threatened; thus, Holmes is engaged by the already dead victim and leaves for La Mort Rouge, a village with an aptly macabre name.Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce are excellent as expected; at this point, their performances are beyond criticism.
Among the best of the Holmes series, "The Scarlet Claw" has everything a Sherlock Holmes fan could want; a fiendish killer, a challenging mystery, an atmospheric setting, and Rathbone and Bruce at their best..
This sixth entry in Universal's Sherlock Holmes series finds Holmes and Watson in Canada investigating a series of gruesome killings in a small village called La Mort Rouge (The Red Death).
The story owes a little to The Hound of the Baskervilles, the most famous of the Sir Arthur Conan Doyle Holmes tales (previously filmed by Fox in 1939, also starring Rathbone).
And like The House of Fear, Bruce's Watson is rarely played as a fool in this entry.The Scarlet Claw does steal a basic plot element, 'the monster' from The Hound of the Baskervilles, which is odd, considering The Hound had been made only five years earlier.
Nigel Bruce does have one such scene, but it plays well within the story.I consider this film every bit as good as The Hound of the Baskervilles.
With its rural location complete with treacherous, foggy marsh terrorised by a seemingly supernatural monster, The Scarlet Claw certainly has more than a bit of The Hound of the Baskervilles about it; the fact that the 'monster' is in fact an escaped murderer wearing phosphorescent clothes in order to scare the locals means that it also resembles an episode of Scooby Doo at times.This combination of the creepy and the cartoonish makes for one admittedly silly but also very entertaining adventure for Holmes, giving the super sleuth an intriguing case more than worthy of his amazing deductive skills whilst reinstating the atmospheric Gothic trappings that had sorely been missing from the series' earlier war-time efforts.Great characters; gruesome deaths; a villain able to take on a variety of disguises with ease; an ominous tolling bell; a deserted, run-down hotel; red herrings aplenty: The Scarlet Claw has what it takes to be one of the best of the Universal Sherlock Holmes films.7.5 out of 10, rounded up to 8 for IMDb..
This Entry in the Popular Basil Rathbone-Nigel Bruce Sherlock Holmes Series is a Fine Example of how Holmes could be Updated to the Present and Still Retain Most of what Made the Name Sherlock a Synonym for Detective and Captivated Literary and Screen Fans.There is the Moor, Covered in Fog, the Bog (watch out Watson), Creepy Surroundings, and a Brutal Murderer that even Slashes to Death a Child.
This is probably the best of the Basil Rathbone/Nigel Bruce Sherlock Holmes series from Universal (although it doesn't top "The Hound of the Baskervilles", which was done for another studio).
"The Scarlet Claw" is not only the highlight of Universal's Sherlock Holmes series, it is the best of all the films based on Arthur Conan Doyle's immortal character.
Of the last Universal films in the Sherlock Holmes series, only THE HOUSE OF FEAR and SHERLOCK HOLMES FACES DEATH have better plots than THE SCARLET CLAW.
Yet his performance is so good that you still enjoy the movie.Unlike HOUSE OF FEAR, SHERLOCK HOLMES FACES DEATH, and THE PEARL OF DEATH, THE SCARLET CLAW has no literary basis in the actual Conan Doyle stories about Holmes.
The motive - vengeance on several people who all live in this Canadian village - actually is a sensible one for a change (some of the motives for murders, especially robberies, in the later films seen stretching it).Being a war movie, Holmes and Watson have a final "patriotic" comment at the end regarding Canada as a link between the U.S. and Great Britain.
In this one, Dr. Watson compares the current mystery to the one encountered in "The Hound of the Baskervilles", all the more interesting because that film was made at competing studio Twentieth Century Fox. There was also that reference to author G.K. Chesterton's mystery stories and his fascination with the occult.Of the post-Fox movies (there were only two), this is by far the best I've encountered, certainly more entertaining than the first three Universal films which had Holmes (Basil Rathbone) dealing with Nazi agents.
"The Scarlet Claw" ranks as one of the best Sherlock Holmes films with Basil Rathbone.
Are they the work of a phantom, or a flesh and blood killer ?This, the eighth in the series of Rathbone-Bruce movies, sees Neill's horror film influence come to the fore (it was the only one he directly had a hand in writing), with various ghastly goings on, a creepy setting, and even a scene where Holmes is attacked by the legendary glowing monster, courtesy of some nice special effects by John P.
Meanwhile her husband Lord William Penrose (Paul Cavanagh) is attending a debate on the occult & supernatural with Sherlock Holmes (Basil Rathbone) & his assistant Dr. John Watson (Nigel Bruce) also in attendance when the news of Lady Penrose's murder is made known.
The acting is OK with Rathbone making for a good Holmes, Bruce as usual plays Watson for laughs although some of the bit part actors are somewhat wooden.The Scarlet Claw is maybe my favourite Holmes mystery out of the fourteen Rathbone films that I have seen thus far, everything you would like is here from plenty of mystery elements & red-herrings, a murderer whose identity is well disguised & their motives are decent & I found it quite clever & well thought out.
Atmospheric, well-cast and much different from its brethren, The Scarlet Claw looks and feels more like a classic late Universal horror film than any of the other Holmes movies.
Sherlock Holmes (Basil Rathbone), however, believes there to be a more earthly murderer at large and aided by Dr Watson (Nigel Bruce) he sets out to prove it.
And what is the explanation behind the strange, luminous figure that stalks the marshes at night terrorising the locals?A highly satisfying entry into the long running and popular series of Sherlock Holmes second features, which were updated to the present day, the Second World War. Basil Rathbone was one of the screen's very best incarnations as Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's ace detective and the way in which he does battle with Paul Cavanagh's Lord Penrose in arguing that his wife's death was of a more earthly nature rather than anything supernatural is engaging and pleasing to watch. |
tt0026605 | The Last Days of Pompeii | In Pompeii 79AD, Glaucus and Jone are in love with each other. Arbaces, the Egyptian High Priest, is determined to conquer her. Glaucus buys the blind slave Nydia who is mishandled by her owner.
Nydia falls in love with him and asks Arbaces for his help. He gives her a potion to make Glaucus fall in love with him. In fact it is a poison which will destroy his mind. Arbaces' disciple Apoecides threatens to reveal publicly his wrongdoings. Arbaces kills him and accuses Glaucus of the crime. He locks Nydia in a cellar to prevent her from speaking.
Glaucus is condemned to be thrown to the lions. Nydia manages to escape and tells Glaucus' friend Claudius what happened. Claudius rushes to the Circus to accuse Arbaces and the crowd decides that Arbaces and not Glaucus should be thrown to the lions.
The Vesuvius starts erupting and a widespread panic ensues. Under the shock, Glaucus recovers his mind. Blind Nydia, the only one to find her way in the darkness caused by the rain of ashes, leads Glaucus and Jone to safety and finds peace by drowning herself. | sadist, historical fiction | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0038934 | She-Wolf of London | American graduate student Randi Wallace (Kate Hodge) travels to Britain to study mythology with Prof. Ian Matheson (Neil Dickson). She arrives expecting a stodgy old academic, but Ian is young and the two are immediately attracted to one other. Their attraction increases but a complication quickly arises when Randi spends a night on the moors and is bitten by a werewolf. She survives what the local hospital thinks was an attack by a large rabid wolf; she insists that it was not a true wolf but instead something supernatural and she seeks Ian's help. For the rest of the series, Randi and Ian investigate supernatural phenomena together while they search for a cure for her lycanthropy and he becomes her keeper during her transformations. Randi's curse draws the attention of various supernatural creatures: another werewolf, spirit possession, succubus, a possessed bookstore, a bogman, an evil carnival, a Guy Fawkes spirit, a killer horseman, in a small town, zombies who ultimately confront Randi in her werewolf form (Diane Youdale). Eventually, their search takes them from British academe to American TV, when they move back to Randi's native California and Ian becomes host of a trashy TV talk show focusing on psychic phenomena. The series was an old-style romantic comedy with a touch of horror. The romantic comedy comes from Randi and Ian's relationship, and their relationship to the Matheson family and the people she and Ian work for. Randi's transformations did not occur every episode but only during the full moon. This gave her and Ian a chance to investigate the supernatural without having to face possible lycanthropic transformations every week. | insanity, humor, murder | train | wikipedia | But she certainly isn't the murderer as she nearly becomes a victim herself...The movie is nicely shot in black and white and some of the foggy night scenes are very atmospheric.The cast includes a young June Lockhart (who went on to play Maureen Robinson in Lost In Space), Don Porter and Sara Haden.Watching She-Wolf of London is an ideal way to spend an hour one dark evening.Rating: 3 stars out of 5..
"She-Wolf of London" is not, despite its name, a horror movie in the classic sense of the word, it is more a typical "whodunit" mystery and an ancestor to the psychological thrillers of today.In London, a mysterious series of murders is creating fear in the population and confusion in the police department as people speak of a killer werewolf.
Her aunt Marta Withrop (Sara Haden) takes advantage of this and tries to force her daughter Carol (Jan Wiley) to marry the wealthy Barry.All this interesting plot gives room to a lot of development, sadly, the movie doesn't move too far away from the established formula and therefore we don't have a lot of chance to get empathy for the characters.
In the turn of the century in London, the aristocratic lawyer Barry Lanfield (Don Porter) proposes to marry the heiress Phyllis Allenby (June Lockhart) and she accepts.
Out of the blue, dreadful murders happen in a nearby park and Detective Latham (Eily Malyon) believes that they are victims of a werewolf or a she-wolf, but his superior Inspector Pierce (Dennis Hoey) says that they are victims of an animal.
Apart from excellent settings and costumes, not to mention the always reliable pulchritude and charm of June Lockhart, this Val Lewton wannabe is mainly a misfire.More's the pity too, since it abounds in shadowy night scenes, fog, and much cloak and daggery, including a final act complete with tilted camera angles, and poisoned milk, (a la Hichcock's "Suspicion").But there is no real grue and no real tension, and what we are left with is a lame, (though slickly produced) thriller whose main interest accrues from its interesting cast and glossy staging.Still, given the paucity of Victorian melodramas at your local cineplex--you could do much worse..
I imagine that horror fans were disappointed, asking "Where's the Werewolf?" (Why Jack Pierce is credited as the makeup man in the opening credits I don't know, since I can't see any place in the film where his special makeup talents were employed.) The story: In Victorian London, a series of murders takes place in a public park, where the survivors report being attacked by a female werewolf.
Supposedly, it is a family curse, "the curse of the Allenbys." Phyllis wakes up in the morning to find blood on her clothes and dirt tracks on the floor of her bedroom.More, I won't say, since it will spoil the mystery for those who haven't seen the movie."She-Wolf" is more of a Gothic thriller than a monster movie.
It does have June Lockhart in an early role...along with Martin Kosleck in a ambivalent rather than evil role, and Dennis Hoey playing a surprisingly adept Scotland Yard inspector (he must have finally won a bet with a studio executive and got away from the bumbling Lestrade of the Rathbone/Bruce Sherlock Holme's movies).
The movie has great sets, though I assume they are redressed from some other Universal horror film...they do look somewhat familiar.On the other hand, this movie is dull...and the plot is easy to figure out after about fifteen minutes.
June Lockhart plays a young heiress who believes a series of murders in London is her fault, seems there is a family history of family members turning into werewolves.
London at the turn of the century---The legend of the Allenby Curse was almost forgotten until------ She-Wolf of London is produced by that bastion of classic horror, Universal Pictures.
Directed by Jean Yarbrough and starring June Lockhart and Don Porter, the title clearly evokes the earlier Werewolf of London (1935) and conjures up images of either a girlfriend of Larry Talbot or Wilfred Glendon running amok.
As history now tells us, She-Wolf of London is more concerned with mystery and suspense than the supernatural themes that ran thru other Universal wolf based movies.Running at a brisk 61 minutes, She-Wolf feels more like a Sherlock Holmes picture minus that particularly intrepid sleuth actually being in it.
Instead, this creaky potboiler utilises a plot that must have seemed trite even way back in 1946: a pretty young heiress, Phyllis Allenby (June Lockhart), believes that she has fallen victim to the lycanthropic Allenby curse unaware that her 'aunt' Martha (Sara Haden) is actually trying to drive her insane so that she can a) lay claim to the family fortune, and b) set up her own daughter Carol (Jan Wiley) with Phyllis's fiancé Barry (Don Porter).If you can't guess what is happening after Martha has given Phyllis her umpteenth warm drink to help her sleep, then you really should consider giving up watching films and take up something less taxing on the brain, like basket weaving perhaps.
Disappointing mystery film from Universal falsely advertised as a horror movie.
There's no suspense and if you can't predict who the killer is, congratulations on seeing your first movie ever.June Lockhart, years from being immortalized as one of the great TV moms, plays the lead character as doe-eyed and dull-witted.
Having seemingly ended the 'Wolf Man' franchise with the previous year's heavily flawed "House of Dracula", Universal Studios set their sights on a different kind of werewolf altogether ...A series of horrible murders have been occurring in London, and many suspect a 'wolf woman' is to blame.
She-Wolf of London) is not a terrible film but it's not particularly great either and one of Universal's weakest overall.It's the production values that makes The Curse of the Allenbys watchable, the sets are truly beautiful and rich in Gothic atmosphere, especially the fog-shrouded park, and the photography is equally handsome.
A couple of performances are also decent, Sara Haden being excellent even while Dennis Hoey is in the Inspector role again but with a different and more subtle and intelligent approach to his Lestrade in the Sherlock Holmes Universal series.June Lockhart was a highly dependable actress but while she is entrancing in the looks department this is really not one of her best roles, it's a blandly written character to begin with but Lockhart acts with too much doe-eyed passivity.
Offcourse it's always fun to see a movie That I've never seen before (at least I think so), and after all it's just around an hour so, so it's not that bad.I have a feeling that if this story was made in the 50's it would be on one of those early TV Theatric shows, that was popular in the 50s, it could even have worked in a 30 minutes Alfred Hitchcock serial,, or why not go a few steps longer and say it would have been an acceptable episode in Angela Lansbury's Murder She Wrote episodes.Anyway She-Wolf is according to the old edition of The Universal Story "A Thriller that wanted to be a Chiller that turned out to be a Filler".The movie is OK as a Filler!
June Lockhart-years before appearing in TV series like "Lassie" and the original "Lost in Space"-plays a young woman who thinks she's responsible for some murders at night because of a family curse.
June Lockhart of 'Lassie' and 'Lost in Space' fame stars in this one as Phyllis Allenby, a young heiress who fears that an ancient family curse - that of werewolf-ism - is plaguing her.
Naturally, her fiancée Barry Lanfield (Don Porter) is more than a little concerned, while those steadfast men of Scotland Yard try to keep people safe from what appear to be dog attacks.Don't go into "She-Wolf of London" expecting a horror film, or any woman to werewolf and back again transformations.
(Say, maybe it is a horror film.)A young heiress, Phyllis Allenby (June Lockhart), believes herself to be the latest victim of a family curse, which supposedly turns her into a werewolf at night, a belief reinforced by the strange murders happening around London.
Meanwhile, the lady of the house, Martha Winthrop (Sara Haden), who is supposedly Phyllis's aunt, reveals to her daughter Carol (Jan Wiley) that neither of them is actually related to Phyllis; Martha was really the family housekeeper when Phyllis's parents were killed.A real mystery is why the above revelation occurs early in the film.
While a title such as SHE-WOLF OF LONDON might indicate a long delayed sequel to the first cycle of Universal horror's WEREWOLF OF LONDON (1935) starring Henry Hull, with the plot dealing with one of the female survivors of a werewolf attack cursed to becoming a she-wolf herself, the movie overall only promises thriller by title and murder mystery by story instead.
There's no traditional horror actors as Bela Lugosi or Lionel Atwill to add to the proceedings, but fresh young faces and future television personalities as Don Porter and June Lockhart in the leads.Opening title: "London at the turn of the Century - The Legend of the Allenby curse was almost forgotten until ...
Upon investigation, Harry Lanfield (Don Porter), an young lawyer, is enjoying his horseback ride with his fiancée, Phyllis Allenby (June Lockhart), where the murders had occurred.
Dennis Hoey, best known as Inspector Lestrade in the "Sherlock Holmes" mystery series (1942-1946), resumes his familiar characterization from those movies into this one.While SHE-WOLF OF LONDON wasn't in the werewolf tradition, especially those "Wolf Man" thrillers of the 1940s starring Lon Chaney Jr., it did offer a change of pace theme of a female to be a prowling and growling monster killer rather than the traditional man.
Overlooking these facts, the story gets by during its quick 62 minutes, especially viewing a youthful June Lockhart in a rare leading movie role of the time some years before she was a familiar television personality in such programs as "Timmy and Lassie" (1957-1963); "Lost in Space" (1965-1968), and the final two seasons of "Petticoat Junction" (1968-1970).
While Lockhart is the central character here, veteran actress, Sara Haden, best known as Aunt Milly in the "Andy Hardy" film series (1938-1946), gathers most attention in a showy performance as the domineering mother and caring aunt, along with Eily Malyon as the suspecting housekeeper.
There's also a nice touch of camera slanting near the finish reminiscing director Alfred Hitchcock visual style like NOTORIOUS (1946), and brief gothic touches reminiscent to the Val Lewton horror unit for RKO Radio (1943-1946) as I WALKED WITH A ZOMBIE (1943).Once presented on Shock Theater /Fright Night trades of broadcast television some decades ago, and formerly available on video cassette, SHE-WOLF OF LONDON can be found as a bonus addition to the "Werewolf" movie package on DVD (**1/2).
"She-Wolf of London" comes right at the end of the horror cycle from "Universal" studios.
1946's "She-Wolf of London," nearing the end of Universal's lucrative wartime horror boom (1939-1946), offers only a few foggy sets to indicate its intention as a mystery (it was included in the SHOCK!
Ulmer's "Daughter of Dr. Jekyll." As our heroine, the young and attractive June Lockhart fails to overcome her character's tiresome deficiencies, while top billed Don Porter can do little but look concerned as her fiancée (actress Jan Wiley made only two more films before calling it quits, three more for Eily Malyon).
Curiously, while "WereWolf of London" aired eight times on Pittsburgh's Chiller Theater, "She-Wolf of London" wasn't far behind with seven: Mar 19 1966 (following 1957's "Beginning of the End"), Dec 31 1966 (following 1958's "Attack of the 50 Foot Woman"), May 17 1969 (following 1964's "Dr. Orloff's Monster"), Jan 20 1973 (solo), July 26 1975 (following 1966's "Picture Mommy Dead"), June 24 1978 (preceding 1937's "Night Key"), and Oct 15 1983 (solo)..
She-Wolf of London (1946) * (out of 4) Extremely bad Universal flick about a small town who falls victim of various werewolf attacks and the young woman (June Lockhart) who thinks she might be the monster.
I guess the unique movie about lycanthropy which there not a single one, so then starting this misleading premisse the picture no make sense was sugested the title itself, therefore all things falling down under this point, forgetting this the picture has some fine aspects to discuss here, the suspence atmosphere of London's fog is largely used in the nights scenes in the park, leting an anxious audience try to discover an ill-fated she-wolf, how Martha Winthrop ( Sara Haden ) handling by an easy spoken driven crazy the leading character played by June Lockhart from LIS is quite convincing, acceptable work that tawdry when realize that there no she-wolf actually!!!Resume:First watch: 2012 / How many: 2 / Source: DVD / Rating: 6.5.
It doesn't take long to figure out that "She-Wolf of London" is more of a crime mystery than a supernatural horror film, and it becomes more suspicious with every passing moment the werewolf isn't revealed.
Truth is, it's not going to help just hoping for something good.Phyllis Allenby (June Lockhart) is about to be married, but she lives with a deadly secret: That at night, she becomes transformed into a killer who is rampaging London.
Sara Haden hovers around the impressive interior set as Phyllis's guardian, bristling effectively at the insolence of her daughter Carol (Jan Wiley) and their lone domestic, Hannah (played by the only real English person in the house, Eily Malyon), but like everyone else, she is cossetted by a story and script that insists on propriety at every turn, until we get to that ridiculous ending where instead of people walking up stairs, we get to see one running down them instead.I won't spoil it for you, because that would require explaining it and I'm not Stephen Hawking.
Jean Yarbrough directed this late entry in Universal Studios horror cycle, a most disappointing affair starring attractive and pleasant June Lockhart as Phyllis Allenby, who suspects that a rumored family curse involving werewolves seems to be affecting her, since a brutal series of murders are occurring that seem to be the work of an animal.
Good cast and some atmosphere can't save a most unsatisfying film with a deceptive title, since this is more a mystery than horror picture, with the revelation of the killer being most mundane and unbelievable..
The title leads one to believe that this is going to be a horror movie - I watched it myself as part of a collection of classic Universal werewolf movies (its inclusion in that collection leads to that expectation) and thought that the concept of a female werewolf (there really haven't been many that I can think of) would be an interesting twist to the usual werewolf stories.
It's a psychological suspense/thriller type of story about a young woman (played by June Lockhart) who believes she's a werewolf and thinks she's responsible for a series of murders in a local park - and, frankly, if you can let go of the werewolf expectation and rate this movie on its own merits, it's really quite well done.You do wonder throughout if there is a werewolf, and the identity of the killer was never really clear to me until it was brought out into the open near the end.
I will admit though, that despite being disappointed in the film and what I thought it was going to be, the plot turn at the end had me surprised.Sara Haden plays very well the nasty step-mother, and I have to admit that I was waiting for her to be among the first killed by the Were-Wolf, but to no avail.June Lockhart plays the main character, and she does a good job with one of her early and starring roles.
This is an odd little horror film from the tail end of Universal Pictures' long series of monster movies.
Phyllis Allenby(June Lockhart, oh how young she is!)believes she has her family's supposed curse of lycanthropy when a series of murders occurs in a London park near her mansion estate, where the victims' throats are mangled.
If this mystery thriller had been retitled and repackaged as a stand-alone film released through Universal completely untied to "The Wolf Man" series, it'd probably come across less a disappointment.
Phyllis Allenby (June Lockhart) is a pretty heiress, who becomes very confused after several murders in a local park in London.
You have here a lot of good atmospherics involving fog, several canines, and generally fine but somewhat routine mystery components, with competent acting and good Universal Studios production values.June Lockhart is a lovely young beginner actress in this movie.
Young heiress Phyllis Allenby (an appealing portrayal by the fetching June Lockhart) thinks she might be responsible for a series of mysterious murders in London, England park because of a family curse.While director Jean Yarbrough keeps the pace moving along at a steady clip and makes nice use of the fog-shrouded sets, he nonetheless fails to generate much in the way of either tension or spooky atmosphere.
June Lockhart (Phyllis Allenby), Don Porter (Harry Lanfield), Sara Haden (Martha Winthrop), Jan Wiley (Carol Winthrop), Dennis Hoey (Inspector Pierce), Martha Kosleck (Dwight Severn), Lloyd Corrigan (Latham), Eily Malyon (Hanna), Frederick Worlock (constable), Clara Blandick (Mrs McBroom).Director: JEAN YARBROUGH.
61 minutes.SYNOPSIS: Is June Lockhart a werewolf?U.K. release title: The CURSE OF THE ALLENBYS.COMMENT: Everyone seems to give this film a bad review.
Despite the title not a horror film--just a boring murder mystery.
Young Phyllis Allenby (June Lockhart) lives in fear of an ancient family curse that may turn her into a werewolf.
Is Phyllis a werewolf, prowling the night looking for her next victim?Other than the title, I'm not sure why Universal decided to include this one on their Wolf Man Legacy Set. She-Wolf of London has nothing in common with The Wolf Man. It's not a horror film.
While there are some nice performances from Sara Haden as the overprotective Aunt and Lloyd Corrigan as the bumbling Detective Latham, June Lockhart is horrible as the film's heroine. |
tt0051881 | The Lost Missile | The appearance of an unknown "missile-like" object in nearby space leads a European nation (unnamed, but implied to be one of the countries behind the Iron Curtain) to fire a rocket at it. Though the rocket intercepts the unidentified object, the explosion only diverts the missile into an orbit around the Earth. Racing five miles above the earth, its passage causes widespread devastation of the land below.
Meanwhile, at the Havenbrook Atomic Laboratory (a thinly veiled reference to the Brookhaven National Laboratory) in suburban New York City, Dr. David Loring and his assistant Joan Woods are preparing for their wedding later that day. Though both are in love, David is deeply committed to his work on a hydrogen warhead for the new "Jove" rocket, so much so that it has interfered with previous attempts at a wedding. Leaving work to go ring shopping, David's irritation with time spent on it leads Joan to accuse him of prioritizing work over their relationship, and she calls off the marriage.
With the missile blazing its path of destruction, a radar station on the DEW Line picks up its approach to the North American continent. Though a patrol jet diverted to intercept the missile is destroyed by the intense heat of its drive, the pilot captures a picture of it that is then transmitted to "Conad", Continental Air Defense Command. An alert mobilizes jets from the Royal Canadian Air Force, which are unable to shoot it down and are destroyed in the attempt.
With the missile projected to fly over New York City, the U.S. military orders a full mobilization. The U.S. and Canadian authorities implement civil defense procedures, preparing the cities of New York and Ottawa for the imminent passage of the missile. As Havenbrook is being evacuated, David realizes that he can use the Jove rocket to get through the missile's intense heat to destroy it, using the fission bomb "trigger" from the incomplete hydrogen warhead. While he works to prepare the plutonium for the bomb, the government orders a full evacuation of New York City. Further efforts by conventional forces to destroy the missile prove unsuccessful, and Ottawa is destroyed as it flies overhead.
As David and Joan race the nuclear core to the missile base, they are attacked by a group of young thugs who steal their jeep with the core inside. David and Joan chase after them, only to find the jeep alongside the road and the men dead from radiation poisoning after having opened the lead-lined box with the plutonium core. Knowing that exposure is fatal, David grabs the box and drives the core to the waiting rocket, loading it into the warhead before dying. The rocket is then launched, intercepting the missile over Lake Champlain and destroying it. | tragedy | train | wikipedia | When I saw it as a kid, I didn't understand the premise of the story, and as an adult, I still have problem with the premise that a runaway missile from space starts to circle around the earth by sheer chance.
If you go beyond the incredible coincidence that this missile just happened to find earth and randomly started killing its inhabitants, the movie is pretty good sci-fi from the '50s.
They try to make things look factual by using stock military footage, and use pseudonym of actual existing institution like Havenbrook (which is an obvious reference to Brookhaven National Laboratory).
It tries for a documentary-feel...but since there is a story going on with characters, it doesn't quite make it.For all this rapid development, the movie is somewhat dull when viewed nowadays, falling prey to "stock footage syndrome".
There is innumerable shots of bombers and fighters taking off...I think more time is devoted to that than dialogue.The plot is simple...an unknown missle enters the Earth's atmosphere and glides into an orbit 5 miles above the planet, which would normally be fine, but the missile has a field of million degree heat emanating from it, carving a five-mile wide swath of destruction on the ground below whereever it goes.
It destroys part of Canada (including Ottawa) and nearly gets New York City except for the heroic sacrifice of Robert Loggia.With the rapid developments, no effort is made to determine the source of the missile (and probably this would not be able to be done anyway), and this movie seems to be a showcase for the effectiveness of the US early warning system for missle attacks if nothing else (though any defense effort is pretty much pointless against this menace).Loggia is stoic in his role, displaying feats of emotion that defy his character depth.
Still, it's interesting to see him act as a young man, having seen him so often in more mature roles.The special effects are actually pretty good.
This was a cold-war era film about a missile that got locked into a deadly low earth orbit by the Germans trying to shoot it down at it initial close approach.
Released (some would say "escaped") in 1958, "The Lost Missile" is, de- spite it's many flaws and shortcomings, a fairly interesting tale about a wild missile, apparently of extraterrestrial origin, loose in the Earth's atmosphere and frying everything underneath it with a million-degree exhaust.
Robert Loggia plays Dr. David Loring, the tragic hero, and turns in a performance that is played with such lethargy and apparent disinterest that it makes you wonder if he was wondering "what was I thinking?" The rest of the cast play their parts like second- or even third-string summer stock.
Seriously though, while "The Lost Missile" may not be a great film, it isn't quite a bad one, either.
Undeniably tense and frightening, an extremely low budget film that is a clever combination of fantastic Air Force and Civil Defense stock footage with effective, chilling special effects.
This is a dead serious scenario that is creepy and its pseudo-documentary style will have you diving under your desk as the radiated missile makes it's way around the Earth destroying everything in its path.There is also an enormous amount of some rarely seen stock footage that has got to be of interest for military history buffs.
Lost Missile, The (1958) ** 1/2 (out of 4)Rarely talked about "scare" film has Robert Loggia playing a scientist who has an hour to try and create something that will stop a runaway missile that is reaching temperatures of one-million.
I was pleasantly surprised to see how great the actual story of this film was but sadly the budget is just so low that they can't do as much with it as I'm sure they had hoped.
The movie contains a great story and one can't help but think this film would have certainly scared people back in the day who feared something like this would happen.
The movie, due to its low budget, features a lot of stock footage, which gets old after a while but the movies central story is still top-notch.
Loggia does a very good job in his role and it's always great to see this underrated character actor.
Despite the equally typical inclusion of a romantic couple, the film is pretty much put across in a documentary style - which is perhaps a cheap way of leaving a lot of the exposition to narration and an excuse to insert as much stock footage as is humanly possibly for what is unmistakably an extremely low-budget venture!
Nothing very much here to report except for a mad speech by a scientist against the project because there might be some sort of life aboard and think of the scientific possibilities but this speech made by the obligatory idiot liberal was pretty much passé by then.What saves this film, somewhat uniquely, IS the stock footage.
There is a very strange shot of a late model F-84 (prototype?) with a straight wing early model F-85 above it in a turn, obviously a manufacturer's (Republic Aviation) advertising film showing the differences between the old and the new improved models of the F-84 ThunderJet. How it strayed into here is anybodies guess.There is other great stock footage of Ottawa in the old days when the capital of Canada was a wide spot in the road and especially wonderful footage of New York City's Times Square during one of the Civil Defense Drills in the early 50s.
Canada must have been cheap and it is rather gratuitously used a lot in the background.As far as the actual narrative of the film there is little to recommend it other than the mystery of just who Ellen Parker is giving the finger to at the end of the picture.
Yes, there is plenty of stock footage for a film that isn't even 75 minutes long.
Well, the story is entertaining as we follow the exploits of a hydrogen missile or some alien missile as it blazes its way from Alaska through Canada on its way to New York City turning everything it passes over nothing more than a burned cinder.
The story sees an alien craft knocked off course by a Russian missile, bringing it into an orbit low enough for its speed and radiation to burn away any thing that it passes over, unfortunate given that its path will lead it in time to burn away the entire surface of the Earth.
Sadly the budget doesn't allow for any notable effects work, the missile is simply a crude model accompanied by screaming sound, while most of the action is accomplished with stock footage.
Acting is generally sound, though there isn't much to raise the characters above stock levels the actors are committed, Robert Loggia is a solid hero, Ellen Parker attractive and likable (also smarter than average) as his assistant, whilst supporting actors are generally sound if unspectacular.
My only problems with this one stem from its lost potential, I hate to criticise a film like this on reasons related to budget, but this one really doesn't do much justice to the destructive potential of the missile and it's rather regrettable.
I remember watching "Lost Missile" (actually throwing a fit until my brother and several cousins at whose home I was an overnight guest agreed to watch it with me - I was, from time to time, the Eric Cartman of the 1960s - sorry, guys) and being somewhat embarrassed when the sustained wave of million-degree heat emerged as a plot device - even as a second-grader I knew that a mere missile just couldn't carry the energy around for that much heat or devastation over more than the duration and limited radius of a nuclear detonation.
The acting isn't bad (apart from the Shatnerism of the actor who played a governor's aide that someone else here mentioned).But the idea of a missile Easy-Baking the surface of the Earth by means of the heat of its exhaust...
But I will remove from my summary opinion these minor and understandable chinks in the armor.LOST MISSILE is a near-great film if not right UP THERE with the best of the genre.
Of course, stock footage has been forbidden in recent times because of its apparent lack of integrity to film-making.
So it appears that it might have had some future influence in the genre.This film should be seen by all sci-fi buffs - it is fun and it contains some thrilling moments in the best 50s style they could conjure up in those days.
It begins with an acknowledgement of assistance from the Departments of Defence and the Army, Navy and Air Force, which means that the sometimes disturbing things the film shows received official blessing; and its copious use of stock footage throughout often make it feel like a public awareness film constructed around a fictitious plot.It's a real curate's egg of a film, lurching abruptly from the clumsy to the highly effective on a scene by scene (and even shot by shot) basis.
Boy would Isis like to get a hold of one of these.This missile looks like one of your rocketship from some old science fiction movie, only it emanates heat of a million degrees as it passes over the earth destroying all in its path.
It takes out Ottawa in Canada and is heading for New York.A bigger budget with some nice production values and this could have been a science fiction classic.
The Lost Missile was one of those movies I used to see on Saturday afternoon TV as a kid - it used to scare the heck out of me!
The movie is primarily concerned with knocking it down.The acting is somewhat melodramatic at points The story, typical for its time, has (for us nowadays) cheesy special effects - the missile looks like a drawing which to someone has added a flashing light bulb for a tail.
The movie uses a lot of stock Defense footage - we see F-89 Scorpions, which carried a large number of unguided missiles in two wing tip pods, firing at the rocket, as well as F-86's, F-100's, F-94, B-52, B-36 - you name it!
But How!Top US nuclear scientist atomic physicists and aeronautical engineer Dr. David Loring, Robert Loggia, has to postpone his wedding plans with his fiancée and fellow scientist Joan Woods, Ellen Parker, at the prestigious Heavenbrook Atomic Labs outside New York City in order to stop the runaway missile from setting the world on fire!
With it's fantastic speed of 4,200 MPH the missile generates heat of over one million degrees which knocks out and burns to a crisps any plane that comes within five miles of it!
Having found out, were never shown how, that the missile is being operated by aliens from space Dr. Freed wants to have it and its alien crew saved for future studies, in the knowledge that the aliens can provide the human race, in scientific advancements!As if things aren't going bad enough for Dr. Loring in his attempt to stop the lost missile, with a baby nuke that he devised, from obliterating the earth he together with Joan are carjacked by these 1950's greasers, or leather jacketed teenagers, on their way to the nearest USAF missile site.
The unaware teens not knowing what their dealing with by being exposed to the plutonium, from he baby nuke, in Dr. Lorings' jeep soon end up being fatality radiated by it!***SPOILERS*** With time and the films' meager budget quickly running out Dr. Loring makes it to the missile launch site with the baby nuke and knowing, by being exposed to it, that his life is kaput willfully sacrifices himself by putting the radiation emitting baby nuke into the missile's, known as Jobe, nose-comb.
It's then that Jobe does its job, by knocking out the runaway missile, in saving the earth until another day or another movie like "The Lost Missile" comes around.Skillfully spliced and integrated stock footage makes "The Lost Missile" hit its mark in keeping its audience glued to the screen without the special effects, of the 1950's, that the film so obviously lacks.
The German government decided to launch rockets up into space just as the missile approaches and inadvertantly knocks it into earth orbit at a very low altitude.
A rocket apparently of extra-terrestrial origin threatens to destroy mankind by circling the earth at low altitudes and generating a million degree heat five miles wide incinerating everything in its path It's up to scientist Dr. David Loring (Robert Loggia) to formulate a last-ditch plan to save the world.Clocking in at about 70 minutes with a lot of stock footage and less than spectacular special effects, "Lost Missile" is still an underrated B-movie classic which manages to use that stock footage and shoestring budget to great effect.
While it is easy to dismiss The Lost Missile for its repetitious use of stock footage and slightly Ed Wood'ish sets, I can easily overlook such typical low budget 50's set-backs and relish in this truly all out action packed end of the world flick!
I recorded this on my DVR along with two other movies showing the same day on TCM as a 50's sci fi triple feature (the other two were The H Man, and The 27th Day), I thought all were interesting since I had never seen or heard of them before, but The Lost Missile was truly my favorite of them and it ranks in kick butt factor a solid 10.
Most sci fi of the late 50's to now has a touchy feely story (ie The 27th Day for instance and to some extent in the closing of the H Man), not The Lost Missile, it is 100% adrenaline!
It (the Missile) takes out a lot of humans and gives you an almost real time till the end of the world feel (you've got 70 minutes!).
Lots of civil defense stock footage as well, this is pretty much a nuke war toe to toe with the Rooskies (as Slim Pickens might refer to them) movie except the enemy is an indestructible rocket that burns large swaths of the earth as it flies around the atmosphere in global circles.
it has all the same trappings as a major WW3 D day and should appeal not just to sci fi buffs but those into nuclear war films like Panic At Year Zero fans.
Not that bad, but it sinks due to an overuse of stock footage AND poor special effects--even for a 1950s sci-fi film..
The story idea behind THE LOST MISSILE isn't bad at all, but unfortunately the story does get a bit dull towards the middle and the overuse of stock footage as well as poor special effects sink this film to the sub-par level.The film begins with a missile heading towards the Earth.
So, it's up to the good scientists of the US (led by a very young and hardly recognizable Robert Loggia) to formulate and plan to save us--and especially save New York that is in its immediate flight path!
This had all the makings of a very good film -- good actors (Robert Loggia, Ellen Parker), a good plot (mysterious missile from space threatens to burn up the planet) and lots of stock footage (if the Air Force had film of jets firing rockets, it was used).
Unfortunately, it is ruined by too much melodrama and an impossible time-line.The movie concerns a missile from space that is attacked by the Soviets and inadvertently diverted into a low atmospheric orbit.
At under five miles and at a speed in excess of 4,000 miles, it emits an exhaust of a million degrees, burning up everything on the ground, including glaciers, Distant Early Warning (DEW) line bases and Eskimos.Every attempt at destroying the missile fails.The first flaws in this film appear early on.
While we don't expect much from low-budget films, some things can't be forgotten -- like a little research.
The only good actor is the film narrator, played by veteran character actor Lawrence Dobkins ("Naked City").All of this could be overlooked if it wasn't for the time-line.
A general (Larry Kerr) announces that the missile will hit New York City in 63 minutes.
Eight million people scramble to fallout shelters while school buses pick up millions of kids (and we get to see the whitest New York City I've ever seen, though watching 50's sci-fi films made it seems like this was the standard).
Then, to add fuel to the fire, Loggia somehow thinks of a way to stop the alien missile.
It was worse than "27 Days" where an alien gives five Earthlings the chance to either save or destroy the planet and he doesn't include any blacks or Hispanics.I saw this on a special Sci-fi night on Turner Classic Movies and I don't expect it to show up again.
Obvious stock footage looks like a bad newsreel or school made documentary.
This doesn't seem like a theatrical film, but obviously got some big screen release even though it probably looked ten times poorer than it does on television.
Maybe the reason that all the sci-fi geeks like this flick is because it features an appearance of that beloved science fiction stereotype; the scientist that wants the deaths to continue in the vain hope that they can communicate with the alien menace!!
The Lost Missile relies on stock footage (you see the same B-66 take off at least 3 times in the "maximum defense" montage) and EXTREMELY limited animation/rotoscoping, but if you can get past that, the story is surprisingly good right up until the "this is the MacGuffin that will save us, so we'll ship it without a proper military escort" plot device near the end (the same stupidity as seen in the War of the Worlds).Oddly, the science behind the story isn't all that flaky. |
tt0044953 | The Naked Spur | In March 1868, Howard Kemp (James Stewart) is tracking Ben Vandergroat (Robert Ryan), who is wanted for the murder of the marshal in Abilene, Kansas.
On the western slope of the Rocky Mountains in Southwestern Colorado, Kemp meets a grizzled old prospector, Jesse Tate (Millard Mitchell), and offers him $20 to help. Tate assumes that Kemp is a sheriff, and Kemp does nothing to disillusion him.
They trap someone on top of a rocky hill who Kemp is convinced must be his wanted man. Rockslides force a retreat. Looking for a way around the hill, Kemp and Tate encounter a Union soldier, Lieutenant Roy Anderson (Ralph Meeker). He has been discharged from the 6th Cavalry at Fort Ellis in Bozeman and is heading east. Tate questions why Anderson isn't on the Bozeman Trail. Anderson's story is that there are some "bad tempered Indians" whose chief's daughter fell in with a handsome young army lieutenant. Kemp has a chance to see Anderson's discharge order in which he is described as "morally unstable" and given a dishonorable discharge.
Tate tells Anderson that Kemp is a sheriff. With the aid of Anderson, who scales a sheer cliff face, Vandergroat is caught, along with his companion, Lina Patch (Janet Leigh), the daughter of Vandergroat's friend, Frank Patch, who was shot dead trying to rob a bank in Abilene.
Vandergroat sets Tate and Anderson straight on two facts: that Kemp is no lawman, and that a reward is offered to bring him in — $5,000 — dead or alive. Tate and Anderson want their shares to aid Kemp in getting Vandergroat back to Kansas. Lina is convinced that her father's friend is innocent.
On the trail to Abilene, Vandergroat attempts to turn his captors against each other, using greed as his weapon. He also encourages Lina to use her beauty to divide Kemp and Anderson. When scouting a way through a mountain pass, Kemp and Tate spot a dozen Blackfeet, a normally friendly tribe, far from their normal hunting grounds. They tell the others, and Anderson confesses that the Indians are after him. Kemp tells Anderson to hightail it out of there to avoid being captured by the Blackfeet. Anderson thinks Kemp just wants a bigger share of the reward money. He rides ahead, and from his position hidden behind a fallen tree trunk, with his rifle he elects to pick off a chief of the Blackfeet, at the moment Kemp's group have confronted the Indians and are about to engage them in talk.
During the ensuing battle, Kemp saves Lina from the Blackfeet and she, in turn, helps him when he is shot in the leg. Later, Kemp passes out on the trail and awakes from a delirious nightmare. He thinks Lina is Mary, his ex-fiancée. Vandergroat tells the others that Mary sold Kemp's ranch, which he left in her safekeeping, while he was serving in the army during the Civil War, and then went off with another man. Vandergroat further reveals that Kemp is determined to buy his ranch back, and that it can't happen if he splits the reward money with Anderson and Tate.
Lina's feelings of loyalty to her father's friend, combined with an attraction to Kemp, confuses her. She has never seen Vandergroat hurt anyone unless it was in a fair fight but after he loosens Kemp's saddle cinch and tries to push him off a high mountain pass, Lina's sympathies for Kemp grow.
Taking refuge from a storm in a cave, Vandergroat manipulates Lina into distracting Kemp. She tells the rancher of her dream to go to California, where no one knows her and she can make a fresh start. He tells her of his wish to repurchase his ranch. They kiss, and this gives Ben a chance to escape. Kemp catches Vandergroat, and Anderson suggests that, because the reward is for a "dead or alive" criminal, they should just kill the troublemaker. Tate stops Anderson but, caught up in the anger of the moment and hurt by what he sees as Lina's treachery, Kemp challenges Vandergroat to a shoot out. The wanted man declines to take part.
Next day, the group comes to a high-running river. They argue about whether to cross or go down stream. Anderson grabs a rope and throws it around Vandergroat's neck and says he'll drag him across the river. A fight ensues between Kemp and Anderson, as Vandergroat watches with malicious enjoyment. Kemp finally manages to kick Anderson unconscious. While Kemp and Anderson recover from the fight and Lina searches for firewood, Vandergroat convinces Tate to sneak off with him to find a gold mine, the whereabouts of which Vandergroat has been tempting the old man with. When they depart during the night, he convinces Tate to take Lina along.
Vandergroat and Lina ride double; Tate follows, holding a rifle on them. Ben suddenly yells, "Snake!" and in the confusion grabs Tate's rifle from him and kills him. He fires two more shots in order to lure Kemp and Anderson to a spot where he intends to kill them. Lina finally sees Vandergroat for what he is.
Kemp and Anderson discover Tate's body where Vandergroat has positioned it for an ambush from the high cliff. Preparing to shoot Kemp, Vandergroat is caught off guard when Lina grabs the rifle barrel, saving Kemp's life. While Anderson exchanges gunfire with Vandergroat, Kemp removes one of his spurs to aid in climbing up the back of the cliff to outflank Vandergroat. He uses the spur as a combination climbing ax and makeshift piton.
Vandergroat, hearing Kemp, gets the drop on the rancher. However, before he can pull the trigger, Kemp throws his spur into the killer's left cheek. As Ben reels from the pain of the spur, he is shot by Anderson and his body falls into the nearby river, becoming entangled in the roots of a tree. Anderson lassos a branch on the other side of the river and crosses using the rope. He then wraps it around Ben's body but is crushed by a large tree stump barrelling down the river.
Kemp grabs the rope and drags Vandergroat's body across the river and, in a rage, vows that he will take him back to reclaim his land. Lina pleads with him not to take blood money for bringing Vandergroat in. She says she will go with him, no matter what, marry him, and live with him on the ranch. Kemp realizes what he is doing and his love for Lina makes him stop. He begins digging a grave to bury Vandergroat and they decide to make for California, leaving their pasts behind. | good versus evil, violence, murder | train | wikipedia | What I imagine makes THE NAKED SPUR stand out among other Westerns is its close, intimate focus on a small band of characters--for once, the motivations of the cynical bounty-hunter, the luckless gold prospector, the brash ne'er-do-well, the slick outlaw are actually all explored and explained as best as psychology can allow.
James Stewart turns in a riveting performance as Howard Kemp, the embittered rancher turned bounty-hunter, who is seeking outlaw Ben Vandergroat (Robert Ryan) for the $5000 price on the latter's head.
What Howard doesn't gamble on is the people added on to his journey along the way--the prospector Jesse Tate (Millard Mitchell), who's been running after gold all his life but has never managed to catch up to it; the reckless ex-soldier Roy Anderson (Ralph Meeker), discharged from the army for being 'morally unstable'; and the young feisty Lina Patch (Janet Leigh), Ben's companion.Throw this bunch of opposites in a trek back to Abilene, Kansas is a recipe for great drama: for example, the mini Indian massacre Roy brings about that gets Howard shot in the leg; the rock avalanche Ben starts to try to escape after sending Lina to distract Howard...
Ryan is slimily charming, Mitchell plays Jesse straight and honestly, Leigh brings off a rather thankless, almost characterless role well (her character is probably the least well developed in the film).
Howard is driven and relentless, as evidenced with the near psychosis he brings to his task of capturing Ben. From his sullenness when Ben reveals how much the capture really is worth, through to the final exciting sequence when Kemp pulls himself up the rock to face his nemesis (thereafter making it clear why the film is given the title of 'The Naked Spur'), Howard Kemp is evidently a man who no longer trusts even *himself* to do the good thing.
Perhaps, they felt one nomination was enough for a movie about greed...James Stewart (as Howard Kemp), Janet Leigh (as Lina Patch), Robert Ryan (as Ben Vandergroat), Ralph Meeker (as Roy Anderson), and Millard Mitchell (as Jesse Tate) are an outstanding Colorado quintet.
We shouldn't be to be too greedy about great movies, after all.********* The Naked Spur (2/6/53) Anthony Mann ~ James Stewart, Robert Ryan, Janet Leigh, Ralph Meeker.
That the action takes place against the backdrop of the West cleverly conceals that the movie is a drama as much as anything else; almost Bergmanesque in its spareness, it deals more with the psychology of greed and revenge than with more traditional western themes, such as honor, which scarcely figures in the story.Stewart plays a bounty hunter who is chasing after outlaw Robert Ryan for personal as much as monetary reasons.
One never knows where Stewart stands with any of them till the end, as the power struggles that ensue are continuous and unrelenting, driving Stewart to near nervous breakdown.This is neither a happy nor optimistic movie, and its high quality is typical of so many westerns of the fifties, managing to deal with serious psychological, moral, even economic issues in ways that were nearly impossible in films set in contemporary times.
James Stewart and Anthony Mann worked together on several films during the 1950's, and this film, "The Naked Spur", represents a very satisfying effort, pooling the collective talents of a great star with a renowned director and letting a story tell itself on film.There is very little action in the sense of a normal western, no shootouts in the streets, no bar-room brawls, no breakouts from the jail, or even a bank robbery.
There is no town, period; the film was made outdoors in Colorado, and the scenery simply enhances and enriches the plot of the film.Basically, James Stewart plays a bounty hunter, Howard Kemp, who has a chance to catch a major outlaw, Ben Vandergroat portrayed by Robert Ryan.
Ryan, in a starkly brilliant performance, also attempts to create chances to escape.In watching the film develop, one has to wonder if Kemp will ultimately, due to his hardened nature, surrender Ben to the authorities, or will he simply let the outlaw go, and try to make a fresh start elsewhere.
Although JAMES STEWART is the nominal big name star, it's Ryan's charming, snake-like villain who dominates this rugged western despite strong performances from the entire cast.
Stewart's character is given strong motivation for his deeds but Janet Leigh, as the outlaw's girlfriend, has a role that is not plausibly explained.Photographed in Colorado's Rocky Mountains, it's a rugged kind of technicolor western that gives all of the performers physically demanding roles--and all of them are more than up to it.Stewart, Leigh, Mitchell and Meeker are all superb--but it's Robert Ryan's devious villain that will linger longest in the memory..
There is a villain, and Robert Ryan plays a great one, but James Stewart's character, Howard Kemp, is no hero.
The Naked Spur is another fine western put together by the team of Director Anthony Mann and player James Stewart.
Spectacular location photography in the Rocky Mountains lend a ring of authenticity to the story.That story being Stewart as a bounty hunter on the trail of outlaw/killer Robert Ryan who has a girl a long with him in the attractive form of Janet Leigh.
In fact the title of the picture gives a hint of how James Stewart uses a spur in a unique manner against Ryan.For fans of westerns and I think non-western fans will find the drama and interaction among the characters entertaining..
A bounty hunter(James Stewart) is on the trail of a murderer(Robert Ryan)who is headed toward California with a lovely younger woman(Janet Leigh).
In the lead, bull-headed James Stewart does his usual shouting thing; supporting cast, however, is exceptional, particularly Millard Mitchell, Ralph Meeker as a dishonorably discharged officer (being chased by Blackfoot Indians!), and Robert Ryan as their target.
A bounty hunter called Howard Kemp (James Stewart) trying to bring a murderer to justice is forced to accept the help of two less-than-trustworthy strangers (Millard Mitchell , Ralph Meeker) .
James Stewart has made a career of portraying loners in western features, especially with Anthony Mann as the director, and this film ranks as one of their best.
Super western, with beautiful scenery and an excellent cast.The plot centers on a cowboy bounty hunter bringing back, dead or alive, an outlaw and to achieve this purpose the cowboy must navigate the rugged countryside of the 1860's, and in the process has to fend off the elements, including the weather and terrain, Indians, and others who want a share of the bounty, plus there is "love" interest in the guise of the bad man's moll.The outlaw is not only a real man, but is a real "baddie" too, and steals the show with his portrayal and the mind games he plays on the others in the story.There is a rawness and ruggedness about this picture, and in my view deserves to be regarded as a classic with the super cinematography of the apparent realistic scenes showing the "wild west".Current film makers should take note that despite this movie being well over 50 years old, what with its' rugged realism and dynamism it surpasses most modern day flicks.8/10..
In fact, the whole story (except for a cave sequence) takes place outdoors.Howard Kemp (Stewart) is on the trail of outlaw Ben Vandergroat (Robert Ryan).
There are 5 excellent performances by Stewart, Robert Ryan (both real-life war heroes as compared to today's liberal wimps), Ralph Meeker, Millard Mitchell,and Janet Leigh.
Whether it was James Stewart, Janet Leigh or Ralph Meeker playing a character, there wasn't a "good guy" in the bunch.There are hundreds of westerns better than this one..
Trailing outlaw Ben Vandergroat (Robert Ryan) up in the Rocky Mountains, Kemp falls in with elderly prospector, Jesse (Millard Mitchell), and renegade army officer, Anderson (Ralph Meeker).
Capturing Vandergroat, who also has his girlfriend, Lina Patch (Janet Leigh), in tow, this small posse must undertake the arduous journey thru the wilderness-with Vandergroat trying to turn the other travellers against Kemp.The third film of five remarkable Westerns that director Anthony Mann made with James Stewart as his leading protagonist.
Of the classic westerns James Stewart made with Anthony Mann I would rate "The Man from Laramie" first, "Winchester '73" second, and this one "The Naked Spur" third.
Stewart's performance is one his very best in an almost anti-hero role; Millard Mitchell is outstanding; Robert Ryan is a superb (and snaky) villain; Meeker is an oily jerk, and Janet Leigh shines in an early role for her.
That same gentle, sensitive family man in It's A Wonderful Life and even his many Westerns as an endearing and humbling hero, in The Naked Spur he is a desperate bounty hunter; stubbled, snarling, raving from Civil War psychological battle scars.Whether that was intended for the benefit of his career, he does it convincingly, with the giant film-set backdrop of the Rockies and alongside Robert Ryan as his bounty and Janet Leigh (who looks quite out of place but as go-between, impromptu nurse and object of desire) this a psychological battle.
Janet Leigh, Ralph Meeker and Millard Mitchell provide solid support.Of all the Westerns James Stewart and Anthony Mann made together, this one probably holds together best.
In The Naked Spur, Stewart's character, Howard Kemp, is a bounty hunter who is tracking down a wanted murderer, deep in the Colorado Rockies and wilderness.
Howard has captured a man who is wanted for murder and has a reward set at $5,000.00 and he also has with him a very young gal named Lina Patch, (Janet Leigh) who won't leave him, Ben Vandergroat, (Robert Ryan).
As this group make their way through woods and mountains, they meet up with other men, like Roy Anderson, (Ralph Meeker) who was a soldier in the Civil War and has a dishonorable discharge from the Army and he wants to get in on this reward money for Ben Vandergroat.
A slight but thoughtful character study that focuses on bounty hunter Howard Kemp (Jimmy Stewart) as he attempts to bring in the wily Ben Vandergroat (Robert Ryan), with differing amounts of aid and setbacks from his two partners (a former Army officer (Ralph Meeker) and ineffective miner (Millard Mitchell)) and Vandergroat's "girl", Lina Patch (Janet Leigh).
Out of the five Stewart-Mann westerns, Winchester '73 is definitely the best, with Bend of the River, The Naked Spur, The Far Country, and of course, Man From Laramie coming up close behind.
As in The Pardoner's Tale, Mann's characters have problems sharing the wealth they have chanced upon, but in The Naked Spur, there is a psychological development that is considerably more complex than Chaucer's simple morality lesson that "money is the root of all evil".Stewart's character Howard Kemp is a man who has been morally wounded through betrayal (by a woman), and the film is about his redemption through forgiveness, a transformation brought about by the love of another woman.
James Stewart plays a bounty hunter Howard Kemp who's after a murderer named Ben Vandergroat (Robert Ryan).The reward of $5000 is waiting for him.He runs into an old gold miner Jesse Tate (Millard Mitchell) and a discharged soldier Roy Anderson (Ralph Meeker).They have to share the reward, naturally.The villain, Ben has a young woman, Lina Patch (Janet Leigh) with him, who's more of a tomboy.But pretty she is.Together they travel on trying to stay alive in the wild nature.The Naked Spur (1953) is the third collaboration of Anthony Mann and James Stewart.It's a really fine western.The actors are great, all five of them.It's pretty awesome to watch the westerners trying to survive on those Rocky Mountains under the blue sky.And then there are those Indians.Movies don't look anything like this today..
A bounty hunter (James Stewart) trying to bring a murderer (Robert Ryan) to justice is forced to accept the help of two less-than-trustworthy strangers.This film is an odd one.
Tough, sweating with tension, and towering as tall as the breathtaking Colorado Rockies, The Naked Spur is simply one of the best Westerns (of the 1950s) ever made.Set in and around the old west town of Abilene, including its surrounding mountainous region - James Stewart plays Howie Kemp, a no-nonsense, self-styled bounty hunter who, along with his newly acquired partners, Roy and Jess, set out to track down and capture psychotic killer, Ben Vandergroat.Once Vandergroat has been successfully apprehended, he quickly stirs up tensions between his 3 captors, cleverly playing on their fears, and vanity, and their obvious greed for a bigger cut of the $5000 reward that's on his head.
Released in 1953 and directed by Anthony Mann, "The Naked Spur" is a Western starring James Stewart as an embittered rancher-turned-bounty-hunter named Kemp.
And Jimmy Stewart is of course excellent in an against-type role as the would-be hero who has too many masculine insecurities plaguing him to be truly heroic.I don't much like how the film ended and wish the filmmakers had found something better to do with Janet Leigh, but this was the early 1950s, so one can't be too surprised by the role she's given.Sam Rolfe and Harold Jack Bloom were nominated for the Best Story and Screenplay Academy Award, which they lost to Charles Brackett, Walter Reisch, and Richard Breen for "Titanic." Grade: A.
Hard to imagine James Stewart playing a character that was anything less than perfect.Good support from Janet Leigh, Robert Ryan and Millard Mitchell.
Hired bounty hunter Howard Kemp (James Stewart) has tracked Ben Vandergroat, wanted for a murder in Abilene, Kansas, to the mountains of Colorado.
James Stewart in a classical psychological western of greed and ambition.As a bounty hunter, Stewart meets up with a released Army vet (Ralph Meeker) and an aging saddle tramp, the last role of Millard Mitchell, who died in the year this film came out.Robert Ryan is the usual villain here.
With an atmospheric score by Polish composer Bronislau Kaper (one of his few scores for a western) and stunningly photographed in colour by William Mellor on locations in the Colorado Rockies it was all stylishly directed by Mann.Stewart plays Howie Kemp a bounty hunter on the trail of wanted killer Ben Vandergroft (Robert Ryan) in the rough terrain of the Rockies.
From director Anthony Mann (Winchester '73), this western sees Howard Kemp (James Stewart) meet Jesse Tate (Millard Mitchell), and then sheriff Roy Anderson (Ralph Meeker).
James Stewart and Anthony Mann teamed up again to make The Naked Spur in 1953 and it's one of their very best films.It's also much more than just a western.Instead what we are treated to here is a psychological thriller headed by an intense performance by James Stewart,as a man who's mounting hysteria is never far from the surface and could erupt at any moment.Former rancher Howard Kemp(James Stewart)rides into the Rockie Mountains in search of sadistic killer Ben Vandergroat(Robert Ryan).Ben gunned down a Marshall and there is a five thousand dollar reward for his capture.An embittered Kemp is desperate for the cash so he can buy back his ranch(which his girl stole from him when he was away fighting in war).He teams up with an elderly prospector Jesse Tate(Millard Mitchell)who's one hope is to strike Gold somewhere in the wilderness.Jesse agrees to help Howard catch Ben.Along the way they fall in with army officer Roy Anderson(Ralph Meeker)who's on the run from Indians,after sleeping with a Chief's daughter.Tracking down Ben they all get a big surprise when they discover a young girl tagging along with him.Feisty Lina Patch(Janet Leigh)is the daughter of his best friend and Ben is the only person in the world she has.Things really start to get interesting when Ben senses Howards growing tender feelings for Lina and uses them to his own advantage.What he doesn't bank on however,is that Lina may harbour similar feelings for Howard.What's so great about the Naked Spur is that you never know who's a bad guy and who's good,that even applies to Howard as at times his desire to shoot Ben nearly gets the better of him and at times comes very close to becoming deranged with anger.We know nothing about these characters only what they themselves tell us and that adds to the nail biting tension which envelopes the film.Filmed entirely on location the danger of the wilderness adds even greater strain on Kemps tattered nerves as he tries to get them all through safely to collect the reward.Highlights include an attack by Indians,Jesse demise by a raging river and Howard and Lina's poignant talk during a rain storm.Beautiful photography and location work add greatly to the power of the film..
In "The Naked Spur" which is the 3rd of 8 films between Stewart and Mann, and in this movie Stewart plays a bounty hunter named Howard Kemp who is after an outlaw named Ben Vandergroat (Robert Ryan) who is responsible for the murder of a US Marshal.
Summarizing, This western has enough action packed scenes, good acting by very famous actors such as James Stewart and Janet Leigh, beautiful scenery and classic Anthony Mann cinematography.
James Stewart, Janet Leigh, Robert Ryan, Ralph Meeker, and Millard Mitchell - what an outstanding cast!The following are my favorite sequences from "The Naked Spur".
End of movie.You have a fine if short cast here-Stewart, Mitchell, Ryan, Meeker, Leigh.
Here in this film it is his emotional psych that is being troubled as he appears to be criminal in his actions.When Howard Kemp (James Stewart) approaches a secluded plateau in pursuit of a criminal he employs the aid of prospector Jesse Tate (Millard Mitchell) and dishonorable soldier Roy Anderson (Ralph Meeker) to help him capture accused killer Ben Vandergroat (Robert Ryan) and bring him in to justice.
As the film starts it looks as if James Stewart is a Sheriff, named Howard Kemp, on the trail of murderer Ben Vandergroat; at least that is what he tells elderly prospector Jesse Tate.
Janet Leigh was good as the feisty Lina and Robert Ryan, Ralph Meeker and Millard Mitchell weren't bad as the other three men. |
tt1050880 | George of the Jungle | Five years after socialite Ursula Stanhope left civilization to marry George of the Jungle, George finds himself hard-pressed to fulfill the roles of jungle king, father, and husband. George's stress level increases when the "Mean Lion" challenges him for leadership of the jungle, and when Ursula's mother Beatrice teams up with Ursula's ex-fiancé, Lyle, in a plot to forcibly take away all that George holds most dear.
To do this, Beatrice invites Ursula, George, and George Junior to visit Las Vegas, which they accept. Throughout the visit, Beatrice and some of Ursula's fellow socialites try constantly to convince Ursula that George is unworthy of her affection. George, observing the threats but not his wife's resistance, begins to think himself unworthy of Ursula.
During the same time, George's mentor Ape has become a gambler and is in debt to several creditors, including Lyle. Upon discovering that Ape does not possess the exploitation rights of Ape Mountain, but George does, Lyle instead makes Ape work off his debts from the gambling for the next 17 years. He then engages Ape as a staged song performer and steals the deed to Ape Mountain from George's wardrobe. He thereafter sends two agents, Sally and Kowalski, to Ape Mountain, where they begin to demolish the jungle. The animals, terrified, turn to the Lion for guardianship.
Having failed to convince Ursula to divorce George, Beatrice hires a master of hypnosis to hypnotize Ursula into having no memory of having known George. The hypnotist brainwashes Ursula, giving her the idea that she had married Lyle. George, upon hearing from Beatrice that Ursula has left him, leaves his luck-charm with Ursula as she sleeps, then departs. He rescues Ape and leaves Las Vegas. Their departure triggers much commotion when the police force Bell 206 and the Animal Control Tranquilizer gun Agency join forces to recapture them.
In San Francisco, Lyle fails to persuade Ursula that he is worthy of her affection. Ursula's memory, meanwhile, is stimulated by events similar to those in which George had played a major part.
Later, George then tries to reconnect with Ursula and George Junior before leaving to rescue the jungle. He has trouble convincing her that he is her husband. Knocking her unconscious, George continues his journey back home with her, Ape, George Junior, and Rocky the kangaroo. In the jungle, George overthrows the Mean Lion and tries to convince the other animals to join him in stopping the diggers, but fails in gaining their lost trust in him until the diggers become an immediate threat. George defeats the bulldozers with the help of George Junior, Ape, Shep, Rocky and Tookie Bird.
Lyle's agents Sally and Kowalski come to destroy the tree house, only to be defeated by George and Rocky. George is unable to defeat the digging machine until his son joins the fray. Lyle and Beatrice arrive to pick up Ursula and George Junior. George manages to defeat both of them by hanging Lyle in a tree and Beatrice is kissed by Ape. Lyle is angered by his defeat and insults the narrator voice, who replies by pulling him from the story's world. George kisses Ursula, restoring her full memory of him. After reviving Ursula's friends in a similar fashion (for they had been hypnotized into forgetting George also), they subsequently renew their wedding vows and learn to find balance among George's duties. | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0106387 | Benny & Joon | As adults, Benjamin "Benny" Pearl (Aidan Quinn) and his mentally ill sister Juniper "Joon" Pearl (Mary Stuart Masterson), live together following the accidental death of their parents. Benny's friend Mike (Joe Grifasi) has his cinephile cousin Sam (Johnny Depp) staying with him. Joon joins a poker game at Mike's that Benny is unaware of, and loses a bet that commits Sam to live with the Pearls. Benny is at first outraged, but after an evening with Sam at the local diner and then coming home the next day to find Sam has cleaned the house, Benny decides Sam should be Joon's "housekeeper" since her other housekeepers had been scared away by Joon's outbursts.
Joon aids an illiterate Sam when he is struggling with writing to his mother, and the two go to the local diner where Ruthie (Julianne Moore) is working. She takes them on an errand, and then takes them home. After Ruthie stays for dinner, her car won't start, and Benny drives her home, where they set a dinner date. Meanwhile, left alone, Joon and Sam kiss. Benny and Ruthie have a fun date, but it ends abruptly because Benny wants to get home to Joon. Sam goes to a video store to try and apply for a job there. Benny, Joon and Sam go to a park where Sam starts doing Keatonesque tricks with his hat, attracting an appreciative crowd. Benny stays at the park to reflect and sends Joon home with Sam, where they make love. Sam then tells Joon he loves her which Joon reciprocates.
Benny tries to persuade Sam that he could do more with his life than be Joon's housekeeper and persuades a buddy to let Sam audition. When Benny makes suggestions to Sam about his comedy routines, Joon becomes agitated and makes Sam explain that he and Joon are romantically involved. An angry Benny throws Sam out of the house, yells at Joon, and shows her a pamphlet about a group home that Dr. Garvey (C.C.H. Pounder) thinks would be a better home for her. Joon starts hitting Benny and screaming "I hate you!", and he pushes her away. Feeling bad, Benny leaves to get her some tapioca. While Benny is away, Sam arrives. They pack suitcases and get on a bus, but Joon soon begins to hear voices in her head and argues with them, in great distress. Sam tries to soothe her, but she continues to become more agitated. The bus is stopped, and two men with the ambulance service restrain Joon. When Benny arrives at the hospital, Dr. Garvey tells him Joon doesn't want to see him. He finds Sam in the waiting room, and they argue. Sam who told Benny that he became a different person, goes to stay with Ruthie, who is an apartment manager. At that point, Benny begins to feel guilty about his treatment towards Joon.
Benny discovers Sam, now working at the video store and asks for his help. They go to the hospital. Benny apologizes to Joon for his behavior and persuades her to consider getting her own apartment and convinces her that Sam has come back for her. While being interviewed by Dr. Garvey, Joon sees Sam swinging on a platform outside her window and waving, and she states that she would like to try living in her own apartment. Dr. Garvey agrees to try out her choice. Benny and Joon reconcile, and Sam and Joon are reunited upon her release. At the end, Benny brings roses to Ruthie. He takes another bouquet upstairs to Joon's apartment but smiles and leaves the flowers in the doorway when he discovers Sam and Joon together contentedly making grilled cheese sandwiches with a clothes iron. | comedy, whimsical, dramatic, psychedelic, romantic, entertaining | train | wikipedia | Now I own it and have watched it more times than I can remember.I have heard that this movie caught a lot of flak about not being "realistic" about mental illness, and not providing a diagnosis for Joon, etc.
There was no theme of "being institutionalised forever" and there was no unrealistic expectation of a "cure".The character of Sam put it best when he said "Aside from being a little mentally ill, she's pretty normal." I think that's the best quote I've heard in a movie, on that particular topic.I also think there is a reason for there being no stated diagnosis of Joon.
He longs to be free to have other relationships, but is wracked by guilt at the idea of leaving Joon in anyone else's care.Joon is an artist and is also mentally ill, a schizophrenic who has good and bad days and who depends on Benny to provide routine in her life.
Sam is undereducated, partially illiterate but a comedic genius who studies Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton, knows catalogs of old movies, and has perfected the art form (kudos to Depp for the grace and conviction of this part of his performance).
In a particularly revealing scene, he asks Benny, as one man to another, "How sick is she?" We know he is wrestling with his feelings for her, but Benny does not, and his offhanded answer comes across as callous and almost mocking.While the handling of Sam and Joon's budding relationship may seem trite, and the humor applied to Joon's illness might seem cruel, in my experience the people who make those judgments know little about living day to day with a mentally ill - not to be confused with unintelligent - human being.
I have to say that I think Benny & Joon may be one of my favorite Johnny Depp films, along with Edward Scissorhands and Cry Baby.
I don't know much about Depp, what I've heard he is a somewhat weird character, but if you look at what he's done - Scissorhands and this movie as two examples - you have to wonder if you're not looking at one of the truly great actors of the day.
But moviegoers might remember this essentially 'feel good' movie as only another incredible Johnny Depp performance..
It is a classic love story between two lovable, quirky characters Sam and Joon.
The quirkiness of their characters complement each other while Aidan Quinn's portrayal of Benny keeps the story down to earth with his sensibility that contrasts Sam and Joon's eccentricity.
It's one of my all-time favorites.This movie deals honestly and caringly with Benny (Aidan Quinn), his mentally ill sister Joon (Mary Stuart Masterson), and Sam (Depp), who comes unexpectedly into their lives.
It is at once laugh-out-loud funny, honest, and touching.I've always appreciated that Joon's character is treated as (as Sam says) a person who is normal, "except for her mental illness." The situations are just a tad this side of wacky, but they feel very real.Seriously, if you haven't seen this movie, watch it.
Masterson's Joon is an awfully sad character that I really felt bad for, so was Depp's Sam, but they worked so well together, and had so many wonderful moments that made this film work.
Sam is a great example of Johnny Depp and his weird, crazy, off-beat kind of characters, and personally one of my favorites.
You can also see some good performances from Aidan Quinn and Oliver Platt.Other than Johnny Depp's performance, the thing I liked best about the movie is the soundtrack.
Johnny Depp's character was a great tribute to the talents of Buster Keaton and Charlie Chaplin on a subtle level and was enjoyable to watch.
It pulled no punches in displaying the difficulties that Joon faced in her mental illness and how this affected the people around her while still being an absolutely adorable movie about romance between two misfits.
This movie is not only funny and one of the best films ever but also is unique and has Johnny Depp in it.
Benny&Joon is a brother and sister played by Aidan Quinn and Mary Stuart Masterson.
Depp's character is Sam a man much influenced by Charlie Chaplin who comes into their lives and changes everything in this very gentle comedy.You have to give credit where it's due, Johnny Depp knew his talent, knew his worth, and was determined not to be pigeonholed as a teen idol that he was from his role in 21 Jump Street.
In fact only recently and I'm sure the money was too insanely good to turn down was he repeating parts as Captain Jack Sparrow.Benny is your average working man who has a garage and paints and repairs cars and he's concerned about his sister Joon who is mentally disturbed.
Anyway Quinn might just be able to get a life of his own now and fill it with Julianne Moore with whom he'd like to get something going with.The year before Benny&Joon came out, Robert Downey, Jr. did his most critically acclaimed role as Charlie Chaplin in the film Chaplin for which he won an Oscar nomination.
(Style) is probably the wrong word but anyway, the meaning behind that word that i am using is the innocence used in this film to triumph over the prejudice towards people who are not considered normal, in this case meaning Joon and Johnny depp's character in this film.
A highlight is his impersonation of some Buster Keaton and Charlie Chaplin routines.Frankly, I didn't care for the rest of the lead characters, those played by Aiden Quinn (too blasphemous) and Mary Stuart Masterson (nice at first, but then pouts all the time which gets tiresome).
The relationship between Joon and Depp's character is very sweet and brings the positive message to this movie.
Benny and Joon stars Mary Stuart Masterson, Johnny Depp and Aidan Quinn, and it's an okay movie, but the subject matter could have been a TV movie of the week just as easily as a silver screen release.
I Love Johnny Depp and he is so cute playing Sam, this is my Fav Movie EVER!
Johnny Depp was great in the film along with all the other characters.
He's not doing very good, and his friends (and Joon's psychiatrist) urge him to put Joon in a group home so he can take care of himself, but he is a very kind, empathetic man and so he doubts it.The roles are played by Mary Stuart Masterson and Aidan Quinn, and this, by itself, could've been the plot, but then the writer throws a fastball at us: at an unusual poker game Joon "wins" a friend's roommate/cousin.
The cousin is Sam (Johnny Depp) an illiterate, quiet young man who's main goal in life seems to be to live as Chaplin or Buster Keaton.
Joon falls in love with him, yes, but that alone doesn't save her, she needs her brother too, and the healing isn't completely done by the end of the film.Benny is pretty much the main character, and we see him as he reacts to the two kooks romance, and even has a romance of his own, with Ruthie (Julianne Moore) and ex-actress who is now a waitress at a nearby diner.But the movie is realistic (in a way, anyway) and all three of the main characters' lives have not been perfected by the end.
And it is fun to watch.The best scene of the movie comes around the middle, when Sam spontaneously breaks into a Chaplin/Keaton style act in the middle of a park while everyone stares in wonder (including the audience).
All three of the characters are lovable, even at their low points.The movie is a joy to watch, and its quirky comedy is fresh and fun, everyone who loves good films with big hearts should watch.7.5/10..
But what really gets me is the quirky characters and the depth caring that they have for each other.There's a lot of love in this movie.It's also got a great theme of overcoming obstacles and situations that can seem impossibly difficult.I've lost count how many times I've watched it.
The superb acting of Johnny Depp and Mary Stuart Masterson carry this movie all the way to the end.
I'd never seen it before and so sat down last night prepared for some light fluff.But, although the plot (mentally ill girl with overprotective brother who exist alone after the death of their parents) may seem familiar, the performances in this movie make it something truly special.Depp, Masterson, Quinn and Moore are perfectly cast and watching their relationships grow is a delight.There are very few movies that can make me laugh out loud when I'm by myself in my loungeroom but this one managed it several times.
He plays the eccentric character Sam who falls in love with a girl that has some mental disabilities Juniper "Joon" Pearl - it's a really nice love story.If you liked Depp in films like What's Eating Gilbert Grape (1993) and Cry-Baby (1990) then there is a chance you will enjoy Benny & Joon (1993).7.5/10.
If you want a sweet, funny comedy when you just want to chill out, then "Benny and Joon" is the film for you.I figured since it was one of the few Johnny Depp films that i hadn't yet seen and thought that i should.
He seems to effortlessly make you love Sam, the slightly quirky cousin who you can't help but smile at and want to keep for yourself.I recommend this film to any Johnny Depp fan who hasn't seen his comic side, the man is a chameleon and also to any one who just needs something to put a smile on your face.This film has won a place in my heart..
The best part of the movie being the true randomness of Joon and Sams' conversations ranging from art and painting to the real story behind raisins.Amazingly funny and sincere Benny and Joon will capture your hearts as well as your imagination.
I thought that I had seen the best Johnny Depp movie ever when I saw "What's Eating Gilbert Grape?" Then I sat down and watched "Benny and Joon." A stellar performance.
INto their lives breezes a full-on eccentric(Johnny Depp,by now fully on his way to the type of intense and remarkable performances he's now known for)named Sam who has been perfecting his reenacting of Buster Keaton routines to the point that it defines his persona.
As the lone parental unit in the relationship,the brother Benny has to learn to let go,both to his delicate sister Joon,and to his own insecurities.Delightful performances from Masterson(who sadly seems to have fewer roles sent her way anymore,it seems),Quinn,Depp,Julianne Moore(as Benny's potential love interest,and a 180 from her breakout role in "Hand that Rocks the Cradle"),DAn Hedaya and Oliver Platt(as Benny's coworker and pal) make this film easy to watch and re-watch.
Benny is late one evening so Joon plays and wins "Sam" (Johnny Depp) who has been staying with Grifasi and driving him crazy.
But beyond the story is Johnny Depp's magnificently entertaining performance of tender touches, wonderful facial expressions and brilliant Buster Keaton-like skits that put this movie into the category of one you want to own..
This movie is brilliant and I think the hard work and trouble that went into the making of this film has definitely paid off.Benny and Joon is the story of a mentally Ill young woman, Joon(Mary Stuart Masterson), and her brother, Benny(Aiden Quinn), who under unusual circumstances meet Sam(Johnny Depp) a quirky Buster Keaton-inspired misfit who has trouble with reading and Writing.
Johnny Depp is a perfect for the role of Sam and the story is one of utmost beauty and comical value.The movie is both funny and deep and includes cameos from Oliver Platt and Julianne Moore.
These people are severe cases....we are not all like that!...like Joon says "Don,t under-estimate the mentally ill....we can count!" I can really relate to this movie, and I do love Johnny Depp oh so much!
In this movie, Depp plays Sam, a free-spirited man who brings light where there is dark in Benny and Joon's small family.
Johnny Depp once again does an absolutely stunning performance in this movie, on the role as a sane but creative character who falls in love with a mentally ill woman.I just happened to be browsing movies on Netflix when I came across the movie.
Not necessarily in that order.Masterson and Quinn are both fine actors, and their performances here are excellent (one of Aidan Quinn's best, I think.) But Johnny Depp is simply remarkable.
This is a great film with interesting (for a change) characters--Johnny Depp is especially charming as Sam.
Benny (Aidan Quinn) lives together with Joon (Mary Stuart Masterson), his sister, who is a lovely though very naive, mentally simple young woman.
He represents the `everything is possible` and gets through to her where others have failed.Watching Johnny Depp in a brilliant performance (Buster Keaton-like) was - for me - the main part in this film.
Mary Stuart Masterson is forgettable as the mentally ill sister, as is Julianne Moore as the love interest for Quinn.The movie's only saving grace (and indeed the reason I watched it) is Johnny Depp.
His performance steals the show, which makes one wonder why they titled the movie "Benny and Joon" since he plays neither of those characters.
In Benny & Joon he plays a young man of questionable mental health who is obsessed with the comedy of Buster Keaton and Charlie Chaplin.
Johnny Depp as Sam is utterly beguiling while Mary Stuart Masterton {Joon} is sweet and affecting in what is after all, the difficult role.
I saw this movie and fell in love with Johnny Depp's acting.
This is an odd, quirky film that boasts good performances from Johnny Depp and Mary Stuart Masterson.It's an interesting story about two oddballs finding each other, and learning more about the world around them through their connection, and it's well played by the stars.It's a little slow in places, and it's a shame some of the supporting cast aren't given more to do, but it's certainly a curious film worth watching..
Sam I liked the most not even because I like Johnny Depp, but because he's the most dramatic personality in all movie and he acts very natural.
A masterpiece which should be know all people who love watching very good movies.
Small town auto mechanic Benny Pearl (Aidan Quinn) dutifully takes care of his mentally ill sister Joon (Mary Stuart Masterson).
But it is really worth watching, as the story is beautiful and heartwarming; the music is lovely; Mary Stuart Masterson's, Johnny Depp's and Aidan Quinn's acting is brilliant; there are scenes that are unforgettable; sad, funny, extraordinary and touching moments; and this film makes you love mentally ill people.
But really, it's Johnny Depp who makes it a memorable film.The least interesting of the three main characters is the protagonist in this film, Aidan Quinn's Benny.
After her most recent caretaker quites, Benny finds himself forced to think about sending Joon to a living community, but plans are stalled when an unusual young man ends up in their lives.Sam (Depp) is an eccentric, a young man who models his behavior off silent film star Buster Keaton and performs various physical comedy gags both on purpose yet also intuitively.
We spend too much time watching Benny mishandle Joon as well as his personal life despite his good heart and best intentions.
Benny and Joon is one of those feel good movies driven solely on character development and good acting.
No matter what film Johnny Depp is in, he's always terrific in good character development even if the movie stinks.
In comes Sam, a kind, sweet and extremely eccentric man and both their lives are changed in ways they couldn't have ever imagined.To me 'Benny and Joon' is a great movie for lots of reasons.
In fact, every time I watch a movie, I compare it to Benny & Joon.
the connection between sam (johnny depp) and joon (masterson) make for a sweet and powerful love story.
Benny & Joon Is A Moving Sweet Love Story.
In fact, it is made clear that Depp's character "Sam" is obsessed with movies, and he is even seen studying a biography of Buster Keaton in the opening scenes.The film benefits from one of the most extraordinary cases of over-casting in recent memory.
This movie is all about loving each other and taking care of another person like Benny was trying to do for joon - I was trying to figure were his mind was at for majority of the film and I'm glad of the outcome because you could tell what his feelings toward Sam were overtime of the film.
Joon was very interesting herself - mentally ill yet so artistic seems only right her and a guy like BuStEr kEaToN ( Sam ) would have a connection.
Benny & Joon's actors also give a good performance I'm not sure how well Aiden and MsM ( Mary s masterson ) would / have done in other movies but in this one they do well and even better when in scenes with Depp.
This movie has an amazing three characters and actors -1= some what plays the straight man Benny who changes - 2 = mentally ill yet creative Joon and 3 = wonderful and different one of a kind Sam a guy like buster Keaton and Charlie Chaplin ,soundtrack great and overall a happy movie with tons of laughs till the last scene.
I know that I have commented on Johnny Depp's versatility from Pirates to Sweeney Todd to Before Night falls, but I had my breath taken away from his role in this film.He was a sort of free spirit that came into the life of schizophrenic Joon (Mary Stuart Masterson), and transformed her with love.Until he arrived, her brother Benny (Aidan Quinn) ran her life for her. |
tt0112438 | The Babysitter | Jennifer (Alicia Silverstone) is a beautiful teenager who is hired to babysit the children of Harry Tucker (J.T. Walsh) and his wife, Dolly Tucker (Lee Garlington), while they attend a party hosted by their friends, Bill Holsten (George Segal) and his wife, Bernice Holsten (Lois Chiles). Harry often fantasizes about Jennifer, while Dolly misinterprets Bill's compliments as a sign of attraction and fantasizes about him. Meanwhile, Jennifer's ex-boyfriend Jack (Jeremy London), whom she broke up with after he began pressuring her for sex, runs into his estranged troublemaking friend Mark (Nicky Katt), Bill and Bernice's son, who once had a fling with Jennifer and still harbors feelings for her. Throughout the night, Harry, Jack and Mark have increasingly racy fantasies about Jennifer.
Jack calls Jennifer and asks to visit her at the Tuckers' residence, but she refuses. Mark later steals beer from Bill's party, where they run into Harry, who becomes fixated on the notion Jack might go to his house to have sex with Jennifer. Jack and Mark get increasingly drunk and show up uninvited to see Jennifer, but she refuses to let them in. They then spend the rest of the night stalking around the house and spying on her through the window. Meanwhile, Harry gets drunk and falls asleep in his car, where he has a nightmare of Jennifer and Jack having sex, which drives him to rush home and confront them. In his absence, Dolly makes a pass at Bill, who rejects her, but agrees to keep her secret and offers to drive her home.
At the Tuckers' residence, Jack and Mark force their way in while Jennifer is taking a bath and, after a tense argument, Mark knocks Jack unconscious and attempts to rape Jennifer, who runs out of the house. Mark pursues her and ends up being fatally run over by Harry, who is arrested for drunk driving just as Bill and Dolly arrive and hear about the accident. Before being escorted home, Jennifer confronts Jack, who is being questioned by the police, and asks him, "What were you thinking?" before leaving an ashamed and guilt-stricken Jack behind. | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | It promised us Alicia Silverstone in her first vaguely steamy role.
Maybe he was duped into expecting sex scenes with Alicia too....
Alicia's cute; movie sucks.
Alicia Silverstone is so pretty, so good, I hope she gets some decent material someday.
Miss Silverstone was good, but the film could have really used some more exposure (wink, nod).
Overall, this film is of interest only to Silverstone fans, (real ones, because she does NO nude scenes here) Grade: D.
The Babysitter is about this beautiful babysitter(Alicia Silverstone) that everybody adores and has every day fantasies about her.
One night, while she is babysitting for the Tucker family, her boyfriend Jack(Jeremy London), her ex boyfriend Mark(Nicky Katt), and Mr.Tucker(J.T Walsh), all want to seduce the babysitter and make their fantasies come true.
A fine cast is totally wasted, especially George Segal, whose role couldn't be more pointless.
What you have here is low-grade, late-night, Cinemax fare trying to capitalize on Silverstone's ability to come off as Lolita to a reasonably capable cast of old pros like George Segal and J.T. Walsh (along with one of those London twins for youthful good measure).
This kind of a film needs some sexual momentum to keep it entertaining; and, sadly, this movie is lacking in eroticism...Silverstone more so..
As usual, Alicia Silverstone is in top form, this time playing an object of desire, and a feature of many fantasies to various men.
Unfortunately, there is one off-putting scene where Alicia's character kisses the putrid J.T Walsh..
The story itself COULD be promising- an innocent teen babysitter is unwittingly the object of obsession for virtually every man she encounters in one night- but the filmmakers try to turn it into a masterpiece of surrealism that it obviously is not.
The Babysitter(1995) has a good premise that wasn't explored deeply and the fantasy scenes are bland and surreal less.
The Babysitter(1995) is a film that would be much better in the hands of someone like a Luis Bunuel, Nicolas Roeg, Terry Gilliam, or a Abel Ferrara.
J.T Walsh's performance is so good that it belongs in a Luis Bunuel Movie rather than this terrible excuse for a motion picture..
This is the first time that I have felt compelled to share my views on this site but having watched this film I felt so irritated that I had wasted an hour & a half of my life I thought I should warn anybody else who might stumble across this laughable film.It appears that there is a reason that films are shown at 3:30 in the morning on Sky Movies & that is to try to send people to sleep.
The flashback sequences (which take up most of the film) damage the flow of the film to such an extent that you end up not caring what is happening in the actual 'plot'.Alicia Silverstone does little wrong & just tends to wander around with little on.
It is a testament to the stupidity of the American film industry that any of the others were allowed to work again & it is testament to my own stupidity that I watched this piece of rubbish to the end..
Although I'd watch Alicia Silverstone in an insurance info-mercial, this movie never got any steam going.
The story, although plausible (I certainly fantasize about Alicia Silverstone), it is pretty pointless.
All the ingredients are there: good actors, a usable plot, and a suspenseful look to the film.
Only recommended for die-hard Alicia Silverstone or J.T.Walsh fans, just to get a fix on your favorite star..
It's just one of a handful of low-profile movies Alicia Silverstone made before her career took off.
Everyone seems to have some sort of obsession with Alicia Silverstone...sure, she's pretty, but how can at least 3 guys have such similarly perverted visions about the same girl?
here it is: a film in which is virtually unknown to most people; actors that you will never see again after the movie you're watching; and character's personal problems that do not relate to the plot.
An erotic thriller.Chilling suspense and horror.This is what alcohol does to teens.I was scared to see what happened to the babysitter with the boys and the dad.
I rented this direct-to-video movie because there's Alicia Silverstone in it, and honestly I really don't understand at all the choice of making bizarre things such as this or her movie "True Crime" for example...
In any case anybody who like rough sex or seeing a babysitter named Jennifer (played by Alicia Silverstone) in a bath full of white bubbles should watch this, otherwise it should be skipped at all cost; there's no story and no acting at all except for Alicia Silverstone....
Shall I pretend I didn't invest 90 minutes of my life in the hope of seeing a less-than-scantily-clad Alicia Silverstone?
As one of those guys who connected the words Alicia and 'contains sex scenes' to make an afternoon's viewing, I have to warn anyone else that feels they should do the same.
Poor acting, a dire script, and an ending which makes you wonder whether alien abduction really does exist (did I miss something??) combine to make a truly awful movie.
The flashbacks are cringe-worthy, and my only sense of satisfaction was to see JT Walsh actually smile, although I bet his skies have never been as dark as this!Still, at least there was the lovely Miss Silverstone in her 18-certificate movie!
But wait a minute - have I not watched the entire film to see no nudity whatsoever???
Oh wait, there was a brief flash of a waitress getting her just desserts from Mark - a cheap and cheerful way of getting that one clause which will continue to sell this movie - WARNING: contains nudity!
I watched this movie because I wanted to see Alicia Silverstone, who I adore.
In fact, her presence is the only reason why I would ever watch the movie again (which isn't something I plan to do right away).
I give this movie 5/10 simply because I would probably do the same thing every male character did in this movie: fantasize about Alicia Silverstone..
The Babysitter(1995) is one of the worst films that Alicia Silverstone has ever appeared on.
The Babysitter(1995) would have been a much beter and more interesting film if it was done by someone like the late Luis Bunuel, or other filmmakers...I.E., Abel Ferrara, Nicolas Roeg, or Peter Greenaway.
It basically functions as a vehicle for then up and comer Alicia Silverstone, cast as the title character.
She inspires fantasies in not only the lecherous, drunken Harry but her estranged boyfriend Jack (Jeremy London) and his shady associate Mark (Nicky Katt).
There are so many fantasy sequences that viewers may feel challenged to keep track of when the film is actually showing "reality".
Too much time is spent with London and the amusingly smarmy Katt as they prowl around the Tucker home, and it takes the film too long to get going.Fans wanting a Silverstone fix would be better off revisiting "Clueless" or even "The Crush".Six out of 10..
The fantasy sequences are strange and not really necessary, but there's a great movie here..
The Babysitter stars the brilliant Alicia Silverstone who plays Jennifer, obviously the babysitter, who has the affections of the father of the children she's looking after and two guys she knows.
Alicia Silverstone is one of the best actress' out there and she plays and suits the role very well.
This is a strange movie, but still really good and if you like babysitter thriller movies or if you're just a fan Alicia Silverstone, then I'm sure you'll enjoy this movie..
Alicia Silverstone is the only reason to see this movie.
The Babysitter stars Alicia Silverstone as Jennifer, object of lust for her ineffectual bookworm boyfriend Jack (Jeremy London), colossal teenage jerk Mark (Nicky Katt), married man Harry Tucker (J.T. Walsh), and even Harry's randy pre-teen son Jimmy (Ryan Slater).
As Jennifer innocently goes about her duties as a babysitter, the males fantasise about the young woman and desire eventually turns to obsession with fatal consequences.There was a time when teenage temptress Silverstone was shaping up to be a major player in Hollywood, her role in hit teen comedy Clueless seriously boosting her bankability as an actress.
But then she appeared in the abysmal Batman and Robin (as Batgirl) and pointless drivel like The Babysitter, an erotic thriller that is neither thrilling nor erotic (largely thanks to a no nudity clause in Silverstone's contract).
Her star rapidly faded.To be fair, Silverstone is perfectly adequate in her role, but the film's script goes nowhere slowly, its study of the male libido being neither enlightening (everybody knows how horny we men can be) nor all that interesting.
Unappealing characters (Jennifer aside) also serve to make this film hard to endure, with wet-blanket Jack making unlikely boyfriend material for a hottie like Jennifer, Mark being a total tool, and Harry a slimy perv.
Director Guy Ferland ends the film with a downer of a finale that sees one family losing a son, and another losing a father, making this not just boring but rather depressing too..
The movie follows one night at the Tucker home where we find Alicia Silverstone's character having a rather uneventful night babysitting two kids: Jimmy and Bitsy.
three horny and drunk men having fantasies about having sex with the babysitter.
Alicia Silverstone has never seemed to be really a great "actress" to me, just a sex symbol teenager.So, without her, this film is STILL quite funny!The characters of Mr.Tucker and Mark are terrifically funny, with black humor and sex jokes.It's a FUN film-not to be taken seriously, but hilarious.Not believable, so just sit back and listen to the smart dialogue and wild soundtrack!.
Some Lifetime "made for tv" movies can be quite good, this one however just stunk.
The few second preview (which made it look legitametly like the babysitter would fall for the homeowner) inticed me to stick around and watch this, however as the movie unveiled it just didnt make any sense.The movie starts out with one guy (supposedly the babysitters ex) following around her current b/f, which is actually ex friend of his.
The father daydreaming about the babysitter in the bathtub, and the wife daydreaming about the guy who's house party they are at.
There were no real erotic scenes and nothing was done even along the lines of those late night HBO "B" erotica movies which actually have a plot!!This movie stunk but even beyond that, it makes you scrambling to try and make sense out of everything.
Loved if you are an adolescent looking for an hour of bizarre sexual fantasy with no requirement for a true plot, hated if you were looking for what could have been a good plot dealing with the danger of obsession.
From the beginning, it appears that Alicia Silverstone's role in the film is to be the object of desire for a variety of male characters, from a young child to a middle aged tragic character; and therefore to be filmed as often as possible wearing as little as possible in the "dream sequence" type fantasy scenes.
Throughout the remainder of the film, the viewer can find it not only difficult to distinguish the fantasy scenes from the real-time scenes - but also to distinguish one scene from another as there is little variaton in the last forty minutes of the movie, which appears to be on a continuous five minute loop to the casual observer.
I kept hoping this would turn into a good thriller but it didn't so after an hour or so I stopped watching.
"I'd watch Alicia in an insurance infomercial." Believe me, the kid is beautiful.
It sort of guaranteed to be another ****ty night in front of the damned TV set, if you are likely to be of that mentality.I selected it as a DVD because I am an Alicia fan.
This sleeper stars Alicia Silverstone as the babysitter, who is the obsession of many males in the film.
Mr. Tucker (played by J.T. Walsh), the father of the children she babysits, lusts after her, as does her boyfriend, Jack (played by Jeremy London), and a neighborhood rebel, Mark (played by Nicky Katt).Based on a short story by Robert Coover, The Babysitter goes like this: After refusing a date with Mark, the babysitter goes to the Tucker residence on a Friday night to babysit the three children there.
Jack is reading Catcher in the Rye in a diner when Mark comes along and begins to coax him into hanging out with him, which leads to the two of them spying on the babysitter while she is looking after the children.
The Tuckers are at a party but Mr. Tucker finds any excuse to go home, much to the dismay of his wife, Dolly (good performance given by Lee Garlington) who herself fantasizes about Bill (played by George Segal), the party host.
Many of the characters consume alcohol, and the combination of booze and their own obsessions leads to a deadly climax.The Babysitter contains many dream sequences which may be difficult to discern from the actual happenings if you are viewing for the first time.
Most people seem to miss the point of this movie, it's about men vs hormones.
He's old!" Teenage girls think their attractiveness is like a bullet, only affecting their intended target, when in fact it's more like a hand grenade, and goes off in all directions.The movie is different from Robert Coover's short story (Google "Robert Coover the babysitter", there's a PDF titled 184 ° Robert Coover), which was mainly a vehicle for an idea about how a story could take different plot lines as characters choose different pathways.
It's about how males of all ages react to a pretty, nubile young woman who's just trying to babysit some kids, and not completely aware of her affect on males, therefore mostly indifferent to it.Fantasies for each male, from age 10 to age 60, play out during the film, making it difficult to keep track of what's going on in reality.
The screen play seems voyeuristic, as if to try to pull you into fantasizing about Silverstone yourself (if you're a male), but time and again her character shuts it down, and reveals just a regular, no-nonsense, non-sexualized person going about her business.In the end the fantasies of three of the characters become reality, and play out as they would in real life instead of a male fantasy land, so things get messy quickly as the three disrupt their own lives within moments.
Two males, the youngest and the oldest, escape perplexed but unscathed.The end of the movie is a disaster scene, apparently with a single cause, but in reality the confluence of bad decisions by three men.
I was very interested on how their mere fantasies would move their actions through the movie.
I was also in suspense, wanting to know how the three competing actors would face eachother during the climax of the movie.
Another interesting is how more and more intense their fantasies get, they evolve as they get more obsessed on the babysitter.
A suspenseful movie from the nineties is always an apparently good choice.
Once the film begins, we don't know which way it is going to go, considering the characters are mysterious and directing is undecided.
After 30 or 40 minutes, I started getting bored, since nothing much really happened, and I also couldn't care less about the story, given that the movie was all about everyone imagining banging with Jennifer all the time.
In the end, the movie ended pointlessly and felting like a big waste of mine.
How things are not going well between them, she refused saying it needs more time to figure out their relationship and where it goes, anyway she can't let him come because she must take care of children.
Meanwhile, the owners are busy getting drunk at the party and Harry thinks at the nanny has his fantasies with her and looking for any excuse to go home.
All the characters are great, and it has some bizarre imaginary scenes as well, plus Alicia Silverstone is simply amazing in this!.
The finale is very suspenseful and shocking, and all the characters fantasies were really quite twisted and sickening but still fascinating all the same, plus for a direct to video film this is top notch!.
Nicky Katt is excellent as the asshole trouble maker as he sickened me with his actions, and some scenes really disturbed me (like the kid walking in the bathroom door to see Alicia naked in the tub, and she let him do it), and this is pretty well made and written as well, plus this should be much higher then 4.0 in my opinion.
This film will not be for everyone, and I liked the atmosphere it had in it too, plus J.T Walsh was also awesome in this.
This is a truly bizarre but awesome thriller, that's quite fascinating to watch, with a unique story and fantastic performances, and I say it's a must see!.
This is a truly bizarre but awesome thriller, that's quite fascinating to watch, with a unique story and fantastic performances, and I say it's a must see!.
This is a truly bizarre but awesome thriller, that's quite fascinating to watch, with a unique story and fantastic performances, and I say it's a must see!.
Alicia Silverstone is amazing as always and is amazing here,she is incredibly gorgeous, vulnerable, extremely sexy, seductive, and also very mysterious, her character was a really good one as this is one of the most interesting roles she has played!
Jeremy London is awesome as the guy who is attracted to Alicia he was very likable, even if he did go to far at times.
J.T. Walsh is really good here, he had a bizarre but great role, his fantasies were very disturbing. |
tt4381834 | The Blob | During one long night in a small rural Pennsylvania town in July 1957, teenager Steve Andrews (Steve McQueen) and his girlfriend, Jane Martin (Aneta Corsaut), are kissing on a lovers' lane when they see a meteor crash beyond the next hill. Steve decides to look for it. An old man (Olin Howland) living nearby finds it first. When he pokes the meteorite with a stick, it breaks open, and the small jelly-like blob inside attaches itself to his hand. In pain and unable to scrape or shake it loose, the old man runs onto the road, where he is nearly struck by Steve's car. Steve and Jane take him to Doctor Hallen (Stephen Chase).
Doctor Hallen is about to leave for a medical conference, but anesthetizes the man and sends Steve and Jane back to the impact site to gather information. Hallen decides he must amputate the man's arm since it is being consumed by the growing Blob. Before he can, however, the Blob completely consumes the old man, then Hallen's nurse, and finally the doctor himself, all the while increasing in size.
Steve and Jane return to the office in time for Steve to witness the doctor's death. They go to the police station and return to the house with Lieutenant Dave (Earl Rowe) and Sergeant Bert (John Benson). However, there is no sign of the creature or its victims, and Bert dismisses Steve's story as a teenage prank. Steve and Jane are taken home by their parents, but they later sneak out.
In the meantime, the Blob consumes a mechanic at a repair shop. The Blob grows in size every time it consumes something. At the Colonial Theater, which is showing a midnight screening of Daughter of Horror, Steve recruits Tony (Robert Fields) and some of his friends to warn people about the menace. When Steve notices that his father's grocery store is unlocked, he and Jane go inside. The janitor is nowhere to be seen. Then the couple are cornered by the Blob; they seek refuge in the walk-in freezer. The Blob oozes in under the door, but retreats. Steve and Jane gather their friends and set off the town's fire and air-raid alarms. The townspeople and police still refuse to believe Steve. Meanwhile, the Blob enters the Colonial Theater and engulfs the projectionist before oozing into the auditorium consuming a number of the audience. Steve is finally vindicated when screaming people flee from the theater.
Jane's young brother, Danny (Keith Almoney), fires at the Blob with his cap gun before running into the nearby diner. Jane, Danny, and Steve become trapped in that diner, along with the manager and a waitress. The Blob — now an enormous red mass from the people it has consumed — engulfs the diner. Dave has a connection made from his police radio to the diner's phone, telling those in the diner to get into the cellar before they try to bring a live power line down onto the Blob.
When it sounds quiet over the phone line, Bert shoots the wire, which falls onto the Blob and discharges a substantial electrical current. The Blob is unaffected, however, and the diner is set ablaze by the electrical current. When the diner manager uses a CO2 fire extinguisher on the fire, Steve notices that this causes the Blob to recoil. Steve then remembers that the creature also retreated from the freezer, saying "That's why it didn't come in the ice box after us. It can't stand cold!" Shouting in hopes of being picked up on the open phone line, Steve manages to tell Dave about the Blob's vulnerability to coldness. Jane's father, Mr. Martin (Elbert Smith), knows there are 20 such extinguishers at the school, and leads Steve's friends to the high school to retrieve them. Returning, the brigade of fire extinguisher-armed students and police first drive the Blob away from the diner, then freeze it, saving Steve, Jane, and the others.
Dave requests authorities send an Air Force heavy-lift cargo aircraft to transport the Blob to the Arctic, where it is later parachuted to the ice and snow pack. Dave says that while the Blob is not dead, at least it has been stopped. To this, Steve Andrews replies, "Yeah, as long as the Arctic stays cold" ("The End" title card appears and morphs into a question mark, suggesting that the Blob may return). | absurd, dark | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0057590 | Tom Jones | The story begins with a silent film sequence during which the good Squire Allworthy (George Devine) returns home after a lengthy stay in London and discovers a baby (played by a girl, Lynn Goldsworthy) in his bed. Thinking that his barber, Mr. Partridge (Jack MacGowran), and one of his servants, Jenny Jones (Joyce Redman), have "birthed" the infant out of lust, the squire banishes them and chooses to raise little Tom Jones as if he were his own son.
Tom (Albert Finney) grows up to be a lively young man whose good looks and kind heart make him very popular with the opposite sex. However, he truly loves only one woman, the gentle Sophie Western (Susannah York), who returns his passion. Sadly, Tom is stigmatized as a "bastard" and cannot wed a young lady of her high station. Sophie, too, must hide her feelings while her aunt (Edith Evans) and her father, Squire Western (Hugh Griffith) try to coerce her to marry a more suitable man – a man whom she hates.
This young man is Blifil (David Warner, in his film debut), the son of the Squire's widowed sister Bridget (Rachel Kempson). Although he is of legitimate birth, he is an ill-natured fellow with plenty of hypocritical 'virtue' but none of Tom's warmth, honesty, or high spirits. When Bridget dies unexpectedly, Blifil intercepts a letter, which his mother intended for her brother's eyes only. What this letter contains is not revealed until the end of the movie; however, after his mother's funeral, Blifil and his two tutors, Mr. Thwackum (Peter Bull) and Mr. Square (John Moffatt), join forces to convince the squire that Tom is a villain. Allworthy gives Tom a small cash legacy and sorrowfully sends him out into the world to seek his fortune.
In his road-travelling odyssey, Tom is knocked unconscious while defending the good name of his beloved Sophie and robbed of his legacy. He also flees from a jealous Irishman who falsely accuses him of having an affair with his wife, engages in deadly sword fights, meets his alleged father and his alleged mother, a certain Mrs. Waters, whom he saves from an evil Redcoat Officer, and later beds the same Mrs. Waters. In a celebrated scene, Tom and Mrs. Waters sit opposite each other in the dining room of the Upton Inn, wordlessly consuming an enormous meal while gazing lustfully at each other.
Meanwhile, Sophie runs away from home soon after Tom's banishment to escape the attentions of the loathed Blifil. After narrowly missing each other at the Upton Inn, Tom and Sophie arrive separately in London. There, Tom attracts the attention of Lady Bellaston (Joan Greenwood), a promiscuous noblewoman over 40 years of age. She is rich, beautiful, and completely amoral, though it is worth noting that Tom goes to her bed willingly and is generously rewarded for his services. Eventually, Tom ends up at Tyburn Gaol, facing a boisterous hanging crowd after two blackguardly agents of Blifil frame him for robbery and attempted murder. Allworthy learns the contents of the mysterious letter: Tom is not Jenny Jones's child, but Bridget's illegitimate son and Allworthy's nephew. Furthermore, since Blifil knew this, concealed it, and tried to destroy his half-brother, he is now in disgrace and disinherited. Allworthy uses this knowledge to get Tom a pardon, but Tom has already been conveyed to the gallows; his hanging is begun, but is interrupted by Squire Western, who cuts him down and takes him to Sophie. Tom now has permission to court Sophie, and all ends well with Tom embracing Sophie with Squire Western's blessing.
In its original release, the film ran 2 hours and 7 minutes. | romantic, satire | train | wikipedia | The second was: "Tom Jones" with Albert Finney and Susannah York, shot with rented equipment and costumes on the streets of London with a supporting cast of brilliant British ensemble players and extras who stood-in just to get in a film.
(Though to be perfectly honest, I'm not sure we'd care for the smell of it.)"Tom Jones" is a low budget, low tech, high quality film that must win the award for the "Most with the Least." The photography is beautiful, not because it used a dozen half million dollar cameras, it is beautiful because it is good photography.
"Tom Jones" is a movie adaptation of the classic Eighteenth century novel masterpiece of Henry Fielding made up by the greatest contemporary British playwriter John Osborne and directed by one of the main film directors of English Free Cinema, Tony Richardson.
This is an highly cinematographic film, e.g. the movement of the camera gives itself the idea of happiness in the scenes of love in the country of Tom and Sophie (the beautiful and greatest Susannah York), the drama of the situation in which Tom risk to be hanged or the funniness in the bawdy scenes in the inn.
In the beginning the film even outlines the beginning of the complex story using even the style of the silent cinema...Tom Jones/Albert Finney even also speaks directly to the public of the film reaching with his greatest originality an extreme level of funniness and pleasantness.
But I would like to point out that Tom Jones did not sleep with his mother as erroneously alleged, and that Albert Finney, 26 or 27 years old at the time of shooting this film, clearly did not look too old for his part.I haven't read the book(s), but from the film it's obvious that Dickens was much indebted to Fielding, using his amazing invention as a convoluted plot model (and perhaps a character-naming model) for many of his works.Go rent this film after seeing Finney in the currently playing Big Fish -- it's great to see him do so well in such very different films made in different millenia, nearly a full professional lifetime apart..
Here we first meet the protagonist, Tom Jones, played by Albert Finney in his most youthful bloom, and his extended family representing every facet of post-Glorious Revolution England.An incorrigible ne'er-do-well, Tom's genuine love for his neighbor Squire Alworthy's daughter Sophie (a very lovely Susannah York), takes him to the heart of fashionable London society in a series of comedic wrong-turns and misunderstandings.
His true love is Sophie (Susannah York) , the daughter of a higher-class rich owner (Hugh Griffith).The picture is a lavish rendition of a classic novel written by Henry Fielding with lots of entertainment and fun .
The film obtained Academy Awards in 1963 to best film for United Artists , Director -Tony Richardson- , adapted screenplay -John Osborne- and original music -John Addison- and was nominated : Albert Finney , Hugh Griffith , Diane Cilento , Joyce Redman and Edith Evans by their robustly agreeable characterization .
Just two hundred years after Henry Fielding's novel appeared, the theatre-actor-turned-cinema-director Sir Tony Richardson rounded up a few Shakespearean-trained prodigees, got John Addison to compose hectic clavichord accompaniment a little in the style of Handel operas and set all this against lush photography to produce one of the most hilarious films of the last five hundred years.
There are also duels, a misunderstanding about the linage of the Jones baby, and an unwanted suitor for the lovely Sophie, Susan York.I saw this film as a teen in 1963 and it telegraphed a new sense of modernism and sexual freedom without pretense that is ironic since Fielding's story was hundreds of years old on the eve of the Beatles and the swinging London of the 60's..
Thus, the uncouth merges with sex and the presentation used here.That presentation form is at once hyperrealistic hand-held verity, engagement with running horses, A specific film joke where Tom and Sophie follow each other riding animals, widely varying lighting schemes using found light, frequent direct dialog with the audience and highly stylized "old" stuff: swordfights, wellworn plot closures, a typical love story but where the girl is halfway in the old and new worlds.Make no mistake: the star of this is Suzanna York as our surrogate.
But John Osborne's adapted screenplay for which he won an Oscar captures the right spirit of the ribald and rollicking novel of the mid eighteenth century in Great Britain.It was one bawdy age, the dissolute courts of the first two kings named George set the tone for British society at the time.
Even the neighboring squire Hugh Griffith likes him, but not as a suitable husband for his daughter Ms. York.The story in many ways sets the tone for the novels of Charles Dickens, many of which concerned young men like Tom Jones, David Copperfield, Nicholas Nickleby, Young Pip in Great Expectations, who seek the meaning of their origins.
I doubt Charles Dickens could have gotten his work published if they had been as naughty as Fielding's.Director Tony Richardson really captures the look of 18th century Great Britain, no doubt part of why he was named Best Director and Tom Jones awarded Best Picture of 1963.
TOM JONES may not be the worst movie to take home the Academy Award for Best Motion Picture, but it certainly is in the running for being the most ineptly directed.
Under Tony Richardson's amateurish direction, the film suffers from having little sense of comic timing, a lack of the astute use of editing or camera placement or even the slightest hint that the famed director had ever been behind a camera before.It is easy to see what Richardson was going for; he wanted to cut the historical epic as a genre down to size.
Amoral and callow, there is little reason to care for Jones' fate other than the fact that he is so gosh-darn pretty.Even granting that 1963 was a remarkably weak year for movies, TOM JONES' winning of the Oscar (among several other prestigious awards) is a puzzlement.
It is, simply, a masterpiece.A brilliant story at the heart of it, of course, but brought to life with fantastic, innovative direction, including affectionate nods to the silents, extraordinary action sequences, unsurpassed breaches of the fourth wall ("Did you see her take it?"), uncommon acknowledgements of some of the grimmer realities of the era, and tour de force performances from the entire cast (who clearly relished every minute), centred of course on the sublime Albert Finney - one of the greats, never better - and the heart-stoppingly gorgeous Susannah York.
The theatre was packed and the reaction of the audience to the movie gives new meaning to the words "guffawing" and "rolling in the aisles" and "rollicking"."Tom Jones" came out at the height of the British New Wave.
The direction makes it easy to laugh along and get caught up in the sheer sexual charisma of Tom Jones' personality.But personally, as an English major who really treasured the book, I find that this movie is not all it's cracked up to be.
This movie was "influential" for the rest of the Sixties, and in all the wrong ways.Tom was the first "anti-hero" in Sixties film, a guy who is good looking and sexy but not especially brave or clever or even kind.
How many times have we seen this bias?Finney was so young looking, I didn't recognize him when I watched this film in the 90s, about 30 years after seeing it in the theater when it came out.
All the actors are outstanding, Albert Finney actually doesn't have to do much except be active, while the character who makes the greatest impression is the rumbustious Hugh Griffith as Squire Western, while his daughetr Susannah York never was lovelier than in this film.
But if a viewer gives it a try with this scrumptiously restored Blu-Ray edition (retrofitted with Dolby Stereo), the consensus is, at the very least, a resplendent period treat enveloped with ample, lilting, euphonious selections to please one's ears and a carefree comedy-of-errors as much beholden to a unique faux-naïf whiff of British nobility as to its often vacuous, non-sensical happenings, which are transmuted from Henry Fielding's 18th century source novel THE HISTORY OF TOM JONES, A FOUNDLING.Our young hero Tom Jones (Finney), whose parentage is the film's best kept secret, is a foundling adopted by Squire Allworthy (Devine), in due time he wins the heart of the young lady Sophie Western (York) with his chivalry, but also has no qualms about copping off with a luscious Molly Seagrim (Cilento), the daughter of a local peasant, and even gallantly defends her names on the back of his black horse, an atypical knight-in-the-shining-armor, the truth is, Tom is a magnetized draw toward the opposite site, which the film flogs to death through the mouths of his many a female admirer, but as fresh-faced as he is, Finney's dreamboat quotient is not potent enough, his appearance often betrays a tinge of sophistication which will mature tangibly with time, ergo, it becomes slightly vexing in this nominal "female gaze" outlook that tapers into frivolity, once Tom sets his foot on his own to explore the world.
On the one hand, it looks bizarre now, that the film holds an unmatched record by securing three Oscar nominations in BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS category (with no win though), granted that the film does present a menagerie of vivacious, delicious and colorful personages: a transmogrified Cilento is a brazen sight to behold; Dame Edith Evans is right on the nose as Sophie's spinster aunt, a moralistic do-gooder cannot be bothered even by a pistol-wielding footpad; Joyce Redman makes splashes with her infamous duet with Finney in their food partaking flirtation as Mrs. Waters, and is spared with an incestuous scandal in the final reveal, apart from those aforementioned three Oscar-nominated ladies, a Golden Globe-nominated Joan Greenwood doesn't cede her reign to anyone else as the amoral Lady Bellaston, but in the event, every character, including the bibulous luvvie Hugh Griffith as Sophie's fatuous father, David Warner's vicious turn in his screen debut and a scene-stealing David Tomlinson as Lord Fellamar who is blatantly ready to ravish his object of desire, even the two leads Tom and Sophie, is wanting of a magic potion which would lend them some substance other than a caricature or a skin-deep nonentity.
The movie takes place in England in the 18th century, and involves the many adventures (mostly sexual) of a young, handsome Tom Jones.
Especially good are Albert Finney as Tom, Susannah York as his love Sophie and Joyce Redman as Mrs. Waters.
I found it difficult to see what the point of the film.The vague story after the book by Henry Fielding follows Tom and his adventures across England making a life for himself after being run out of house by his uncle landlord.
The supporting cast is uniformly excellent with special mention going to Hugh Griffith's gruff Squire Western Edith Evans, Joyce Redmond and the venerable Jack MacGowan as Patridge.Honored in its day but mostly ignored for its importance today Tom Jones has aged far better than most.
Tom Jones, Albert Finney who has left us lately (sometimes in February 2019) , Has so much charm, Such a beauty on the screen, subtle humour, , and above all it gives you the feeling of watching a great theatre play due to film director Tony Richardson, and All actors fro A-z.
Although you may have seen some of the techniques copied (unfortunately, the only film which comes immediately to mind with regards to the editing is Start the Revolution Without Me (1970)), I feel fairly certain that freeze frames (with narrative voice- overs), characters playing (even talking) to the camera, and the lyrical wipes & fades ("zeroing" in on a specific object or face - like the singing mice in Babe (1995)) employed were first done in this Academy Award winning Best Picture.A very visually creative film which tells the bawdy tales of a bastard son raised by a wealthy squire.
my memory escapes me).The score, which also won the Academy Award, is whimsical and upbeat with its tempo perfectly matching the kinetic pace of many of the more comical exploits of the title character, played by Albert Finney (Oscar nominated in only his third film).One of the few comedies (15%?) to win BP, it also took home Best Director (Tony Richardson) and Writing (the story was adapted from the Henry Fielding novel).
Tom Jones is significant to me, personally, as it was the last film I needed to see to have seen all the Academy Award Best Picture winners.
The costuming and the sets were both extraordinary, and I was shocked that Tom Jones, a film that won 4 Oscar's, was not awarded for its sets nor period clothing.
It is easy to see why Tom Jones, halfway a very good film, won Best Picture in an otherwise underwhelming year.
Good, Clean, English Fun. In eighteenth century England, "first cousins" Tom Jones (Albert Finney) and Master Blifil grew up together in privilege in the western countryside, but could not be more different in nature.This is a truly odd film.
I have to tell you that I've seen a lot of lousy movies, but this one takes the price.The main character Tom Jones is a disgusting man that makes out with every woman he possibly can, while as he says that he's deeply in love with a young woman named Sophie.
To me, I actually would have enjoyed the film a bit more if it had chosen to emphasize the humor a bit more--sort of like the extremely funny START THE REVOLUTION WITHOUT ME--a very madcap film made just a few years later and starring many of the same supporting actors in TOM JONES.As far as acting goes, everyone was fine in the film.
...sorry for the bad British imitation.but this film is truly one of the best of its time.strong cast.strong director.strong script.strong music.this film is a true and clever window into 18th century England, and some of its literature.the subtleties people miss when watching it are apparent in their reviews.the most bogus descriptor many reviewers here use is "dated." What a useless observation.this film also represents a very excellent adaptation of the story to film.it is no wonder that it won accolades from both the public and critics.those of you who say this film is raunchy and the beginning of the end of Hollywood and its so-called "submission to sex and cultural depravity," should go rent some of the films of early 1930s, the "pre-code" era.Hollywood, from it very beginnings in the silent era, quickly saw and realized the fruits of the relations between sensuality, bawdy stories and setting it all to film.Tom Jones is hardly the signal of cinema's downfall in the 1960s..
Luke-warm Best Picture Oscar winner from 1963 has Albert Finney (Oscar-nominated) as the titled character in this small little film that used smoke and mirrors to make the audience think it is a masterpiece.
I wonder if much the same thing happened with "Tom Jones." I saw this probably ten or so years ago and thought it was light-hearted and breezy, but I couldn't for the life of me understand how it could have been universally liked enough to win the Best Picture Oscar in 1963.
I guess it does have a kind of groovy style about it that was in line with the direction of pop culture during that time period -- it certainly makes two of its Best Picture contenders from that year, "Cleopatra" and "How the West Was Won" (the only two I've seen), look like hopeless dinosaurs staggering from the remains of an out-of-touch Hollywood.
Tom Jones is on the whole not a very good movie.
While it's perfectly true that a film whose cast includes such wonderful actors as Albert Finney, Susannah York, Hugh Griffith, the divine Joan Greenwood, Edith Evans and, in minuscule roles Angela Baddeley, Rachel Kempson (as well as Kempson's daughter, Lynn Redgrave, in her film debut) can't be all bad, I can't say I enjoyed TOM JONES much better on a second viewing about 17 years after the first.
Based on Henry Fielding's classic, Tony Richardson's 'Tom Jones' has received quite a lot of acclaim and is still highly praised after almost half a century.
Albert Finney fits Tom Jones like a puzzle.
I don't mind when a movie shows disturbing elements (as long as its relevant to the story) and hunting was a big game during that time period but it just seemed pointless to really kill a deer over it.Anyway, 'Tom Jones' just didn't work for me.
Instead I get a romance novel with less interesting plot lines.Throughout my viewing of this film, I could not help but compare it to another famous "Young Englishman Makes His Way In The World" film, Stanley Kubrick's 'Barry Lyndon.' That movie is an order of magnitude superior to Tom Jones in just about every aspect, especially visually.
Tony Richardson's film reaches a high level of interest with appealing characterizations and somewhat unusual camera work, but fails ultimately to reach the extraordinarily high level of sophistication in Henry Fielding's original novel.The story is set a few hundred years ago, and begins with an interesting silent film homage which reveals the "bastard" parentage of our hero, Tom Jones (Albert Finney), who is adopted and raised by the kindly Squire Allworthy (George Devine).
The success of "Tom Jones" is an example of a film being released at the right time.
But the awful"Cleopatra", Elia Kazan's"America, America", the mediocre "How The West Was Won" and the mediocre "Lillies of the Field" were all nominated.Now while there are many good things to recommend (Albert Finney, camera-work, direction, costumes and setting), I can't say that I really enjoyed this film. |
tt0140399 | Muthu | Muthu (Rajinikanth) is a kind-hearted man working in the zamin of Sivakami Ammal (Jayabharathi) taking care of the chariot and the horses used by her son Raja Malayasimman (Sarath Babu). Muthu is very loyal to the zamin family and in the meantime Muthu and Raja encounter Ranganayaki (Meena), a stage artist during their visit to a show and Raja immediately falls in love with Ranganayaki. Ambalathar (Radha Ravi) is the maternal uncle of Raja and he has plans of getting his daughter Padmini (Subhashri) married to Raja.
Ranganayaki’s drama troupe faces financial issues and Raja offers jobs to the entire troupe in his zamin. Now Muthu and Ranganayaki fall in love with each other and Sivakami gets to know about this. Kaali (Ponnambalam) is a spy for Ambalathar working in the zamin and keeps informing him about the happenings in the zamin. Kaali lies to Raja that Muthu is forcing Ranganayaki to marry him. This angers Raja and he has Kaali beat up Muthu, then orders him to leave the zamin. Sivakami gets angry on hearing about her son’s behaviour and informs him the truth that both Muthu and Ranganayaki are in love which shocks Raja.
The story moves to flashback where it is shown that Muthu’s father (Rajinikanth) is the zamindar and real owner of all the properties. Rajasekhar (Raghuvaran) is the cousin of zamindar. Sivakami is married to Rajasekhar and their son Raja is adopted by the zamindar as he did not have children. Later the zamindar’s wife gives birth to a child and dies. Rajasekhar and Amabalathar plan to grab the zamindar’s properties by forging false documents. The zamindar on knowing these worries about the nature of people around him and decides to give all the properties to Rajasekhar and his family and also to leave the place along with his son Muthu. But Sivakami pleads for guilty of her husband and asks to at least give his son so that she will raise him. The zamindar hands over Muthu to Sivakami but says that he should be brought up as an ordinary man and not as a zamindar for which Sivakami agrees. Rajasekhar feels bad about his cruel activities and upon seeing the generous behaviour of the zamindar, commits suicide. The zamindar leaves the place and Sivakami moves to another town. She informs everyone that the zamindar’s child is dead as she has been asked to raise the child as a normal man by the zamindar.
Sivakami says that the zamindar currently lives in a nearby place as a nomad and Raja, realising his mistake decides to go and meet zamindar and bring him back. Kaali overhears the conversation made between Sivakami and Raja and informs to Ambalathar. Now Ambalathar decides to murder Raja and frame Muthu so that he can take over all the zamin properties. But he is saved by zamindar and is married to Padmini. Finally Muthu comes to know all the truth and wishes to see his father but he leaves the place before Muthu could reach there. Muthu becomes the new zamindar, but prefers to see himself as a worker. | cult, romantic, flashback | train | wikipedia | Big and pleasant surprise.. Truly fabulous! It is so nice to see that old Hollywood musicals of 40's and 50's are still alive and well in southern India. The music is really something to be remembered, too.. Best movie ever. Muthu paves the way in regards to romantic-comedy-action-drama-martial-arts musicals. The "chariot jump" sequence almost made me wet myself in laughter. Unbelievably hysterical. Is there an English version of this somewhere?. My first Indian movie. I was 15 when I watched "Muthu." I started to be interested in other cultures at that time and I chose this movie randomly to watch something special. I totally fascinated by the dance scenes which start suddenly, colourful exotic dresses, and rhythmical songs replayed in my head again and again. It is the best movie to enter Bollywood world.. MUTHU with a HARRY POTTER TWIST. MUTHU is a well thought and written piece with subcontinent dialogue and language other than the language we use. We use for our understanding of cinema both our mother tongue and the intelligence gained by watching films from the western hemisphere. |
tt0298786 | Caramuru: A Invenção do Brasil | Diogo Álvares gets stranded on a tropical island when he sails with a boat, and meets a beautiful native of the island, a girl called Paraguaçu and her sister Moema. The two natives become his lover, but Diogo is already engaged to be married in his native Portugal. He's engaged to Isabelle a French noble woman, an agreement made between the Portuguese and the French kings. At the island Diogo meets the two native's father, who after a few misunderstandings make him the tribe's chief. After some time on the island Diogo sees a caravelle far out in the sea. The ship approaches the shore and Diogo finally gets rescued by Portuguese nobility on the way to India. Diogo embarks on the ship, Paraguaçu swims to him. Diogo decides to take Paraguaçu with him to Europe.
In Europe everything is new for Paraguaçu, even the fact that people get married, a concept she did not understand. When Paraguaçu finds out that Diogo is engaged to be married to Isabelle and meets Isabelle, she makes a deal with her. She proposes Isabelle to let her marry Diogo and in exchange she will tell her where there is gold in her native island. Isabelle accepts the proposal and Paraguaçu marries Diogo. Isabelle later finds out that Paraguaçu lied to her, she never intended to show her where there is gold. Isabelle gets arrested by the king because she did not marry Diogo according to the agreement made with the kings and Diogo and Paraguaçu return to the island, which in fact is Terra Brasilis, Brazil. The film has a happy ending, Diogo and Paraguaçu live happily ever after in Brazil. | satire, historical fiction | train | wikipedia | Brazilian comedy at its best. There's no doubt Brazil has made really good comedies in recent years. Director Guel Arraes is one of the symbols of this success. After the great performance of "O Auto da Compadecida", he made this "Caramuru - A Invenção do Brasil". It's a joke of Brazilian colonization where Portuguese people and Indians live (in the film, of course) funny situations and the historical facts are full of ironies and fun. The cast includes some of the best actors and actresses of Brazil, what makes the story even more attractive.. Hilário Way to Tell the History of Brazil. A humorous way to tell the story of Brazil, a film with our way Macunaíma de ser, a film that makes you know some facts in a bizarre way, being a pleasant and engaging film.The filmmaker is the Pernambuco Guel Arraes, who develops exquisite works, many on TV and some pearls in the cinema, started with an already commented the O Auto da Compadecida 2000, one a hilarious story and the other a novel similar to this one of this post, a hilarious film, great called: Lisbela and the Prisoner (2003). The protagonist is the actor who also directs some works like "The Clown" and acted in an international film called Trash: The Hope Comes from the Garbage (2014).. Jawless, humorless comedy lacks a sucker mouth, horny teeth & a rasping tongue. This kind of video-clip aesthetics is based on coarse humor plus quick editing cuts plus total indifference to period fidelity. 'Caramuru' ridicules Brazilian colonial history. Allegedly, it is therefore a farce. Quite unfunny, to say the least. Its action is in the 16th century but the film emphasizes 20th-century Carnival pageants. Inaccuracy on purpose? What difference does it make? Clothes are ridiculous. On purpose? Anyway, Bad humor + Awkward narration + Excessive histrionics + Pseudo-genius touch equals low-brow audience success plus middle-brow critical commendation, with perhaps a little touch of toadyism. |
tt0071665 | The Intruders | 20-year-old Rose Halshford (Miranda Cosgrove) moves to Chicago with her father Jerry (Donal Logue) after her schizophrenic mother Sophia has committed suicide some months earlier. Jerry, who is working as an architect, wants to help his daughter cope with their loss. But Rose, who has suspended her studies at Stanford University for one semester, does not feel comfortable in the hundred year old house, and is suspicious almost immediately.
After speaking with Leila Markby, the girl living across the street, she confirms that her new house may be hiding a dark past. Leila's father Howard (Tom Sizemore) soon begins to show strange behaviour. After an uncomfortable night, Rose is surprised by the young craftsman Noah Henry (Austin Butler) coming into her house unexpectedly, whom Jerry has hired to do some renovation work. She befriends Noah, and at the same time tries to find out secrets surrounding the history of the house.
While exploring the home, Rose finds a necklace, the head of a doll, and clues pointing to a "Rachel", a woman who lived in the house previously. Noah tells Rose that a few days before their moving in, he saw the windows in Rose's room locked with boards and a padlock on the door. Jerry is skeptical about his daughter's fears and thinks that she is delusional due to her mother's death.
Nevertheless, Rose continues her search and finds reports about the former inhabitants of the house. She finds that Cheri Garrison and her son Marcus accommodated the drug addict Rachel Winacott, who then disappeared. Howard was the prime suspect in this case, but he was acquitted because Rachel was said to have run away. He also explains this to Rose. Noah invites Rose to a pool party to distract her from her fears and sorrow. On the same evening Leila disappears.
Rose gets a copy of the construction plans of the house from the archive. When she goes to look at the plans, she faints, and is suspected of having abused pills. After her recovery she gets a message from Noah which lets her know about a hidden room. She finds such a room, and is attacked by Marcus Garrison. He forces her to put on Rachel's dress and tries to rape her, but Rose is able to get away, and in her escape she finds a tied up Leila. Jerry arrives home not long after, and tries to help his daughter, but is knocked down by Marcus. At the same time Rose stabs Marcus with a knife.
After the horror has come to an end, Rose again moves to a new house with her father and continues her studies at Northwestern University, still haunted by her encounter with Marcus. | pornographic | train | wikipedia | null |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.