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
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
tt0217629 | Looking for Alibrandi | Looking for Alibrandi begins light-heartedly, and the viewer gets a very quick understanding of Josie's character through her interactions with her friends and family. As the film progresses, the glamour that is initially associated with Josie begins to fade as she struggles to cope with her final year of school (especially the racist attitude of one girl in particular, Carly Bishop (Leeanna Walsman)), the suicide of her crush, John Barton (Matthew Newton), and meeting with Michael Andretti (Anthony LaPaglia), her father, of whom has only just found out about her existence upon returning to Sydney for work. She also has continual conflict with her grandmother, Katia Alibrandi (Elena Cotta).
However, these complications are seemingly resolved quickly, in keeping with Josie's brusque and forthright outlook on life. For example, in response to Carly's continuous snide remarks, she breaks her tormentor's nose with a history textbook. It is this summary act that brings her father back into her life.
Another complication—the suicide of her close friend and unrequited crush, John Barton—tests her resilience. Struggling with her grief, she finds comfort to a certain extent within Jacob Coote, he was a 'bad boy' on the outside, but he was found out to be a sincere and caring person on the inside.
The most significant complication and challenge for Josie, though, is her rocky relationship with her father, Michael Andretti. When they finally get to know each other, and recognise themselves in each other, their rift heals, and she can confide in him. | romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0434008 | Hak se wui | The movie begins as the two-year term expires, and all the elders of the Wo Luen Shing are in the process of electing a new chairman, with some last-minute "campaigning" from both Lok and Big D just a few days prior to the election. Lok is calm, patient and even-tempered, while Big D, who attempts to buy the election, is boisterous, impatient and quick-tempered. After bitter arguments from supporters of both candidates in the likes of Uncle Cocky and Uncle Monk, Lok is elected as the new chairman. However, Big D is dismayed by the result and proceeds to punish two men responsible for his loss by kidnapping them and rolling them down a hill in boxes, prompting ex-chairman Whistle to ask his lieutenant Four-Eye to hide the dragon head baton, which is a symbol of power for the leader.
In an attempt to keep the peace and prevent infighting, the police, headed by Chief Superintendent Hui, arrest the key Triad figures, including Uncle Teng, Big D, Uncle Cocky, Uncle Monk and the newly elected chairman Lok of the Wo Luen Shing. However, during a negotiation attempt in a holding cell, Big D, in a fit of rage, threatens to break with the Triad and form his own society. The culture of the Triad emphasises brotherhood and unity; such a revolt would not be accepted by the Triad, and would lead to heavy violence. Both the heads of the Triad and the police want to avoid turf warfare.
Meanwhile, a pursuit of the baton ensues in which Kun (Blacky's henchman), who is recovering the baton for Big D catches up with Big Head (Tally's henchman), who holds the baton and is recovering it for Lok. During the confrontation, Kun severely beats Big Head with a giant log in order for him to hand out the baton when Kun's boss informs him that the plan has changed and that Kun is to recover the baton for Lok. The leaders are eventually released on bail and after hours of pursuit between Kun, Jimmy, and Jet on route, Lok eventually receives the baton from Jimmy thus making his election official.
Lok proposes a truce, which Big D accepts, on the terms that they will be partners and Big D will be the next chairman when Lok's term expires. Initially, this is a successful partnership; together they expand the Triad's turf. In contrast to his earlier behaviour, Big D becomes loyal to Lok, whom he now considers a good friend.
In the final scene, Lok and Big D are fishing on a sunny afternoon, accompanied by Lok's young son, Denny, and Big D's wife. While momentarily alone with Lok, Big D proposes that they share the power of chairman; it is not an uncommon practice to have more than one chairman. Lok agrees to support Big D. However, seconds later Lok attacks Big D from behind, using a small boulder to repeatedly smash in his head. Denny and Big D's wife return in time to see this. Lok orders his son to wait in the car, and proceeds to finish murdering Big D. He then runs after Big D's wife, attacking her with a shovel and then crushing her throat with a heavy branch. He buries both bodies, washes his hands in the water and goes to the car, where his visibly shaken son is waiting. | violence, comedy, murder | train | wikipedia | In this sense, Election manages to bring out the very best in Eastern cinema, the rich culture (despite the notorious background of the Triad) steeped in tradition holding important virtues and values such as honour, which have all too often have been left behind in the Middle Ages.
Other plus points include the strength of the cinematography, typically shot in clean contrast with vivid colours and engaging compositions, while the acting is convincing with some slick performances from Tony Leung and Simon Yam.Election confronts the issue of the modern globalised world coming into conflict with the traditions of heritage of the triad which are seemingly being swamped by the sheer force of power the outside world, and in particular capitalism, possesses.
However The Godfather, for example was a film which had a relatively slow paced storyline, yet you were utterly immersed for nigh on three hours, with Election the 100 minutes, feels like three hours, and that is not a good thing.
Not enough actually takes place on screen to engage you, there are debates among elders about who should be the next Chairman, you see the candidates approach other members of the triad to ask for their support, you see more debating, you see various characters obviously being set up to be more important in volumes II and III, and you see some good acting go to waste with not much happening.
It's shot with style, the characters all feel unique and identifiable, the action scenes are really gruesome, violent and stylistic, the pacing is a bit slow yet it feels just right and in the end the story isn't half bad either.
It took me easily two thirds of the film to just start recognizing different faces from one another and the movie didn't exactly help, as the two main characters were quickly referenced by name, but it wasn't made clear just who they were on the screen.
Especially when one realized that the movie actually has a sequel.All in all, it's a good gangster film.
Election marks the 2nd trial society theme movie directed by Johnnie To.To marvellously casted Simon Yan and Tony Leung Kar Fai as Lok and Big D, as the two trial members who were chosen as candidates for the position of chairman for Ho Sing society, a 100 year old trial society.While Lok is a man who keeps his cool at all times, Big D is not only impatient, but also thinks that he is on top of everything.
Together with some of the veteran actors making their appearance in the film and the excellent script, it makes the only HK movie to represent Cannes Fil Festival 2005.Election has hardly failed any critics who wants an different trial society theme movie..
Even so, mafia chic has more or less been done to death, which is where (to a western audience) a Hong Kong gangster movie, like Johnny To's 'Election'; can be refreshing.
Lok may be an appealing family man in contrast to Big D., but although shocking, the ending lacks the surprise of the ending of 'The Godfather'; indeed, I personally think the 'The Godfather Part II', though a very skillful film, also suffered from the problem that the audience is unable to maintain the necessary illusions about its protagonist prior to the end.
Naturally, every such product gets an added buzz doing the rounds on its behalf, probably helping to generate bigger box office intakes.Surprisingly or not, there's nothing even remotely mature about Election, and to all intents and purposes it's almost identical in the gruesome department to every other crime flick done in Hong Kong over recent years, with the Infernal Affairs series coming to mind.
We went in there anticipating substantive violence, nudity, colorful language and the like, only to be sorely disappointed, leading us to conclude someone managed to convince the ratings board to stick a handily sensational label on Election, immediately putting it apart from the competition (most of which falls under tamer categories).
This type of cynical, conniving trickery does not win points with anyone gullible enough to build up expectations, and disappointment indeed featured prominently among members of the audience of which we were a part.But that aside, Election's in no way a bad triad movie.
However, once you're done appreciating the film's underworld history and politics lesson the flaws begin to surge.First among them is the pacing, slow and dry to the point of making it hard for non-enthusiasts to sit through Election wriggle or nod free.
Lam Ka Tung (infernal Affairs, World without Thieves) fares better as efficient soldier Kun, but most everyone else in supportive roles does not rise above average.Much of Election revolves around the two antagonists' search for a mythical baton, the Wo Sing's symbolic talisman without which no chairman can ever be accepted, and although this pursuit seems trivial it at least provides the film with an excellent panorama of HK as the search goes on, from rural border area Lo Wu to teeming night district Tsim Sha Tsui, so at least we have that.Not much else, though.
There was no drama at all except for some scenes where they kidnapped a few members of the enemy elective party for ransom and also don't forget the shock that happened in the end which I won't reveal for spoiler reasons.
The only that kept me moving in the film was some of the interesting facts they gave us about Triad street life in the movie.
This isn't as violent as I was expecting which makes the violent scenes appear all the more brutal and effective.There are a lot of twists and turns and back stabbing and double crossing all the way through the film making it hard to know who's side a particular character is on.The plot is pacey with some good dialogue and character development and gives an interesting view of the workings of the Triad gang it follows.The violence when it comes is brutal, no guns or martial art scenes with special effects, this is believable in your face violence and for all the dialogue you are never allowed forget that the Triad is a violent criminal organisation.The ending is surprising but thoroughly consistent and believable..
"Election" showcases all that are exceptional about the Hong Kong film industry in the past 20 years or so; old thespians, A-cast list and upcoming actors join hands to make this grim but entertaining movie.
It's talky, but the acting is first-rate: cool and collected Lok (Simon Yam), cocky and violent Big D (Tony Leung), the frustrated police superintendent (David Chiang).Many Western mainstream audience think that Mafia and Triad movies ought to be filled with killings, gunshots and bloodshed.
Johnnie To crime drama surrounding the hierarchy of Triad familyFollows the election process of two lead candidates: Big D - a veteran, tough, aggressive, power driven; and Lok - calm, respectable, more giving, family oriented.
I find it a quite serviceable gangster thriller that makes pretty good use of a very old storyline, about two rivals battling for control of a Triad gang.
Not Alexander's Payne Oscar nominated comedy, this Johnnie To drama of the same name focuses on division within Hong Kong's high profile gangs as they try to choose a new chairman for the local triad.
Cited by Quentin Tarantino as his favourite film of the year and selected to compete at the Cannes Film Festival, the film certainly has a lot of interest for its insight into ritualistic gangs where the most important decisions come in words rather than actions, but one's mileage with the film is likely to vary..
I had interest in watching Election (2005) because of all the excellent commentaries I had heard about it.Now,after watching this film,I can say it's not bad but it disappointed me.Let's see the bad points from this movie.I felt the story from this movie excessively confusing.I always appreciate narrative complexity on a movie but what I do not appreciate is when the narrative complexity becomes very confusing and that's what happened to this movie.I thought the story should have been told in a more clear way without losing the narrative complexity.I also felt this movie has some redundant moments which do not add too much to the story.In summary,I think a more clear story and more focus on the editing would have made a much better movie.Now,I have to mention some positive elements.With some exceptions,the film did not bore me and I found interesting the implicit comparison this movie makes between gangsters and politicians.But,in spite of that positive elements,this movie did not result too satisfactory in my case.Maybe,I was expecting too much,I do not know.I think I can recommend this movie but I do not think I can recommend it with much enthusiasm..
Every two years, a new movie comes to prove that Hong-Kong cinema is well alive and still has a word to say to the international world of cinema.
In 2001, "Time and Tide" reelected Tsui Hark as one most inventive director alive, in 2003, "Infernal Affairs" proved that HK thrillers are still better than American ones, and now, Johnny To wants to be elected as the new ambassador of HK cinema, as the selection of his two last movies at the international Cannes film Festival proves it.
But if "Election" is a good and entertaining movie, it doesn't really bring anything new to the genre.Every two years, one of the most important triad of Hong-Kong has to elect his boss, through a democratic way, where the older decides who can run and win the election.
The movie deals with one of this election, which soon becomes a death fight between the two main candidates : the calm and cold-hearted Lok (magistraly interpreted by Simon Yam) and the crazy and dangerous Big D (Tony Leung Ka Fai).
Everything that could help to win the election is now permitted : from corruption to torture, and nothing will be spared.So the film is quite enjoyable, for it's always nice to see a classical and well done HK triad movie.
The main influences are still Melville and Coppola, with maybe a new touch of Kitano here (for the character of Big D.) 1997 finally didn't affect too much the way Hong-Kong makes movies, and although we knew it for some time now, it's always a pleasure to have a confirmation.But the problem is that "Election" really lacks of originality, where Tsui Hark brought some crazy experimental elements and "Infernal Affairs" a more realist tone, "Election" didn't really bring anything new.
And if the movie is realist and even didactic (you learn a lot about the triad rituals and the way it works while you're watching it), it also lacks of action and tension.
And there almost no dramatic tension in it : a long scene shows a sort of relay to catch a scepter, which will decided the winner of the election, and as no real suspense in it (even if it's quite fun to watch).And one last thing I didn't really appreciate about the movie is its photography, which is very dark (and by dark I mean dark : you sometimes can't see anything but a black screen with a point of light somewhere very far).
This style, which is familiar to Johnny To - he uses it in PTU for instance - doesn't really help the narration, which is already a little complicated, especially in the beginning of the movie, when you're not well aware of all the relations between the characters and of the triad complex rituals.
The first of two films by Johnny To, this film won many awards, but none so prestigious as a Cannes Golden Palm nomination.The Triad elects their leader, but it is far from democratic with the behind the scenes machinations.Tony Leung Ka Fai (Zhou Yu's Train, Ashes of Time Redux) is Big D, who plans to take the baton no matter what it takes, even if it means a war.
Big D will change his tune or...Good performances by Simon Yam, Louis Koo and Ka Tung Lam (Infernal Affairs I & III), along with Tony Leung Ka Fai.Whether Masons, made men in the Mafia, or members of the Wo Sing Society, the ceremonies are the same; fascinating to watch.To be continued....
The election of the new Yakuza's boss is the beginning of a war inside the organization.In my opinion the violence is wise used in the context, making a very strong gangs film.
Is like Infernal affairs, but without the easy action-violence scenes, and the confused storyline.
The film uses numerous clever pieces of identification all the time playing with modernity yet sticking to tradition a theme played with throughout the film Where John Woo's Hong Kong films are action packed and over the top in their explosive content as seen in Hard Boiled (1992) and when Hong Kong films do settle down into rhythms of telling the story from the 'bad' point of view, they can sometimes stutter and just become merely unmemorable, a good example being City on Fire (1987).Election is a film that is memorable for the sheer fact of its unpredictable scenes, spontaneous action and violence that are done in a realistic and tasteful (if that's the right word) manner as well as the clever little 'in pieces' of film-making.
Another fine piece of attention to detail is the way the Uncles toast using tea and not alcohol, elevating themselves above other head gangsters who'd use champagne (The Long Good Friday) and also referencing Chinese tradition of drinking tea to celebrate or commemorate.Election is a good film that is structured well enough to enjoy and a film that has fantastic mise-en-scene as you look at what's going on.
"Election" is a confusing gangster movie with a story that really shouldn't make so little sense.
The more even-tempered Lok is elected, much to the anger of his rival, the disrespectful and hot-headed Big D.The Triad chairman must own a dragon head-carved baton.
Hak Se Wui. Not to be confused with the Resse Witherspoon high school film of the same name, this is a stylised look at Hong Kong's triad gangs.
Either way this is a good start and if there are no sequels a great film in its own right..
Unquestionably the most prolific director in Hong Kong today, To brings something new to each movie he makes and yet maintains a consistent quality.
My personal favourite of his work will always be "The Mission" (1999), the pinnacle of a stylish "gun" movie surrounding an ensemble of fascinating characters."Election" (or "Hek she wui", the underworld) which competed in Cannes earlier this year is another good one from To, following his traditional crisp, no-nonsense and unpretentious direction.
In polarised contrast to the ageing, fate-beaten photographer he played in "Everlasting Regret" (which was actually shot AFTER "Election"), he portrayed Lok's nemesis "Big D" with such explosive intensity that not even the automatic choice for such characters, Francis Ng Chun-yu, could have done any better.Those who are disappointed because the supporting characters have no depth have entirely missed the point.
Basically there is an election for the new chairman of the Hong Kong Triads Wo Sing Society coming up, so you can imagine how much violence that is going to occur during this.
The struggle is between "candidates" Lam Lok (Simon Yam) and Big D (Tony Leung Ka Fai) for control of the oldest and most powerful Triad parts of the society.
Also starring Louis Koo as Jimmy Lee, Nick Cheung as Jet, Cheung Siu Fai as Mr. So, Lam Suet as Big Head and Lam Ka Tung as Kun. There are some good realistic corruption themes and moments, just about enough action, apart from maybe when the cops get involved, but a sequel followed, so it's a pretty worthwhile crime drama thriller.
This movie is great fun to watch if you love films of the organized crime variety.
I was somewhat disappointed by some of the choices made story-wise but overall a good crime film.
it's just not nearly as good as it's sequel.In the first Election installment, we are shown the two competitors for Chairman; Big D and Lok. After a few scenes of discussion amongst the "Uncle's" as to who should have the Chairman title, they (almost unanimously) decide That Lok (Simon Yam) will helm the Triads.
I wonder if this influenced director Johhnie To in any way while making the second Election, as he does deliver more of Jet's character in the sequel.While Nick Cheung gives a scene stealing performance, I must not fail to give due to the rest of the film's actors.
Simon Yam is his usually glorious self and the film also benefits from heavyweight HK actors like Louis Koo, Tony Leung Ka Fai, and the under-appreciated Suet Lam. There really aren't any weak links in the acting and one could easily believe that they're watching real gangsters.Although the performances are great, one of the most impressive things about Election is Johnnie To's eye for the camera.
It gets a bit hard to follow because the film is so full of characters that aren't integral to the plot.
Maybe the film would have worked better if it would have been a bit longer with more time dedicated to the inner workings of the Triad, or if Director Johnnie To would have funneled down the necessary elements and expounded on them more.
Election is a Chinese mob movie, or triads in this case.
Every two years an election is held to decide on a new leader, and at first it seems a toss up between Big D (Tony Leung Ka Fai, or as I know him, "The Other Tony Leung") and Lok (Simon Yam, who was Judge in Full Contact!).
Unlike any other Asian film I watch featuring gangsters, this one is not an action movie.
Simon Yam was my favorite character here and sort of anchors the picture.Election was quite the award winner at last year's Hong Kong Film Awards, winning for best actor (Tony Leung), best picture, best director (Johnny To, who did Heroic Trio!!), and best screenplay. |
tt0785035 | Ong-bak 2 | The film begins in 1431 feudal Siam. It is a time of political upheaval, treachery and danger. The opening scene explains how during the reign of Boromarajatiraj II of the Ayutthaya Kingdom, the Ayutthaya royal court became more powerful than the Sukhothai kingdom and expanded to the east. The Ayutthaya army besieged the Kingdom of Gods for several months. The king sent his son, Prince Indraracha to rule the kingdom.
At the new kingdom, Lord Sihadecho is a provincial ruler, and a gallant and noble warrior of a formally great dynasty. His son, Tien, a spirited and unyielding youth, aspires to be just like his father, but is forced to undergo dance lessons instead much to his disdain. Meanwhile, the treacherous and power-craving Lord Rajasena, a former city administrator of the capital city, plots to seize total control of all Asia and has amassed the greatest army in Asia. Rajasena sends out vicious assassins to murder Lord Sihadecho's family and his loyal soldiers. The only survivor from this massacre is Tien, who manages to escape with deep vengeance in his heart.
Tien is captured by a group of savage slave traders, who throw him into a pit with a giant crocodile when he proves uncontrollable. Tien is saved by Chernang (Sorapong Chatree), leader of the renowned "Pha Beek Khrut" (Garuda Wing Cliff) guerilla group, who attack the slave traders. Chernang throws a knife to Tien, proclaiming "your life depends on you, young boy," with which Tien kills the crocodile. Intrigued by his physical prowess and attitude, Chernang takes Tien to a soothsayer, who says the boy has a great destiny, that "spirits will fear him" and that he will become the greatest warrior who will ever live, and as such Chernang takes in Tien as his adoptive son and raises him like himself as a guerilla and a bandit. Tien gets his wish to train as a warrior and more besides, growing up to excel in the arts of war, including man-to-man fighting, incantation, and subterfuge. Tien is instructed in a variety of traditional Asian fighting styles, including muay boran and krabi krabong, Japanese kenjutsu and ninjutsu, Malay silat, and various Chinese martial arts. He also learns the use of weapons such as the ninjatō, katana, jian, dao, talwar, nunchaku, rope dart, and three-section staff.
Now a young man and with all these martial arts heavily instilled, becoming the greatest warrior to ever live, Tien (Tony Jaa) is eager to quench the vengeance in his heart by killing the slave traders, which he does. He then goes on to kill Lord Rajasena by posing as a dancer during a celebration. Returning to the Pha Beek Khrut, Tien is mystified to find their village deserted. Suddenly, he finds himself confronted by wave after wave of masked assassins, the same ones hired by Lord Rajasena to destroy his original home. As the fight progresses Tien is too enraged to notice that the masked villains are none other than his Pha Beek Khrut comrades though their individual combat styles are glaringly recognizable. As Tien tries to defeat the masked assassins he climbs on an elephant but then Bhuti Sangkha a.k.a. The Crow Ghost (Dan Chupong uncredited) appears and kicks Tien off of the elephant. Bhuti's nature is unknown and he has a small role in the film. Then he takes the elephant away. At last confronting their leader, Tien finds they have been surrounded by Rajasena's army, which is led by the tyrant, himself. Lord Rajasena reveals he had survived thanks to an armored tunic concealed beneath his state robes. Chernang unmasks and admits to his part in killing Lord Sihadecho, as he was in league with Rajasena. Chernang explains that he must carry out Rajasena's orders, or his family (the Pha Beek Khrut) will be killed. As Tien reluctantly fights Chernang, Chernang pins him to the ground, once again calls Tien his son and asks him to take his life in payment for killing his father. Chernang then forces Tien's blade to snap and slash across his throat, taking his life.
The film ends on a cliffhanger with Tien, after defeating dozens of Rajasena's warriors, being finally overwhelmed by hundreds more. Rajasena orders Tien to be taken away to be slowly tortured to death. It is unclear whether Tien survives, and if he does, how it is so. An extremely ambiguous and vague voice-over explains that Tien "may find a way to cheat death again", and shows him with a fully-grown beard (which he does not have in the film) standing in front of a scarred golden Buddha statue, perhaps indicating reincarnation. | cult, revenge, boring, violence, flashback | train | wikipedia | tony ja's love for elephants is obvious(Thailand's national animal).overall 9/10 (-1 if there is no sequel) one can obviously see that even though the movie is tony ja's first direction it is very maturely taken and it's sure that it makes you feel like there should be some more at the end but The movie is unfinished as tony and the producers had some unknown clashes behind the scenes.Yet the movie is full of brilliant fights and you will surely be satisfied while expecting for a sequel..
Tight editing, lots of superb fight sequences, lots of innovative battle techniques, minimal storyline meaning minimal time wasted on anything but the raw action that we are there to see; all makes it a great movie impossible to miss.
There's no doubt I've been a fan of movies starring Tony Jaa with the likes of Ong Bak and Tom Yum Goong being showcases for the Muay Thai brand of martial arts, and I fondly remember those hard hitting action sequences that left me gaping, as well as the numerous replays just to drum it through to you that it's all Jaa and it's all as incredible as can be.
One only wishes that it does get made sooner rather than later, and without the production woes that plagued this one.So Ong Bak 2 is actually half a movie, and given that it's a totally new story to begin with, I thought it would make better sense in retitling it, rather than to have a misnomer that it's a sequel.
I remembered having read somewhere that there's supposed to be some fusion of dance and martial arts, which didn't transpire in this film as far as I can tell (the dance/action sequence here doesn't make the cut), so it might be left for the next movie instead.Compared to the other Tony Jaa movies, you can see that the production values here have been ramped up tremendously.Techniques have also matured, and gone are the repetitive playbacks.
But that doesn't mean you're going to lose out, because like any self-respecting martial arts film, the camera stays still when it should be and at a sane distance away to capture all the action comfortably, and the editing doesn't cut in and mess up the sequence.
As for the revered elephant, you know it's never far behind, and there's one thrilling battle atop the large mammal, with Dan(ce) Chupong no less, albeit hidden behind a mask.Ong Bak 2 picked up very slowly, and spent significant time developing the back story of Jaa's Tien.
So at this moment, we can still enjoy what Tony Jaa has prepared for action fans worldwide a showcase that he's not just all about Muay Thai, but a bona fide action hero who's the real deal, crafting a myriad of incredible fight sequences that would still leave your mouth gaping wide open..
When all is said and done, this film genuinely captures Thai culture from start to finish, with no pandering to foreign influence outside of some martial arts styles.And that, my dear friends, is the crux of why "Ong Bak 2" so very easily surpasses its predecessor.
This is not to say that the script of "Ong Bak 2" is far better than Jaa's previous movies, because the conclusion is in desperate need for a direct sequel that wraps up the fates of the surviving antagonists as well as the lead protagonist.
This movie doesn't even need action to sustain interest, and if that's not a glaring sign that Tony Jaa has already surpassed Bruce Lee as a cinematic entertainer, then nothing is.It is somewhat surprising to read some of the negative reviews that bash the storyline to bits without resorting to any specific observations whatsoever.
I just finished watching Ong Bak 2 and I have only one thing to say - if you liked Ong Bak (or at least thought it was decent enough for your time), well, you're going to LOVE this one.Totally different story told in a beautiful way (no unanswered questions this time) filled with some of the greatest fights I've ever seen (and I'm a profound martial arts fan).
Here it feels like those working with him have just given up totally and have allowed him to do little other than fight – he barely has a line in the film and any "plot/character development" stuff is done by the child playing his character while Jaa himself looks into a fire in a "remembering" pose.
At the moment Ong Bak 2 just looks like they are happy to film him fighting and leave it at that, which I think is a real shame because this only makes for great action – not a great film.
Although he did a good job directing the film in some regards, this is probably a mistake because he cannot do anything about his own failings as a performer.Ong Bak 2 is a technically brilliant martial arts film with plenty for the weapons fan to love.
The first Ong Bak was good because a) North American audiences hadn't really been exposed to Thai martial arts and the movie showcased the more violent aspects in a very acrobatic way.b) they kept the story really simple: get the head of the statue back, no matter what.
What we end up with what you might expect if a brickmason decided he was an architect and made everything including the furniture out of bricks.I was briefly part of a startup which would have been able to extract things like the movements of the Thai martial arts in this film and compare them to the few Hong Kong- produced fight moves.
Ong Bak 2: The Beginning is not a continuation of the first film, neither is it a prequel in the true sense; the story takes place several hundred years ago, and tells of Tien (played as an adult by Tony Jaa), the son of a murdered lord, who becomes a powerful warrior after a clan of outlaws adopt him and teach him their combat skills.This period setting allows for a far more epic feel than the first film, but the broader scope of the plot ultimately means less minutes devoted to pure, bone crunching action, a fact that has understandably disappointed those hoping for another relentless, adrenaline fuelled, juggernaut of a martial arts movie.
Add the fact that Jaa's impressive Muay Thai skills are often overlooked in favour of weapons based action, and it's not surprising that this film hasn't been as overwhelmingly well received as its predecessor.On a more positive note, the film looks absolutely fantastic, with beautiful cinematography, sumptuous costumes, and some truly outlandish characters, and when the action does kick into top gear, it is utterly breath-taking, especially during the flawlessly executed, bone-crunching final battle between Tien and a host of enemy warriors, where we finally get to see the star delivering his trademark punishing blows with knee and elbow.In short, Ong Bak 2 is a very enjoyable slice of solid action entertainment—not quite as jaw-dropping as part one, but then what is?7.5 out of 10, rounded up to 8 for IMDb..
The bonus in this movie is that, unlike the first Jaa movies, it features a lot of weapon-play and incorporates other martial arts, as well as the usual Muay Thai elbows and knees.Occasionally slightly hard to follow, but never entirely confusing, I would argue that, contrary to popular opinion, this movie actually has a decent plot.
It is an interesting form of dance, I suppose but I tend to just fast forward to the point where the real action begins again.Having said that I find Ong Bak 2 worth watching because it is one of the most arrestingly beautiful films I have seen in a long time.
That aside,'Ong Bak 2:The Beginning' is a high octane Martial Arts epic,starring Tony Jaa (the South East Asia answer to Bruce Lee...and perhaps a splash of Jet Li,for good measure).
I am a huge fan of Jaa's films ong bak and warrior king, as some thing of a fan of martial arts films i was pleased with originality that these brought such as the repeated scenes from other angles as with ong bak.I had heard that this movie had ground to a halt due to production problems so when I got the chance to see it i was pleased.A fractured start opens this but this is explained during further acts in the film.
Unfortunately during his hiatus Jaa or the film producers seem to have watched some of the seminal martial art movies such as jackie chans drunken master and snake in the eagles shadow and some of jet li's original work.
The hand to hand scenes are however superb.The final 20 minutes or so are high quality and I would recommend any fan to watch for this reason alone but on a whole I expected better.It would be nice to see Tony Jaa in a buddy movie with a more main stream action star, (I would like to say Jet Li), to see what the result would be but I get the unfortunate feeling that it won't happen..
The acrobatics that made the first two big Jaa movies (Ong Bak and Tom Yum Goong) so fabulous take a back seat to more varied fighting.On the whole, I was entertained (even without dialogue), and I'll probably watch it again.
I'd hate to fight this guy, especially if he is in a bad mood.I didn't care for the mysticism, which only served to distract from the story; but I accept it is likely a cultural thing and try to look past it.ONG Bak 2 is an action packed emotionally thrilling film that forces viewers to relate to the characters.
The characters are OK but tony jaa gives the best entertainment there is a martial art based story but its still not good as the script or the setting just didn't work.
Ong Bak 1 was good but for me it just seemed western, maybe that is how Thailand is today but Ong Bak 2 and 3 has shown me a lot.I think Tony Jaa should take on real Thai fairy tales and folk stories like Ramayan.
And the story takes place way before the first Ong Bak. It reminded me of that crappy live action "The Jungle Book" movie than a legit straightforward martial arts flick.
Still a long way to go for Tony Jaa. The attempt on an epic piece of martial art movie ends up as an epic piece of trash, the only thing matters is a few fight scene that you can eventually watch on youtube.IMO Jaa tries to make a shortcut to his ambition on becoming the same caliber as Jackie Chan, to write and direct his own movie.
Ong Bak and Tom Yum Goong didn't have much of story but at least they were so simple they make no real damage to the whole movie.I wish I'd just go for the DVD; at least I can skip those annoying parts, which is quite a lot, and go straight to the fight scenes, which is getting sour to my taste because brutality just can't maintain its charm..
The original "Ong Bak" and Tony Jaa's next movie "The Protector aka Tom Yum Goong" are two of my favorite martial arts movies of all time.
"Ong Bak 2" is Jaa's attempt to make a classic martial arts movie but it really falls short of that goal.
I like Jaa's intentions here of showing off different martial arts styles but I kept waiting for those jaw dropping fight scenes that I've been accustomed to seeing from him and sadly they are nowhere to be found.
Set in 15th Century Thailand, the subtitled "Ong Bak: 2" brings little that is new to the martial-arts genre - but a barrel load of impressive fight scenes and an authentic look make it worthwhile viewing for the aficionado.
It's the oldie about a young boy who is trained to become a righteous warrior, standing up for the innocent and the helpless against a cruelly oppressive regime.As noted, there isn't much in the way of storytelling, dialogue and characterization to distinguish "Ong Bak: 2" from the countless other films in this category, but the battle scenes are impressively staged and mounted, with a brutality that, while it makes them hard to watch at times, seems an accurate reflection of the era in which it's set.
Moreover, directors Panna Rittikrai and Tony Jaa (who plays the lead role) never feel the need to prettify the setting, offering up a screen full of snaggle-toothed, matted-locked extras to go along with all the muck and mud.Tien, ace martial arts fighter and tamer of elephants, takes on a half-a-dozen opponents at a time, slicing-and-dicing and karate-chopping them into the dust, only to have them rise again to face a second, third, even fourth humiliating go-round at his punishing hands.
Even Ong Bak: Tom Yum Gung featured the same style of humour which balances the intense fight scenes.Tony Jaa utters about 2 sentences in the entire film whilst trying to showcase his skill of weaponry in the style which is put to shame by better films made by the Shaw Brothers.
Action, action, action - isn't that all we really want from action/martial arts flicks?As proved time and time again by poor, non-existent or just plain ridiculous story lines, we like to get motivated a little by a plot and characters, so that the action is so much the sweeter when it comes about.Ong Bak 2 (a misnomer, perhaps?) certainly doesn't fall into the above category which has spoiled so many other titles, however, by the time it finishes, you'll probably be left wondering, "Isn't something missing?" And you'd be right - at least an extra hour of film!Without risking ruining the viewing for anyone, by the time the characters and the story have fully developed, the film suddenly ends.
Yeah, it could be argued that it was supposed to have, or that it was shoddily paving the way for a sequel, but for me, it felt like the closing of the second act of a martial arts epic, and by it just switching to the credits, I felt rightfully cheated.Tony Jaa's a spectacle to watch as ever, the story's there, just not played out properly (unless some moron truly did truncate filming or cut the film in half) and the sets and action are all superb...
I heard that tony Jaa is a good actor with high martial arts skills and I had seen tom yum goong (the protector), although protector was not a bad movie but this one was really poor.
After all, that was entirely the plot of each film, pushed out to 90 minutes by the breathtaking physical feats and awesome fighting abilities of one Tony Jaa.So I guess this is welcome to "Who stole my Buddha head 2?" Nope, this is a prequel my friends, and it has nothing to do with Ong Bak whatsoever!
1", this is simply too long and repetitive.The last fight is good but also suffers through repetition, and the likelihood is that you simply start waiting for this thing to end.As with all Tony Jaa movies you only watch them for the fights and stunts, so to summarise.* Ong Bak had better fights, stunts and action.* The Protector had wayyy better fights.Final Rating – 5.5 / 10.
Tony Jaa might be the best athlete and martial artist in fight scenes today, he just makes sh*tty films in between those fights.If you liked this review (or even if you didn't) check out oneguyrambling.com.
My husband and I saw this movie for sale at a local store, picked it up because the cover art looked promising...I have to tell you though, after about 1/2 hour of terribly dubbed dialogue, we had to turn it off.The cinematography was great, the martial arts were fantastic and the story line was pretty good.I don't know who they got to do the voice-overs, but in the end it would have been better to have just left it in the native language with subtitles only.Please, please...
What left me scratching my head was that the movie is presented as a sequel (prequel?) to Ong Bak, well at least in title, but the story has ZERO to do with the first film other than it stars Tony Jaa. Was this a dream sequence of the guy in Ong Bak I, perhaps he went back in time?
Hugely disappointing outing from Tony Jaa. I am a huge fan of Tony Jaa, and I think Ong Bak and Tom Yum Goong are two of the best martial arts movies ever made.While the production values of Thai films in general are very low by western standards, his films generally stand out for their stunts, fights, and sheer audacity.In this movie, however, Jaa's fights are few (2?
2.5 counting that atrocity that was the dance scene and the skills test) and the quality was horrible.I admit, it is very difficult to match the fights from Ong Bak 1, although Tom Yum Goong did try it by adding different styles and levels of fighters, along with the incredible stairway sequence that was filmed in one take.This movie, on the other hand, simply appeared to run out of money and imagination, preferring to spend a lot of camera time on close-ups of really ugly people screaming.
From the costumes (which are rich in detail and lend yet further visual depth to an already beautiful film) to performances that ring true throughout to some of the high-flying, death-defying martial arts for which Jaa is known, ONG BAK 2 is the kind of movie- satisfying on every level- that lovers of the genre always hope for but seldom get.
(But this is a martial arts movie, so a good story can be viewed by some as being inconsequential to the fights.) The film has many phenomenal action set-pieces that really make expert use of Jaa's penchant for crushing/breaking bones, acrobatic stunt-work, and mastery of many different fighting styles. |
tt0465436 | December Boys | This film is a coming of age picture for the four main characters, and how their lives change over one Christmas holiday. The film is set in late 1960s Australia. Four orphan boys from a Roman Catholic orphanage in the outback of Australia – Maps, Misty, Spark and Spit – were all born in the month of December, and for their birthday, they are sent on a holiday to the beach to stay with Mr. and Mrs. McAnsh. While there, they meet Fearless, a man who claims to be the risk motorbike rider in the nearby carnival, and his wife, Teresa. Misty, Spark and Spit instantly become closer to Teresa, but Maps, eldest of the four, is still reluctant to talk to her. He instead finds more fun in spending time with an older teenage girl named Lucy, who had come to the beach to stay with her uncle. He often goes up to a place with strange rocks, and meets her there.
A few days later, the orphans peek through a window in Fearless' house to see Teresa undressing, but Misty, being the most religious of the four, throws a rock at the wall to make them go away. Misty runs back to Mr. McAnsh's house and looks through the small opening of a door to see someone in the shower, only to find that it is the sickly Mrs. McAnsh. They soon discover that she has breast cancer.
One night, Misty overhears Fearless talking to his friends about the possibility of adopting one of the orphans. Excited about the opportunity to finally have parents, he keeps it to himself until he decides to reveal it to a priest who has driven to the beach for the orphans' confessions. The other boys realise that he is taking too long, and once he is finished, they force it out of him with the threat of Spit spitting on him while he is pinned to the ground. Misty, Spark and Spit are eager to compete for the love of the seemingly perfect Fearless and Teresa, but Maps is less than excited, even saying to Lucy, "What's the big deal about parents, anyway?" Maps experiences his first kiss with Lucy, and soon loses his virginity to her in one of the caves of the Remarkable Rocks.
There, she tells him to promise that he will always remember her as his first. The next day, he goes up to the Remarkable Rocks, only to find Lucy is not there. Her uncle tells him that she's left the beach to return to her father, and will not likely be back until next summer. Heartbroken, he goes to the carnival to find Fearless and talk to him, but discovers that he is not a motorbike rider there, and instead cleans up after the animals. Furious that he'd lied all along, he finds a painting made by Misty of him as the son of Fearless and Teresa, and destroys it. Misty attacks him and hits him with the fragments of the frame he'd put the painting in, and the bond between the four orphans is broken.
Fearless finds Maps in the cave of the Remarkable Rocks, and explains to him what had really happened. It is revealed to that Fearless was formerly a bike rider, and did all of the stunts with Teresa riding on the back of the bike. Then, there was an accident that kept Teresa in the hospital for nearly a year, making her unable to have children. That was the reason they had wanted to adopt one of the orphans.
Maps returns to the beach and finds out from Spark and Spit that Misty has gone into the water, and is drowning. Maps goes after him despite the fact that he cannot swim. Both he and Misty nearly drown. Underwater, they open their eyes to see a vision of the Virgin Mary, possibly meaning that they are dying. Before they can reach out to it, the two boys are grabbed by Fearless and brought back to the shore. Maps and Misty reconcile with each other and the four are friends again.
The next day, the boys are called to Fearless' and Teresa's house for an announcement. There, they reveal the couple is going to adopt Misty. He takes leave of his friends and he watches on the front porch with Fearless and Teresa as the other three orphans walk away and begin playing on some rocks down the beach. Misty realises that they are his true family, and asks Fearless and Teresa if he can stay with them instead. They accept, and he returns home with the orphans.
Many decades later, Misty, as an old man, drives to the same beach along with the ashes of Maps, who had recently died while working as a priest in Africa helping refugees, and Lucy's ring that she gave to Maps on that holiday long ago. He meets up with Spark and Spit, and they toss the ashes and ring loose into the wind from the hill above the beach, remembering Maps and their time there, with a cheer to "The December Boys." | dramatic, boring | train | wikipedia | Daniel Radcliffe plays a very subdued character far removed from HARRY POTTER and shows that he has the talent to continue in the business as an adult.
The buzz for December Boys surely points to how Daniel Radcliffe will fare sans cloak, glasses and lightning bolt scar on his forehead, to star in a movie that's totally out of the Harry Potter franchise.
Based on a novel by Michael Noonan, December Boys tells the story of 4 orphans, all being born in the month of December, who were sent packing to a seaside village for a vacation, by virtue that it's a reward sent to the orphanage, and what better (lazier?) way to select the lucky few, than the ones celebrating their birthdays the same month.So we have Maps (Radcliffe), Misty (Lee Cormie), Sparks (Christian Byers) and Spit (James Fraser) sent on a journey that will test their close friendship, and as usual, each will come face to face with their individual challenge that will forever change their lives.
Each child however, have an episode directed around him, to similarly allow the audience to pick their preferred sub plots, involving a giant fish, a misunderstood motorcycle stuntman, dealing with mortality issues when their surrogate guardian has to battle disease, and of course, saving the best for last and for Radcliffe, first love, in the form of a young lolita Lucy (Teresa Palmer).Soon, their hot blooded young boy antics and rebellious streaks give way to a tone of seriousness, and there's where the movie adds its poignant gravitas.
Finally a movie where you actually care about the characters.The acting is marvelous, the story is touching and the scenery is magnificent.
It's a good movie, I really felt that I cared for what happened to the boys, especially Maps and Misty.Teresa Palmer as Lucy is absolutely beautiful, it's the first time I've laid my eyes on her.
I know the story, it doesn't feel like it would be so interesting when it's not the first time.All in all, this December boy gives the December boys a 7/10 stars.
Many of the indie/low budget films are far better than what is making the big dollars and getting the heavy promotion these days.December Boys is not a great film but it certainly is good and I found it very enjoyable.
.I have seen complete garbage nominated for Oscars in the past and lately I don't put too much stock into many movie critics that give "A" ratings to films that I cannot believe someone paid money to even make let alone ones that I would waste my money on.There's nothing wrong with a film that has a simple story line....a feel good movie thats enjoyable to watch.
Not all Radcliffe fans are squealing 10 year olds.The only thing I found worth to criticise in December Boys was the unclear time period and the time span in the aging of the characters at the end.
And obviously the 'present day' older boys are too old, in my opinion by a couple decades.Some say it was too sugar coated, etc...but there were many films in the golden age of Hollywood (which I loved) that would now be considered too chaste, too sweet, un-realistic...the list goes on and on.
Set in the late 60s, December Boys is a beautiful, poignant tale of adolescence and abandonment with the vast, awe-inspiring Australian outback as a backdrop, unraveled in the same vein as Stand By Me."What's the big deal about having parents anyway?" Maps (Daniel Radcliffe) retorts to his summer fling Lucy (Teresa Palmer).
Sparks (Christian Byers) is good with mechanical things, while Spit (James Fraser) is so named for what he does best.Having been given a glimpse of what the orphans' lives have been like together, you have an idea of where Maps' trend of thought comes from.
Rude awakenings and rejection are themes that most people can relate to after hardened years, but for children to already know it intimately at such an age is what makes December Boys the thoughtful tearjerker it is..
this film portrays this well.Excellent Cinema Photography and composition with some excellent stills and excellent script too with some pot shots at the ridiculous order that Nuns were and are today :( with their strange methods at handling Orphans not to mention their narrow minded beliefs.The acting by the 4 orphan boys was very convincing as was the portrayal of how young boys behave like smoking after lights out in bed, or how the awareness of the opposite sex awakened their senses.The orphans were the stars without a doubt the other adults competent enough Jack Thomson was somewhat wooden in his role.To sum up an enjoyable film devoid of any nasties ...
That something is the engaging performances of the two major boys - Daniel Radcliffe and Lee Cormie.The action takes place during a Christmas holiday of the late 60's or early 70's in Australia.
They are given a treat of a vacation at the shore provided by an older couple.The four are three pre-adolescents - Sparks, Spit, and Misty (Cormie) - and one older boy who acts as the big brother of the younger three.
The story is told by Misty as an adult and contains many, probably mis-remembered, events of that eventful vacation.The boys are hosted by an older couple with the man being played by Jack Thompson as Bandy.
Bandy's wife is ill with cancer, and there are some interesting scenes of interactions with the boys but the couple plays a very small role in the whole thing.The vacation cabin is in a small cove accompanied by several others, and the inhabitants of these neighboring cabins provide a number of interesting characters.
They are seen as potential parents by the boys, and the three younger ones compete in a battle for their attention - led by Misty.Maps is far more interested in a local teenage girl with whom he develops an intimate relationship.
It's not a great movie, but it gives the viewer a good feeling and gives this viewer some memories and emotions of times long passed..
A great movie indeed with all that a good movie needs: love, drama, realistic characters, joy, sadness and all the other things that a human being might feel nostalgic about at a certain moment.The orphans change the cove and cove changes them forever and, if you let it, their story might change you as well.The emotional charge simply grows bigger and bigger from the beginning of the movie towards the end thus providing with a finale of biblical proportions (emotionally speaking).Although in the beginning it might not seem like much this is, in my opinion, a movie that will not leave you unchanged and give you a new perspective as to what your dreams are and/or ought to be..
And as for the apparitions and the last scene involving the boys as adults was laugh out loud absurd - half the audience certainly thought so when I saw it - howls of sniggering and laughter.Shame really - as I said, wanted to enjoy it for a number of reasons - its Australian, its a good a story, I wanted Daniel Radcliffe to set himself up post Harry Potter (and he actually didn't do a bad job - the most convincing scene in the film involved adolescent embarrassment between him and Teresa Palmer) etc..
I like the movie and was especially emotional because I've been to Kangaroo Island for one week last year and I have lived near Snellings Beach.
"December Boys" marks star Daniel Radcliffe's first lead foray outside the world of Hogwarts, and the magic is conspicuously lost.
Not that Rod Hardy's well-meaning drama is terribly bad, but it's listless and overly sentimental that ultimately, it's a forgettable experience.Set in 1930s Australia, Radcliffe plays the role of Maps, an orphan boy raised in a Catholic orphanage.
Together with three other orphans born in December (hence their eponymous moniker), they were sent on a holiday at a beach for Christmas where a newlywed couple plans to adopt one of them.While the film's location and cinematography are breathtaking, there's not much else.
They say the best place to start is at the beginning, which is where our four main characters are introduced; Maps, Misty, Spit and Spark, otherwise known as the December Boys.
Based on the edge of a seaside town noted for fairgrounds and fireworks, the cove provides the ideal backdrop for an emotional journey they will always remember.The theme of love, romance, family, and friendship all play a role as the December Boys deal with the notion that one of them may be adopted, by a childless couple living in the cove.
However, despite these flaws December boys contains plenty of small joys and touching scenes, with timely voice overs and good direction, this is a film deserving to be seen..
I've seen a lot of movies, from Hollywood to Bollywood, jumping countries and continent, mixing comedies and dramas, actors and amateurs, but I have never seen a movie where I knew that even though it would be sad ending, I would feel happy about it, knowing the characters in the film will always be happy.Where to start...the acting was simple and brilliant.
Daniel Radcliffe also shone in this role, and I am always delighted to see his movies (he is truly an inspiration for people who want to do good in this world).
We have forgotten the feeling of brotherhood, of looking out for each other, of enjoying the simple things in life, of fighting but reconciling in the end, of the merit of good deeds that, even when they are hard to make, come back to you in a good way.There is not one criticism I would make of this film.
It is a film about growing up and making hard choices, about loneliness and a sense of belonging, about friendship, brotherhood, first love and lost, family, parenting, good life skills.
It is a movie that moves deep emotions, tells the sad story of guys who are left alone in this world with the hope that someone and at some point give you a sincere hug, to see this film I moved to my childhood, because I was adopted and the panic that you feel when you are alone..
The story of this film is very touching: focusing on four young Australian orphans, the film portrays the end of childhood and the beginning of adolescence.
A word of praise for the choice of filming locations, with beautiful maritime landscapes and enchanting beaches.I think most people who see this movie do it because of Daniel Radcliffe but, after watching it, I think it has a lot more to offer.
For Radcliffe, this film overlaps a bit with the Harry Potter movie series.
(No spoilers, however you should be ready for the religious element coupled with the boyish considerations of good and bad.) The boys are entertained by almost anything, and the members of the little seaside community each have their encounters/shenanigans with the DBs, but midway in the film Misty turns on the group in a desperate effort to secure his adoption by the family sponsoring their holiday.
(No spoilers.) Radcliffe ("Map" in the film) is struggling with the fact that he's nearly old enough to be let out of the orphanage; for the majority of the film he tries to play the subdued teenager who isn't easily moved or eager to be adopted, but other factors come into play for him.
Despite good acting, with Radcliffe grasping not the best of Ocker accents, and likable settings of KI, I just found the film, limited in it's story, the best parts of course, involving sexy Teresa, who least added some spark and sunshine to the bare film.
Radcliffe, while finding time to fall in love and actually some fun, going sand boarding and intimate cave exploring, is one of four orphans, hoping to win guardianship from this young couple they stay with during the warm month of December.
I was interested in "December Boys" (2007) for two reasons: I like (non-raunchy) coming-of-age flicks and the fact that it takes place on the Southern coast of Australia (actually it was shot on Kangaroo Island, part of South Australia).
As for Daniel Radcliffe, the star of the popular Harry Potter films, I've never seen him in a movie before and have no interest in him or Potter.The story revolves around four boys from an Outback Catholic orphanage who get to celebrate their December birthdays by taking a Christmas holiday on the coast.
They discover that a young childless couple are interested in adopting one of them, which creates a bit of rivalry, although the oldest one (Radcliffe) could care less and spends his time learning about girls and romance.
No kidding.After seeing the film a few times I only remember two of the boys: Maps and Misty.
This is definitely a picture where you'll have to read in between the lines to appreciate, which might make it good for repeat-viewings.On the positive side, the Kangaroo Island locations are fabulous, especially the high shots of Remarkable Rocks in Flinders Chase National Park.The picture really comes alive when Teresa Palmer is on screen; she plays femme fatale Lucy.
Others complained that the children-as-adults at the end were too old considering they were kids in the late 60s, but the epilogue obviously takes place in the near future, like the 2010s or 2020s, which would put them in their 50s or 60s.BOTTOM LINE: Although the story is merely okay as far as captivating and moving cinema goes, the highlights noted above compel me to give "December Boys" a decent rating, in particular the scenic rocks/coast and Lucy.If you like Teresa Palmer in this picture be sure to check her out in "Bedtime Stories" (2008), "Restraint" (2008) and "The Grudge 2" (2006).The film runs 1 hour, 45 minutes.GRADE: B/B-.
Full marks to him for shedding his image nd trying something as experimental as this.This trail of four adolescent orphans celebrating a vacation in a picturesque location in Australia waiting to be recognised.Their rivalry nd brotherhood at t same time nd various teenage activities are real enough to make us nostalgic.But there r some loose ends where u simply cannot explain t actions of t leading characters as real.And t ending is a big let down making a few wonder 'wats t point'.But u can accept a few blemishes in t editing nd script to walk down t memory lane one more time.
In this movie, you got 4 orphans: Maps (Daniel Radcliffe, "Harry Potter"), Misty (Lee Cormie),Spark (Christian Byers),& Spit (James Fraser).
December Boys is Radcliff's first non-Potter film since he was twelve.
Enough about that wizard though.December Boys is a heart-warming story of four brother-like orphans fighting for the affection of hopeful adopters.
Although there is little diversity in their characters, Misty, Maps, Sparks and Spit engage in cute rivalry, betrayal and camaraderie.The film tackles some simple themes in a charming manner.
Daniel Radcliffe plays Maps and appears much taller and older than the other boys and is withdrawn .A Man appears on a Triumph motorcycle looking like his from the eighties.
The other boys are drinking by now we see the horse with a fish in its Radcliffe's character is already smoking and probably already having sex with the blond Lucy.
Nice coming-of-age story of four Australian orphaned boys..
Most of the movie takes place on small beach of vacation cabins on the South Australia coast, but it begins in the vast, featureless spaces of the Australian Outback, the location of this boys town run by nuns.
And there is the old fisherman fishing for Henry ("Is that a person, or a type of fish?"), the old, large fish that visits the bay.The movie is narrated in modern time by the adult character we come to know as Misty.
Daniel Radcliffe of Harry Potter fame is Maps, because he has birthmarks on his chest that looks like maps.
This is a very big deal because it was very hard for any of these boys to be adopted.A very nice, little movie, it has a realistic feel and is a coming of age experience for the 4 boys.SPOILERS: Maps is the oldest of the boys, and often takes a "big brother" role.
Towards the end of the movie, the childless couple announce they have chosen Misty to adopt, and the three of them watch as the other 3 boys wander away.
Misty realizes that his family really is the group of 4 December Boys, and he affectionately tells the young couple thanks for choosing him, but he really belongs with the family he already has.The movie ends in modern time, and we see Max Cullen as the Narrator and the Adult Misty.
For many years, Daniel Radcliffe has stunned audiences both young and old alike as the dynamic Harry Potter.
In the movie "December Boys", Radcliffe shows that he's now all grown up and is now ready to take on other challenges outside the realms of Harry Potter.
Based highly on the novel by Michael Noonan, "December Boys" under the direction of Rod Hardy, this movie, like Rob Reiner's 1986 iconic film "Stand By Me", truly stands out as the definitive coming-of-age story centres around four boys named Maps (Radcliffe), Misty (Lee Cromie), Spark (Christian Byers) and Spit (James Fraser) form an alliance thanks mainly to the orphanage they're staying at because of sheer irony that their birthdays happen to be in the month of December.
The boys are now past the adoption age limit and may never know what it's like to be loved by a parent.
All the ensemble give it their all, especially Radcliffe's Maps who serves as a mentor to the other boys while at the same time is facing off with his own disappointments.
This movie had me totally dismiss that this young man starred in Harry Potter as his trial and tribulations had me intrigued the whole time. |
tt4294444 | Deep Six | In 1966, the refitted liberty ship San Marino is on its way from San Francisco to Auckland, New Zealand. The ship is carrying more than eight million dollars' worth of titanium ingots as well as a mysterious passenger who goes by the name of Estelle Wallace. Wallace is actually Arta Casilighio, a former bank teller at the Beverly-Wilshire bank who embezzled more than $120,000 and is making her getaway. Unfortunately, for her and the rest of the crew, a group of Korean seamen who came aboard as last-minute crew replacements have hijacked the ship and its cargo, and conveniently dispose of Wallace and the crew by paralyzing them with poison in their food and dropping them over the side into the depths of the ocean.
The story then flashes forward twenty-three years to the waters off of Augustine Island, Alaska where an extremely deadly poison is moving through the waters, killing everything it comes in contact with. The poison comes to the notice of the Coast Guard cutter Catawaba when it intercepts a derelict crab boat called the Amie Marie. The men sent aboard to investigate discover that the entire crew has died horribly, bleeding from every orifice and their skin had turned black. The boarding party soon begins to exhibit symptoms themselves. The doctor sent aboard orders the captain of the Catawaba to quarantine the crab boat and calls off his symptoms as the poison overtakes him, hoping that this information will help others in their diagnosis.
It is later revealed that the symptoms of the mysterious poison are strikingly similar to those of a deadly biological weapon, called Nerve Agent S, developed by the Rocky Mountain Arsenal outside of Colorado as the ideal weapon for use on troops wearing gas masks and protective clothing. The agent clings to everything and is absorbed through the skin, resulting in almost immediate death. The weapon was eventually discontinued by the Army because it was as deadly to the troops deploying it as it was to the enemy. While en route to be buried in the Nevada desert, an entire boxcar carrying more than 1,000 gallons of Nerve Agent S disappeared.
Dirk Pitt and his friend, Assistant Projects Director Al Giordino are called away from their current project to assist the Environmental Protection Agency's Dr. Julie Mendoza in an effort to find the source of the poison in what is assumed to be a sunken ship. Pitt discovers that the liberty ship Pilottown is embedded into the shore of the island with only her stern exposed to the elements. They board her and discover the containers of the nerve agent but while they are attempting to recover the barrels, the volcano on the island erupts, causing the barrels to shift and inadvertently kill Dr. Mendoza when her biohazard suit is punctured, exposing her to the poison. Pitt vows to get to the bottom of who was responsible for the poison being on the ship and to take his revenge for the death of Dr. Mendoza.
In his attempts to trace the history of the Pilottown, Pitt discovers information on the wreck that leads him to the Alhambra Iron and Boiler Company in Charleston, South Carolina, and from there turns to NUMA computer expert Hiram Yaeger and St. Julien Perlmutter, a family friend and naval historian. They discover that the Pilottown has been part of a complicated web of insurance scams and piracy which saw her name changed several times, from San Marino to Belle Chase, and finally to Pilottown, as her ownership changed through a number of bogus holding companies. Eventually, they tie the ship to Bougainville Maritime Lines, a powerful company owned by the ruthless and mysterious Madame Min Koryo Bougainville.
Bougainville and her grandson, Lee Tong, have entered into an audacious plan with the Soviet Union to engineer the kidnapping of the President of the United States, the Vice President, the Speaker of the House and the President pro tempore of the Senate, the next three men in the line of succession to the presidency, as part of a project code-named Huckleberry Finn. It is revealed that the Soviet economy is in ruins, a famine is spreading amongst the Eastern Bloc nations and the whole Eastern Bloc may be on the verge of collapse. The Soviets have devised a plan that calls for the President to undergo a top-secret Soviet mind control procedure, termed "mind intervention", which uses a combination of an implanted microchip and injected memories from a brainwashed Soviet dissident to allow the Soviet government to control the President's thoughts without his knowledge. The other three men are kept in reserve as the procedure only has about a 60% success rate. In return for carrying out the abduction, the Bougainvilles are to receive one billion dollars in gold, which the Soviets intend to cheat them out of while unaware that the Bougainvilles intend to double-cross them as well.
When the disappearance of the President (and those next in the line of succession) on the Presidential yacht is discovered, Secretary of State Douglas Oates, now the acting president, orders a cover-up of the disappearance while a massive search is under way to find the kidnapped men. Congresswoman Loren Smith, the on again-off again lover of Dirk Pitt, who is on a fact-finding mission aboard the Soviet cruise liner Leonid Andreyev off the coast of the United States inadvertently witnesses Speaker of the House Alan Moran smuggled onto the ship by a KGB agent. When the Soviets discover that Smith knows that Moran is on board, they kidnap her as well. Pitt discovers that Loren is missing and he and Giordino sneak about the Leonid Andreyev to find her. But after the Bougainvilles detonate a bomb that sinks the ship (part of their double-cross) she is kidnapped by Lee Tong, disguised as a steward, aboard a rescue boat.
Meanwhile, the President, now under control of the Soviets, returns to the White House and announces that while he was gone, he was negotiating a secret disarmament agreement with the Soviet President and has agreed to loan them billions of dollars in hard currency which they may use to purchase food and previously banned American high-technology products. When he further announces his intention to pull the United States out of NATO and bring home all troops and missiles in Europe without the consent of Congress, Congress announces their intention to impeach him from office. The president sends the Army to keep members of Congress from meeting and it appears that the United States now has what the founding fathers feared worst, a dictator in the White House.
Using information from Yaeger and Perlmutter, Pitt determines that the secret lab the Bougainvilles are hiding the remaining captives in is on a barge along the Mississippi River near New Orleans. He and Giordino embark on unauthorized rescue mission with the aid of the local office of the FBI. The agents are ambushed by Bougainville's security guards and it's up to Pitt and Giordino to rescue Loren and the Vice President. In a last-ditch effort to intercept the barge before it can be sunk at sea, Pitt commandeers the riverboat Stonewall Jackson and enlists the help of 40 members of the Sixth Louisiana Regiment of Confederate re-enactors. Armed with smooth bore muskets, as well as two Napoleon cannons that fire improvised charges, they launch an attack against the Bougainville's crew of stone-cold killers armed with automatic weapons, while Pitt attempts to board the barge and rescue Smith and Margolin before it is too late. | gothic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0030709 | The Saint in New York | During a visit to Europe, Simon Templar (alias "The Saint") befriends a rich American whose son was recently murdered in New York City; the culprit went free due to police and courtroom corruption. Templar is given an offer he can't refuse: $1 million if he goes to New York and deals out his unique brand of justice to evildoers in that city.
The book begins with the New York Police Department receiving a letter of warning from Scotland Yard Chief Inspector Claud Eustace Teal, indicating that Templar, after being inactive for six months (presumably since the events of The Saint Goes On), has relocated to the United States. The letter is accompanied by a dossier on Templar's career thus far (Charteris proceeds to give new readers a brief summary of past adventures dating back to the first Saint novel, 1928's Meet - The Tiger!).
When an accused cop-killer is found shot to death, the NYPD knows the Saint has arrived in New York. After Templar rescues a child who has been kidnapped by a mob boss (assassinating the gangster in the process), the whole city learns that the Saint is on the job. Templar's ultimate goal is to discover the identity of the city's main kingpin who is known only as "The Big Fellow".
Templar is abducted by one of the remaining crime lords and two corrupt, high-ranking New York City officials offer him $200,000 to reveal who is backing him. Templar claims to be working on his own, and the crime lord orders Templar to be taken for the proverbial "ride". Templar is taken to a remote location in New Jersey but manages to escape his fate thanks to the intervention of Fay Edwards, a beautiful young woman who happens to be a cold-blooded killer, and who claims to be working for The Big Fellow. Simon Templar and Fay Edwards fall in love with each other, in a completely Platonic way (they exchange only two kisses and exchange only a few words) which seems nevertheless very deep and poignantly emotional. (On his return to London, in the last page of the book, Templar would refuse to tell Patricia Holm about his American experiences.)
The Saint eventually learns that he is being manipulated into killing off certain crime bosses in order that The Big Fellow will not have to split a $17 million cache of blood money that was going to be shared among the gangsters. In effect, rather than being a daring and idealistic vigilante, as he thought of himself, Templar finds that he had been made into a gangland hit man – and very much dislikes to see himself in such a role.
And when the Big Fellow's identity is finally revealed, he ends up being the last person Templar would suspect. | murder | train | wikipedia | A dark and enjoyable start to the Saint films with a really good presence in Hayward.
With crime rife in New York due to gangs and a small group of men in particular, Inspector Fernack makes the decision to bring in Simon Templar aka "The Saint" to help.
Dispatching one of the men with a clinical kill very early on, Templar quickly uncovers the existence of a character known as the "Big Fellow" clearly a top man behind the gangs.
Moving steadily into more and more danger he tries to reach and remove the Big Fellow to cut the head off the snake.I'm not sure why this film was apparently banned in Sweden on its release but I would hazard a guess that it had something to do with the marvellous anti-hero qualities that Templar is given in this film.
The plot could have been straight out of any crime b-movie as it essentially involves bringing "justice" to New York by taking down a major crime syndicate; however in many other films from the 1930's the hero would have been a cop trying to get a conviction and, if he killed anyone it would have been by necessity rather than choice.
This dark edge makes the film more interesting than the standard plot suggests it should be and I was quite taken in by it even if the quest for the "Big Fellow" wasn't really delivered with any tension or mystery (which was a bit of a shame, although it did enough to keep me guessing and watching).The real feather in the cap is Louis Hayward who plays it with the perfect mix of the suave and the psychotic.
Outside of his though the performances are either just OK or wooden but nothing better; they more or less do the job but I could help feel that Hayward deserved more than the very basic caricatures of cops and criminals.Overall though this is a tough and enjoyable b-movie that features an enjoyably dark anti-hero.
Later films in the series (well, the next one in fact) would quickly lose touch with this dark, cruel character and tone it down to be nonexistent but here it is in full effect and it makes a standard (if engaging) plot much better than it deserved to be..
This by my lights is a splendid and very good story about Leslie Charteris's enigmatic character, Simon Templar, "the Saint"; it was the first of a series of films which starred several actors inn the role.
The film was directed by Ben Holmes, and also stars Kay Sutton as an enigmatic bad girl, Sig Ruman, Jonathan Hale, Jack Carson and many others in small but effective parts.
Templar is tracked down in foreign parts by an honest man representing a group in New York who want to bring down the mysterious crime boss who is poisoning the city with his influence.
But what drives it is the script, written from Charteris's novel,; it is the best of an interesting series because it is fast-paced, original, clever in dialogue and clear in its contexted ethical purposiveness; the group who hired him and the viewers finally come to know that they picked the right man, whatever doubts they may originally have had about the famous and notorious Simon Templar.
The first Saint movie was a very good effort, true to the spirit of the book albeit made on the cheap by RKO.
I grew up thinking that Roger Moore was the Saint and no-one could top him, but have to admit that Louis Haywood was just right in the title role with the right amount of debonair, imperturbable devil-may-care attitude.
This is Snow White for adults!A real pity Haywood only played the Saint this glorious once in Hollywood - I don't count his 50's British attempt - although Sanders was very funny in his 5 films didn't really hit the right note.
He also falls in love.The cast features Louis Haywood as the Saint, Kay Sutton and Jonathan Hale.The Saint In New York is worth watching if you get the chance.
The first film in RKO's series (continued, successfully, with George Sanders, and unsuccessfully, with Hugh Sinclair), this features tiny, white-suited Louis Hayward, as the dangerous psychotic Simon Templar, law-enforcer of a kind (mainly by shooting people), on a mission to find the 'big fellow', head of a crime gang.
Hayward is excellent in this, having just the right amount of repartee and daring (without making the role comedic as Sanders did or boring as Sinclair did), as is his love interest, Kay Sutton, who seemed to do very little in films despite her good looks and strong voice.
The first film adaption of Leslie Charteris's hero Simon Templar, aka The Saint finds The Saint In New York taking on the job of cleaning out organized crime in the big apple.
What they get is little more than a contract killer, albeit a charming one.Louis Hayward plays The Saint and then left the role to return to it for one more go in the Fifties.
I wish he had done a few more episodes in this film series.What The Saint's been hired to do is eliminate one way or another a gang of six that control all the crime in New York City worth controlling.
Still this Saint film gets by on the considerable charm of Louis Hayward and it's easy to take..
Although many may argue that the later portrayers of the Saint (Roger Moore, Ian Ogilvy) are better, one has to admit that, for a start, this film is a good start.
Louis Hayward makes an interesting "Saint"....
Before George Sanders took over the role, it went to LOUIS HAYWARD for THE SAINT IN NEW YORK.
Hayward was an interesting actor who should have had a better career than he did in Hollywood, proving that when he got a chance to play an interesting scoundrel ("Ladies in Retirement"), he was fearless in letting his bad side show.Too bad he didn't play "The Saint" more often in the string of films RKO came up with in the '40s.
He's good, better than his material here which is strictly a by-the-numbers sort of thing."You should have a question mark after your name," he tells his romantic interest, KAY SUTTON, a dark beauty who looks somewhat like a softer version of Gail Patrick.
She's an enigmatic woman and remains so since her character is never developed.Hayward joins the search for "The Big Fellow", head of a crime gang wanted by the NYPD and along the way encounters several misadventures with mob members being disposed of in his unorthodox way.Interesting to see JACK Carson, JONATHAN HALE and SIG RUMAN in the supporting cast.Modestly entertaining but nothing special in this series..
Too bad this kind of character complexity didn't survive the many sequels.The story itself is pretty routine: cleaning up the city by getting the mysterious Big Fellow.
Simon Templar's roguish audacity is very well conveyed by Hayward and the film is a lot of fun..
So it begins, the start of the realisation of Leslie Charteris' literary creation, one Simon Templar, AKA: The Saint.
And it's a good start to be sure.Templar here is played by Louis Hayward, all smirky confidence, lithe and deadly, Templar is "hired" by some big city suits to snuff out New York's baddies who have in turn been snuffing out policemen and getting away with it.
Exciting and witty action mystery with Louis Hayward a tough Templar.
New York is being overrun by a few mob leaders: the police do their job and arrest lawbreakers, but crooked lawyers and bought juries just set them free again.
"I don't know
.Maybe it's because I like to see justice for the underdog
.maybe it's simply my love of anything that smells of danger or trouble." Louis Hayward is immediately arresting as the Saint, from his careless posture to his easy grin and wary eyes to his sparkling conversation.
Intrigued by the idea of aiding a city in need, he agrees to fly to New York—but only if he is allowed to work using his own methods.Jonathan Hale is strong as the police inspector whose respect for the law makes him leery of trusting an outsider like Templar; grudging respect grows into good teamwork as the two men gradually learn each other's ideals and motivations.The rest of the cast is also excellent—solid character actors in well-written roles.
An actor named Cliff Bragdon is swell as a taxi driver who can "handle a wheel better 'n any guy in this screwy town."A good script and strong RKO production values—and Hayward's charismatic touch as the Saint—add up to a top B mystery..
Louis Hayward is "The Saint in New York" in this 1938 film starring the Leslie Charteris character of Simon Templar, aka The Saint.
Here, Simon is sent to New York to deal with gangsters who have escaped punishment by the justice system, and also to identify the man behind all of them, "The Big Fellow." I have to admit that though I've seen Roger Moore, Ian Ogilvy, and George Sanders in the role and enjoyed them, my favorite Saint has always been Louis Hayward since I first saw this film years ago.
While Sanders especially, with his talent for the acerbic, mined the humor in the role, Hayward mines the elegance, the grace, the light touch.Hayward is backed up by the beautiful Kay Sutton, who reminded me of Kay Francis, Sig Ruman, Jonathan Hale, and Jack Carson in an early role.Very good.
It's a quickie B-movie, but it's a lot of fun.Simon Templar, a.k.a. The Saint, is a sophisticated thrill-seeker who hands out vigilante justice to those who deserve it.
The man plays by his own rules, but he sure gets results.THE SAINT IN NEW YORK (1938) is the first of many film outings for the Simon Templar character.
Played by Louis Hayward, Templar is a scrappy sort of globetrotter with the charm of an Orson Welles (think Harry Lime).
("It's like poetry.")This Saint adventure is action-packed, with Templar taking down a city- wide crime syndicate over the course of a few nights.
It does sag ever so slightly in the middle and, other than the entertaining Jonathan Hale and Kay Sutton (despite a relatively underwritten role) who brings the right amount of allure and mystery, the supporting cast while still solid and well suited to their roles are not hugely memorable.Louis Hayward however is simply terrific in the title role, bringing suavity, charisma, elegance and toughness to a potentially stock character that actually has shades of complexity.
The ending is one of the more satisfying ones of the series.Overall, the first Saint film is also the best one.
They enlist the help of Simon Templar, aka The Saint, a British amateur crime-fighter not afraid to break the law or take lives to stop crime.
Templar's given a list of names of six criminals and sets out to eliminate them one by one, saving a police inspector's life and rescuing a kidnapped child along the way.The first in RKO's "The Saint" series, based around Simon Templar.
After this film, Louis Hayward would be replaced by the much more debonair George Sanders.
Hayward would return to the character once more in the '50s in a movie made by Hammer, The Saint's Return.
This first Saint film is really good.
While I prefer George Sanders overall, there's certainly a gritty appeal about Hayward's Saint.
Simon Templar aka the Saint started his long and illustrious career in 1929 with the release of Meet the Tiger as written by the brilliant Leslie Charteris.
And while most people know of Roger Moore, Ian Ogylvie, Simon Dutton or George Sanders playing the Saint this first one is played by Louis Hayward (he played in the first movie and the last one of the b/w series) and he does it very well.
This is a straight "revenge" story in which the Saint takes care of the organized crime in New York, by means that are not available to the police.
The very first "Saint" made into a film, based on the novel by Leslie Charteris.
This one stars Louis Hayward as Simon Templar.
The Saint In New York.
Simon Templar, the character alluded to as The Saint, is best known through the UK TV series that ran from 1962 to 1969 with quintessential Englishman Roger Moore in the title role; Moore would of course go on to play the equally enigmatic James Bond.
The original Saint was a much darker character than portrayed by Roger Moore, Ian Ogilvy or (on film) by Val Kilmer; he was a murderer, for that is what we call vigilantes who execute gangsters without due process of law.In this short black and white film we see Louis Hayward as a sardonic avenger brought in by the legal authorities in New York to clean up the city's underworld any way he sees fit.
Even making allowance for 1930s gangster films, the script, the plot (including the romantic sub-plot) and most of all the escapes, are silly, but the one-liners more than compensate for that:"you're getting so crooked, you don't even trust yourself" and later after dispatching two hoods: "they've gone to join their fathers, if they had any".
Louis Hayward plays the Saint, rather less suave than Roger Moore would play him a few decades later in the television series but more of a dapper thuggish charm.This Saint is not a copper or a sleuth but more of a Robin Hood type vigilante who is not prepared to mask himself like Zorro and work incognito.This Saint is prepared to break the law and serve justice his own way as he has been hired to clean up the city and find the Big Fellow with Kay Sutton helping out and adding romantic interest.The adventure is a potboiler with plenty of fisticuffs but the mystery element is lacking as a modern audience will easily guess who the Big Fellow will turn out to be..
Saint in New York, The (1938) *** (out of 4) The first in RKO's series of The Saint films features Louis Hayward in the title role.
In this film, The Saint is tired of criminals getting away due to the judicial system so he sets out to get his own vengeance.
I've seen a lot of these early mystery series from the Crime Doctor to Boston Blackie to The Falcon and so on but this one here, at least the first film, is a big change from those series because The Saint isn't a totally friendly character.
Where those other series have the good guys trying to arrest the bad guys that's not the case here because The Saint wants them dead and will even kill in cold blood or kill an unarmed man to get his vengeance.
Hayward is very good in his role and his dry acting really adds a lot to the character.
The supporting cast really isn't that impressive and that holds the film back some as does some ill-fated humor at the hands of two of the top gangster's gunmen but outside of that this is a very good movie and one that's unlike the others of its type that was out there around the same time..
While the movie lacks the charm and sophistication of George Sanders (who most associate with the leading role), it makes up for it in a big way by being so very different.
Instead of a crime fighter who always wraps everything together neatly for the police by the end of the film, this version of the Saint just kills the bad guys or gets them to kill each other!!
I really liked this, as the typical role played by Boston Blackie, the Falcon or Charlie Chan is way too predictable--they NEVER would plug a bad guy who isn't even resisting arrest or making an attempt on the hero's life!
Simon Templer's methods are sure a lot more practical and fun to watch than other crime fighters!
Apart from the way he dispatches criminals, the film is a rather standard film about bad guys and a mystery--in this case WHO is responsible for leading a crime syndicate in New York City.
The first in a series based on Leslie Charteris' character, this B crime drama is a predictable programmer meant to pack in as many shady characters as possible, a bit of mystery and some fast-moving action.
Louis Hayward, in his only appearance as the Saint, is not as good as his successor George Sanders would be.
Kay Sutton is the gang moll he briefly gets involved with, and Jonathan Hale (who would be back in several more of the series) is the New York detective he is brought onto the case by.
For my first encounter with The Saint, I'm glad it was with the original film in the series, this one featuring Louis Hayward in the role of Simon Templar, though continued in subsequent pictures by the likes of George Sanders and Hugh Sinclair.
Which is interesting in light of the fact he went on to portray that character in 'The Lone Wolf' TV series of the mid-Fifties.I was somewhat struck by the idea that The Saint was called on to deliver a brand of vigilante justice way back in 1930's New York.
The concept of revolving door justice seems a product of more recent times, but obviously that wasn't the case at all as we see here.Clever repartee and offbeat disguise help The Saint make his rounds in New York as he gets closer and closer to the identity of The Big Fellow, one of the men on The Saint's hit list.
Louis Haywards only entry as the Saint, this movie has some interesting legends.
So, my best guess is The Saint came to New York to kill off the entire underworld here.
Totally out of character from the rest of the series even to this day, this Saint deserves a watch. |
tt0447590 | Honô no mirâju | Takaya Ougi, a high school student, wants nothing more than to protect his best friend Yuzuru Narita and live a normal life. That is, until Nobutsuna Naoe, an intense and charismatic man, informs Takaya that he is in fact the reincarnation of Lord Kagetora, the adopted son of a noble samurai lord, Kenshin Uesugi. Naoe, himself a "possessor," or a soul reborn through time, reawakens Takaya's abilities to exorcise evil spirits and fight the Feudal Underworld, a collection of restless warrior spirits bent on modern-day conquest. While most possessors remember their former lives before being reincarnated, Takaya does not, and is often hostile towards any effort for the complete recovery of his memory. As the plot unfolds, the complex history of the characters and their past suggests why this is so, and the true nature of the tempestuous and somewhat ambiguous relationship between the two leads provides the backdrop for a melodrama that spans several generations of Japanese history. As they ascend to the living world to renew their ancient war, Naoe, Takaya, and two other possessors gear up to prevent that from happening.
=== OVA ===
The OVA Rebels of the River Edge (2003) has animated the book with same title. this OVA resumes the plot of the anime television series, yet incorporates several new developments, among them the question of unswerving loyalty and personal honor. Takaya is sent to Kyoto to investigate the re-awakening of the Ikko sect and Araki Murashige, a one time member of the Ikkō sect who has since deserted the clan. With the help of his vassal and fellow possessor Haruie, the two are successful in tracking him down, only to discover that Murashige is after a 400-year-old mandala (a Buddhist ritualistic artifact and meditative aid) made of the hair of the deceased Araki clansmen. Unfortunately, by the time they meet up with Murashige, Haruie recognizes him as Shintarou, her former lover in a past life. Whether it's true or not, and despite the confusing emotional complication of this development, Takaya orders Haruie to eliminate Murashige once he becomes a true threat to the balance of power. Meanwhile, Takaya finally reunites with Naoe after a prolonged period of estrangement. Unresolved sexual and psychological tension dominates their initial exchange, and it's uncertain whether these two powerful possessors will resolve their differences and work together against this latest threat. | romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0000091 | Le manoir du diable | The film opens with a large bat flying into a medieval castle. The bat circles the room, before suddenly changing into Mephistopheles, an incarnation of the Devil. Mephistopheles produces a cauldron and an assistant, who helps him conjure a woman from the cauldron.
The room is cleared shortly before two cavaliers enter. The devil's assistant pokes their backs before instantaneously transporting to different areas of the room, confusing the pair and causing one to flee. The second stays and has several other tricks played on him, such as furniture being moved around and the sudden appearance of a skeleton. The cavalier is unfazed, using a sword to attack the skeleton, which then turns into a bat, then into Mephistopheles, who conjures four spectres to subdue the man. Recovering from the spectres' attack, the man is visibly dazed and is brought the woman from the cauldron, who impresses him with her beauty. Mephistopheles then turns her into a withered old crone in front of the man's eyes, then again into the four spectres.
The second cavalier returns and after a brief show of bravery, flees again, this time by leaping over the balcony's edge. After the spectres disappear, the cavalier is confronted face-to-face by the Devil before reaching for and brandishing a large crucifix, which causes the devil to vanish. | paranormal, gothic | train | wikipedia | Containing some elements of later vampire films..
The very first horror movie was not 1896's Le Manoir Du Diable (The Devil's Castle), in fact, Georges Melies' Un Nuit Terrible that features a giant insect, is his first production in the horror genre, anticipating the creature-on-the-loose plots of the fifties.
However, Le Manoir Du Diable is the first film to feature hints of the vampire.
Its running time barely three minutes, and made by and starring Melies.
Looking at it many years later it seems primitive and crude, but it also displays an imaginative exuberance and joy that makes it one of film history's little treasures.The Devil played by Melies himself, has a kind of carnival charm.
In a castle, a flying bat turns into the Devil.
The Devil makes a cauldron magically appear.
Our villain clearly panicked, there is a puff of smoke and the Devil is gone.Because of the brazen, Gothic quality of Le Manoir Du Diable, its brief running time is not a limitation.
Read books like " The Satanic Screen: An Illustrated Guide to The Devil in Cinema" by Nikolas Schreck and Allan Hunter's "Chambers Concise Encyclopedia of Film and Television." Find odd-man-out wonders like Le Manoir Du Diable and enjoy horror's timeless feast..
This Georges Melies film is one of the very first films to dip into the horror genre.
As was usual for a Melies production it's full of visual trickery and invention, while obviously being stagey and crude due to it's incredibly old age.
It certainly must be one of the first films to make reference to vampires with its bat that turns into Satan.
The simple narrative involves this character manifesting himself in an old castle and then conjuring up a cauldron, a young woman and old man.
Like all of Melies films, this one isn't about story-lines.
And it took many years for both audience and film-makers to work out how to do it.
So these early films like the Melies ones were mainly a means of showcasing visual trickery, a way of letting people see the impossible.
It's well worth any fan of cinema taking a few short minutes of their time out to watch these ancient films, not only because they are the very first primitive twitches of cinema but also because they are fascinating historical documents in themselves..
this film, although generally seen as the first horror, was in fact originally intended to amuse rather than scare.
its only when you look at it with todays understanding of horror conventions that we see it as such.
yes, it does correspond with the whole dark and impending thing and have aspects of the supernatural and creatures that we, as a modern cinema going audience connect automatically with horror, but if you view it as those at the time would have, you start to see that contrary to being a fear inspiring piece, it is actually a very interesting and cleverly put together series of artistic images.
So, when I see Georges Méliès with his silly bats, imps and devils appearing and disappearing, I can't help but admire him as this is among the first films to even try such 'advanced' special effects.
Sure, you might laugh at it now, but audiences of the day were mesmerized as these effects seemed to appear and disappear as if by magic--though it's obvious to folks now that the director simply stopped and re-started the film to achieve the effect.
I wouldn't call it comic per say like a view of the previous reviewers thought but a film to try and get a thrill out of an audience.
Georges Melies with his little gem may have kick started the horror genre to a place it may not be at with this type of movie.
House of the Devil has horror elements and essentials such as ghosts, witches, skeletons and the devil himself in form of a bat.
Take a look if you want to watch something very old and neat from a time way way forgotten..
Innovative horror film-making.
Must cinema buffs already know that Georges Melies was a cinema pioneer who single-handled devised many of the tropes that are now familiar to us as modern cinema-goers, and THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL is another example of his skill as a film-maker.The story sees the Devil at work in his spooky old castle, summoning up various creatures in a bid to commit evil.
Unfortunately he falls foul of an upright Christian, who uses the power of the cross to dispel his opponent.The three minute running time is chock-full of the special effects work that Melies loved to put on screen, particularly the use of jump cuts to make figures appear and disappear at will.
With a plethora of imps, spirits, bats, and ghouls, Melies single-handedly invented the horror genre, one which is still going strong all these years later..
Impressive For The Era. Melies Is Probably One Of The Best Technicians Of Film Ever.
In Comparison With Films Of The Time This Is Probably The Best Film Of The 1890's.I Have Seen Melies' More Famous Counterpart "A Trip To The Moon", That Is More Entertaining But This Film Has Less References To Racial Slurs (The Moon Men Are Often Criticised For Being Representations Of Africans) And In This You Don't Question Anyone's Movtives (Seriously Who Takes A Nap The Minute They Get To The Moon?) I Heard This Is Considered The First Vampire Film.
Simply, No. The Only Representation Of That Mythology Is Melies' Character Entering As A Bat Then Turning Human, By The Way Named Mephistopheles Who Is A Demon For Those Who Read Up On The Subject.I Can't Really Find A Downside Besides Its Not Really As Entertaining As It Would've Been 116 Years Ago. Besides That I Thought This Movie Was Well Done Technically.Overall I Liked It But Not As Much As "A Trip To The Moon".
Le manoir du diable (1896) *** (out of 4) aka The House of the DevilEarly Georges Melies trick film has a bat appearing inside a castle when it then transforms into the Devil himself.
LE MANOIR DU DIABLE is going to be a big interest to those Melies die-hards such as myself but I think horror fans will also get a real kick out of this.
To say this isn't one of the earliest examples of a horror film would be rather crazy because not only do we get the Devil and black magic but there are also ghosts, a skeleton and various other ghastly images.
Melies was clearly years ahead of everyone else and the effects still hold up quite well today.
I really loved how the different people began to appear even though the editing effects are quite obvious.
Amazing for the time in all sorts of ways.
There are dozens of ways that this three minute movie is amazing for the day.
"Le Manoir du Diable" is one of filmmaker Georges Melies's earliest trick movies.
But, having discovered special effects earlier the same year, he began experimenting with them, reproducing a stage magician's act with "The Vanishing Lady" and going even further to turn out "The House of the Devil".I have many things to say about this film.
I'll begin with the 'first vampire movie' thing.
Yes, there is indeed a bat included--but it is actually Mephistopheles, an incarnation of the devil, which it turns into.
Only looking at movies today about vampires do we look back at this and misinterpret it.
I cannot believe how stupid people can be nowadays.Is it a horror film?
According to Wikipedia, "The House of the Devil" was originally meant to amuse rather than scare.
The thing is, it looks so much like a horror.
The ghosts that appear actually DO look a little creepy.
It may not have originally meant to have been a horror, but one cannot deny that the whole theme makes it so from start to finish.As for the rumor going around that Melies played Mephistopheles, I have something to say about that too.
Wikipedia's article makes no mention of Melies having ever appeared in this short at all; however, according to my own beliefs, he played the cavalier character who is the victim of Mephistopheles's traps.
Melies's acting always has a certain joyful charm whenever he is in front of a movie camera, whether he's playing a frightened inn guest, a magician or the devil.
The devil here doesn't really feel like Melies at all, but instead comes across as sinister and lurking.
On the other hand, the cavalier not only looks like Melies, he comes off as very lively, amusing and every bit as childish as you'd expect from Melies's acting.
The actor for Mephistopheles's role still remains uncertain, though Georges Sadoul, a film historian, believes him to have been played by Jules-Eugene Legris, a performer at Melies's Theatre Robert-Houdin.Now that we've cleared that up, we can get on to see just how amazing this movie is for the time.
As I said before, Melies's earliest films were exactly like other films of the day--documentaries of ordinary life with no attempt to tell a story of any sort.
Just a bunch of guys appearing and disappearing in a castle.
Audiences had no idea how anyone could film stuff like this--they were spell-bound.
Not only does "The House of the Devil" contain special effects, it has a really (and this is sincere) cool looking set which sets the scene for the interior of the castle.
Behind the main set, there is another doorway guarded by a cardboard knight (which was later reused in Melies's films "A Nightmare" and "The Haunted Castle", I believe).
Behind that is another painted backdrop which is supposed to look like other doorways, later replaced by a balcony set so the second cavalier can jump off.
(A little odd, that change of sets, but Melies hadn't yet invented multi-scene narratives).
The dwarf appearing in puffs of smoke effect looks very convincing, while both transformations from bat to devil are actually surprisingly well done.
While all Melies used was just a simple splice to do all the effects, I think it actually looks better than could be hoped for.The whole thing was filmed out in Melies's garden in Montreuil, but watching it you wouldn't really know it since the sets are so convincing looking (at least to me).
While it may be a bit padded, that is actually a good thing since a three minute movie from 1896 was very rare.
This is truly amazing for the time and proof that Melies was one h--l of a guy..
I'm sure the appearing and disappearing in this brief film must have been quite entertaining to the viewers in 1896.
Anyway, at three minutes or so, there is a lot of action and one of the great early masters of film begins to feel his oats.
Titled 'The Devil's Castle' here in the UK, it is claimed to be the very first "horror" film due to the imagery of spectres, demons and vampirism.
In actual fact, it's intended to be a comedic fantasy short where the Devil conjures up phantoms to subdue two cavaliers who have entered a medieval castle.
Méliès managed to translate pantomime to motion picture, where the results have surprisingly aged well considering it's over 120 years old (1896).
Méliès' usage of the quick cut editing technique does seem viscerally raw, where the lack of seamless transitions make the illusory disappearing effect incredibly noticeable, but however marks him as one of the finest experimentalists of that era.
Méliès pioneered cinema with an array of genre firsts and, considering this was presumed lost until 1988, am fortunate he was able to convey his crazy fantasy thoughts onto film.
A simple three minute short that is very rough around the edges, but allowed an illusionist to bewilder his audience through ghostly magic..
Méliès, the Devil..
Georges Méliès was more like an experimenter, who took advantage of the invention of the first film cameras to create innovative techniques in this art.
This is what, as we see, he had more in common with other filmmaking pioneers of that time, such as Lumiere brothers, only the difference is that the latter were "scientists" experimenting with their new creation, while Méliès, who was also a professional magician, aimed to impress the audience with their tricks, something that in this case, he greatly does.This short, while it has a simple set-up (but there was a clear intention to tell a story after all, something that was not very common in other "films" at that time), is quite interesting and reasonably entertaining, and it allows the showcasing of very good special effects.It has a few comic relief characters, such as the cowardly cavalier, whose final scene has a bit of dark humor, or the villain's assistant (a possible precedent of Igor from Frankenstein?), which work all right.Perhaps some will find it confusing due to the pace being too fast but the results are worthy.Even though he would end up doing more notable works, in this one, you can already perceive Méliès' talent to entertain and amaze, something that many directors today do, or at least try.
And the fact that it is said that he played a cunning mastermind (the Devil itself), brings a bit of irony to the table..
It's simply INCREDIBLE what magic Georges Melies - a real-life trained magician - was able to bring to the screen in those very early days of cinema; and "Le Manoir Du Diable" was his first great masterpiece of special effects that must have absolutely baffled the audience at the time.
The way ghosts and devils and people disappear and reappear, the sudden flame bursts, menaces lurking literally everywhere - it's REAL magic.
And there's even an underlying sense of humor, which is so characteristic for Melies' fantasy, sci-fi, and horror shorts; VERY few people have contributed as much to the development of cinema as an ART form as Georges Melies - and this unique masterpiece, born in the 19th (!!) century, is one of the best examples for his genius!.
Is this really the first vampire movie?.
According to The Encyclopedia of Horror Movies, Edited by Phil Hardy, that's what this film is supposed to be.
The version of this on YouTube is listed as 1 minute 28 seconds in length, but the entire beginning portion is a newer introduction showing miniature sets that resemble the actual sets in the 1896 film.
Related films of Georges Melies include LE DIABLE AU COUVENT (1899) and A LA CONQUETE DU POLE (1912), in which a gigantic "abominable snowman" type monster crushes a human explorer.
LE MANOIR DU DIABLE is very much a stage pantomime, with the characters running about, and absolutely no subtitles.
By the way, no one in America that I've met seems to know how to pronounce Georges Melies' name correctly.
Not a official Vampire Movie.
But on first glance, this film is no official Vampire Film and second film was also too short, but 2 minutes!
The French film - Le Manoir Du Diable (1896) (The Devil's Castle) was the first short horror movie.
The 'real' count of the Vampire Films started in the year 1909 - Titel: ''The Vampire of the Coast'' (1909).
This -> Trivia: May be the first horror and "vampire" film is nonsense!
''In a castle, a flying bat turns into the Devil'' - this says enough that this vampire is essentially no!
The titles of this Movie say it enough: Also Known As: Manor of the Devil, The Devil's Castle, The Devil's Manor, The Manor of the Devil (english) - This is not about a Vampire, but the Devil!.
I'm not interested in retroactively assigning early films to the horror genre, as others seem to desire by claiming this film, "Le manoir du diable", as some sort of first horror film or to misunderstand the bat transformation to devil character here to be a vampire.
Rather, this is another trick film, which Méliès made many of.
Mephistopheles is the director-magician's surrogate, allowing a slight narrative construction around the attraction of substitution-splices (a.k.a. stop substitutions), as the devil terrorizes a lord/cavalier with various appearances, disappearances and substitutions.
By the way, I'm quite sure that Méliès plays the Faust-type lord/cavalier character and not Mephistopheles, despite several sources stating otherwise.
Thus, Méliès plays the victim to the magic perpetrated by himself as the film's director and editor.For a film of 1896, this is a rather elaborate fiction subject and production.
Most films at this time were actualities of ordinary events, popularized by the Lumiére Company.
Soon, Méliès would create the first decent movie studio, but for this film, he at least created a makeshift, painted cardboard set in the open air (see the shadows).
According to catalogues, the film originally ended with the devil being bashed into smoke, but this part seems to be lost.
It now ends with Méliès holding a cross to corner Mephistopheles.) EDIT: Flicker Alley has now also put this film on DVD in Region 1..
This short film is packed with fantastic effects for the time.
The film shows a bat transform into the devil who proceeds to conjure all manner of creatures.
It didn't happen too often that the possibly most notable early silent movie director, Georges Méliès, overshoots the mark, but this is one example where he did.
This film is packed with the the diabolically supernatural as well as with Méliès' usual magic tricks, show etc.
Unfortunately he goes for quantity over quality from start to finish and packs so much action in this short film that it's just one spectacular thing happening after the other and the story pays the price for it.
I wish he had focused a bit more on precision instead of turning this basically into a showcase of 3 minutes that also lacks quality in terms of the physical aspect of the film itself.
Méliès has done better many times. |
tt0143039 | The Genie from Down Under 2 | Penelope Townes, a 13-year-old British girl, comes into possession of an opal pendant when she explores the dusty attic of her family's decaying mansion. The opal contains two Australian genies, Bruce and his son Baz. Typically, an episode revolved around the consequences of one of Penelope's flippant wishes, or the efforts of an outside party to steal the opal (and thus, the genies).
There is also a strong subplot involving Bruce's efforts to manipulate Penelope's wishes in order to become free from the opal – something which Penelope, who is snobbish and sees the genies as her property, is too selfish to allow.
When Penelope inherits a property in Australia (Townes Downs), Bruce and Baz are very happy because it means that they can spend more time in their own country. When they go to inspect the property, they meet Otto von Meister, who runs tours of outback Australia. His family had once owned the opal, and according to Otto, Penelope's great grandfather had stolen it from his family years before. When he finds out that Penelope has the opal, he tries to steal it from her. He often enlists his nephew Conrad to help him. Penelope falls in love with Conrad, which gives Otto far more opportunity to steal the opal.
Things are further complicated when Bruce (the genie) falls in love with Penelope's mother, Lady Diana Townes. She is already supposedly in love with Lord 'Bubbles' Uppington-Smythe, however, it is revealed that this is only because of his money, and she in turn falls in love with Bruce.
In the end, Penelope accepts that Bruce and her mother are in love, and gives the opal to her mother, allowing Bruce to reveal his true identity. Bruce and Diana end up marrying. | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0014142 | The Hunchback of Notre Dame | The gypsy Esmeralda captures the hearts of many men, including those of Captain Phoebus and Pierre Gringoire, but especially Quasimodo and his guardian Archdeacon Claude Frollo. Frollo is torn between his obsessive lust for Esmeralda and the rules of the Notre Dame Cathedral. He orders bandits to kidnap her, but the hunchback is captured by Phoebus and his guards, who save Esmeralda.
The following day, Quasimodo is sentenced to be flogged and turned on the pillory for one hour, followed by another hour's public exposure. He calls for water. Esmeralda, seeing his thirst, approaches the public stocks and offers him a drink of water. It saves him, and she captures his heart.
Later, Esmeralda is arrested and charged with the attempted murder of Phoebus, whom Frollo actually attempted to kill in jealousy after seeing him trying to seduce Esmeralda. She is sentenced to death by hanging. As she is being led to the gallows, Quasimodo swings down by the bell rope of Notre-Dame and carries her off to the cathedral under the law of sanctuary, temporarily protecting her from arrest.
Frollo later informs Gringoire that the Court of Parlement has voted to remove Esmeralda's right to sanctuary so she can no longer seek shelter in the cathedral and will be taken away to be killed. Clopin, the leader of the Gypsies, hears the news from Gringoire and rallies the citizens of Paris to charge the cathedral and rescue Esmeralda.
When Quasimodo sees the Gypsies, he assumes they are there to hurt Esmeralda, so he drives them off. Likewise, he thinks the King's men want to rescue her, and tries to help them find her. She is rescued by Frollo and her phony husband Gringoire. But after yet another failed attempt to win her love, Frollo betrays Esmeralda by handing her to the troops and watches while she is being hanged.
When Frollo laughs during Esmeralda's hanging, Quasimodo pushes him from the heights of Notre Dame to his death. Quasimodo later goes to Montfaucon, a huge graveyard in Paris where the bodies of the condemned are dumped, where he stays with Esmeralda's dead body until he dies. About eighteen months later, the tomb is opened, and the skeletons are found. As someone tries to separate them, they crumble to dust. | insanity, flashback, murder, romantic, melodrama | train | wikipedia | Deaf and half-blind, THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME, feared & rejected by the people of Paris, becomes the unlikely protector of a poor gypsy girl.Lon Chaney, master of disguise, solidified his celebrity with his portrayal of Quasimodo, the deformed bell-ringer, who is forever cut off from any semblance of a normal life.
Both performers do very well with their 'normal' roles -- her innocence contrasting well with his initial lust -- even though the viewer is doubtless anxious for the return of the Hunchback.A handful of excellent character actors from the era add their assistance: gaunt Nigel de Brulier as the saintly Archdeacon, defender of the Hunchback; beefy Ernest Torrence as Clopin, King of Thieves, ruling over the Court of Miracles; prissy Raymond Hatton as the effete poet Gringoire; and feeble Tully Marshall as a suspicious Louis XI.Special mention must be made of Universal's splendid attention to detail which they lavished on the film.
To see Chaney clamber down, swinging from pinnacle to gargoyle to statue; or, to watch Quasimodo defend Esmeralda from the crowd of beggars he thinks has come to kill her, dropping stones, beams and molten metal on their heads below from the Cathedral's ramparts, is to enjoy two of Silent Cinema's great visual moments..
The highlight of the movie is clearly Lon Chaney's performance as Quasimodo, the hideously deformed resident of Notre Dame cathedral in Paris in the 15th century.
Director Wallace Worsley does a good job of building up sympathy for the Hunchback throughout, and the image of Chaney gleefully swinging off the rope to ring Notre Dame's bells is one that will stay with anyone who has ever seen this film.Although Quasimodo is the title character, much of the story actually revolves around Esmeralda, who is the object of the affection (some romantic, some fraternal) of almost every male character in the story.
Ernest Torrence is especially convincing as Clopin, the "King of the Poor" in Paris, and foster-father to Esmeralda, who feels betrayed when Esmeralda falls in love with a member of the nobility (an "aristocrat" as Clopin contemptuously calls him.)The movie suffered a little bit from what I found at times to be a less than appropriate musical score, and the quality of the film is not especially good (at least when I saw it) but that is hardly surprising given its age.
This classic silent version of the often-filmed story of "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" features good atmosphere and one of Lon Chaney's many fine renderings of an unusual character.
While Victor Hugo's classic novel, published in the 1830s, had been transferred to the screen on several occasions prior to this 1923 adaptation, one of mention titled THE DARLING OF Paris (Fox, 1917) featuring Theda Bara, this production ranks one of the first lavish spectacles Universal had produced thus far, as well as a truly challenging performance for Lon Chaney (1883-1930) in the role of the deformed bell-ringer named Quasimodo.
In fact, the more recent adaptation transferred to the screen became the 1996 feature length animation musicalized version, but many of the remakes then and now do owe a lot to Chaney's artistic achievement of long ago.Set in fifteenth century Paris, Quasimodo "deaf, half blind", is a deformed soul attending the gathering of the Festival of Fools.
Jehan continues his abduction plot on Esmeralda, but because of her love for Phoebus, makes her the accused and sentenced through execution for the stabbing of Phoebus, leading Quasimodo to repay the favor by coming to Esmeralda's aide.The other members of the cast of thousands include: Ernest Torrence (Clopin, "King of the beggars, enemy of the king" and Esmeralda's "foster father"); Tully Marshall (King Louis XI, "whose dungeons are always full, whose executioners always kept busy"); Kate Lester (Mademoiselle de Gondelaurier); and Gladys Brockwell (Godule, the mysterious reclusive woman who feels gypsies "should all be cursed").With Chaney's many early screen performances starting in 1914, along with hundreds of characters and thousands of faces, he actually didn't reach true star prominence until after achieving the kind of success long overdue him with THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME.
At present, many other video and/ or DVD transfers, do feature the original opening title credits and the complete finish focusing on the bell as it slowly stops swinging back and forth before stopping with the THE END (or rather FIN) title card reaches the screen.THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME occasionally appears on cable television's Turner Classic Movies as part of its weekly Silent Sunday Night presentations hosted by Robert Osborne.
Due to a renewed interest into the life and career of Lon Chaney, "The Man of a Thousand Faces," this best known version to the Victor Hugo classic should be the one film to consider and study.
This superior silent movie (even when viewed in a substandard print as the one I saw) blossoms as one of the finest literary adaptations to appear on the screen.Quasimodo, the repulsive deaf hunchback who rings the bells for Notre Dame Cathedral, is played by the multi-faceted Lon Chaney, and he puts the different aspects of the character across very well - fear, hatred, betrayal, longing, kindness.
This is a misunderstood 'freak' who has much of the human spirit intact within him despite the betrayals of those who should protect him.Patsy Ruth Miller is an effective Esmeralda, pretty and compelling whether in her gypsy dance or at the finale where she watches the battle between the turrets of the Cathedral and the square below as her people try to battle their way into Sanctuary.Also of note are Nigel de Brulier as Claudio, Ernest Torrence as gypsy king and Esmeralda's foster father Clopin, Tully Marshall as a bored Louis XI, Norman Kerry as a posturing Phoebus, Brandon Hurst as a cunning Jehan, and Raymond Hatton as a twittery Gringoire.There are nice touches in the staging, too - as Esmeralda and Phoebus lunch at an inn, a spider sucks a fly into her web; while the gypsy band at the steps of Notre Dame get showered with a rain of molten lead as Esmeralda hides in safety in the cathedral tower.The version I saw used music and sound effects to accompany the pictures and titles, which was done very well.
"The Hunchback of Notre Dame" is the often filmed Victor Hugo classic tale of the tragic Quasimodo and his love for the lovely Esmeralda in 15th century Paris.
After almost 80 years, Lon Chaney's "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" remains the definitive version and a true classic of American cinema..
In this the first movie version of the immortal novel, the classic role of Quasimodo is performed in film for the first time by another legend, "The Man of a Thousand Faces", Lon Chaney Sr.Set in the 15th Century, the movie starts as just another day in the simple life of Quasimodo (Lon Chaney), the bell-ringer of the famous Cathedral of Notre Dame in Paris who has spend most of his life inside the Cathedral because most people fear his gruesome deformity.
While the focus is certainly on Quasimodo (and he is indeed made a more prominent and sympathetic figure), the screenplay remains an epic tragedy about life and death in Paris, and takes its time to introduce and develop every character, surprisingly including many of the novel's subplots that became forgotten in subsequent versions of the story.
With a cast of thousands and enormous sets, Worsley makes 15th Century Paris to come alive once again and, just like Victor Hugo would wanted, the Cathedral of Notre Dame is made another character of the story thanks to the beautiful cinematography that gives an ominous atmosphere to the building.Lon Chaney is without a doubt the star and highlight of the movie, delivering one of the best performances as Quasimodo (second only to Charles Laughton), and creating one of his most amazing works of make-up.
Not only Lon Chaney's magnificent performance as Chaney (as well as his outstanding work of make-up) is a true highlight of the film, the lavish sets built for the movie are definitely one of the most amazing works done in silent films, with the reconstruction of Notre Dame's Western facade being extremely detailed and actually very accurate.
As a side note, among the many assistant directors who helped Worsley in this project, there was a young man named William Wyler receiving his first work in the movie industry.Depsite its flaws, this first version of "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" remains as one of the best movies of the silent era, and one of the best versions of Victor Hugo's classic.
The performances are very good on the whole, with Lon Chaney stealing the show as a grotesque and poignant Quasimodo, and Patsy Ann Miller as a beautiful and understated(if perhaps not quite sexy enough) Esmeralda and Ernest Torrance as Clopin faring best in support.
Victor Hugo's classic "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" receives a grand send-up from Universal Pictures, and superstar Lon Chaney (as Quasimodo).
Chaney was responsible for pulling viewers into the cinema for several high-level productions; before his "Hunchback" even reared its ugly head, he was sitting comfortably with Douglas Fairbanks and Rudolph Valentino inside the annual "Quigley Poll" of "Box Office Stars" (at #9 for the year 1922).Universal added some of the best supporting actors in Hollywood, beautiful Patsy Ruth Miller (as Esmeralda), director Wallace Worsley of Chaney's "The Penalty" (1920) to the mix, and spent a fortune on the sets.
It's enjoyable for those who appreciate the genre, but this "Hunchback" can be seen more as a documentation of lavish setting, and for Chaney's towering titular performance.******** The Hunchback of Notre Dame (9/2/23) Wallace Worsley ~ Lon Chaney, Patsy Ruth Miller, Norman Kerry, Ernest Torrance.
The story is overall pretty interesting and it follows the novel much closer than the majority of movie adaptations out there although there are still a few key differences.The acting in this picture is a mixed bag with Lon Chaney stealing the show as Quasimodo.
this is the second filmed version of Victor Hugo's classic novel,the first one being The Darling of Paris in 1917.in this version,Lon Chaney plays the title character whose name is Quasi Modo and judging by how the character looks,Chaney endured quite a bit for the character.Quasi Modo is a deformed slave and bell ringer.this movie isn't as much about the hunchback as it is about one woman who has stolen the hearts of a few men,and what they do to try and win her love.what follows is lust,deception betray and tragedy.caught up in the middle of it all,through no fault of his own,is Quasi Modo.but the movie isn't all sadness and despair.at the beginning,it is lite hearted and comical.i enjoyed most of the film,though it does have its slow moments.the acting is quite good though,as is the musical accompaniment.i give The Hunchback of Notre Dame 7/10.
The film's overwhelming sets (designed by E.E. Sheeley and Sydney Ullman) are, perhaps, its one outstanding achievement; the inter titles give a satisfactorily detailed breakdown of the plot which can be easily followed (though the framing is off throughout, as these are often lost to over scan - and characters' heads lopped off!), and the dialogue itself is often quite literate (and very rarely falls on archaic medieval colloquialisms).While there's no doubting the quality of Chaney's performance on a technical level, his conception of the role (or maybe the script's) emerges as somewhat unsympathetic: he never quite affects us emotionally the way Charles Laughton does in the 1939 version and, in any case, he is dwarfed by the massive sets - as well as being relatively subservient to the romantic leads, despite the film's title!
Apart from all this, I feel that Chaney here is more constrained than abetted by the heavy (indeed, excessive) make-up he has created for himself!Patsy Ruth Miller as Esmeralda is surprisingly animated (in contrast to the usually stiff heroines of Silent films) though Maureen O'Hara in the remake was altogether more believable as a gypsy - and the subplot wherein she is shown to be of noble birth (not present in the 1939 version and, perhaps, thankfully so) is somewhat pointless, as she never discovers this fact for herself anyway!
His supposedly lustful desire for Esmeralda never convinces for a second, feeling as merely a bit of lechery on the side - whereas Hardwicke is almost pitiable in his blinding (and, perhaps, genuine) obsession towards the gypsy girl!Clopin, the self-titled 'King of Beggars', gets a more rounded characterization here than in perhaps any other version (including Thomas Mitchell in the RKO film) and Ernest Torrence gives quite a fine performance in the role.
The rest of the cast in this silent film classic is also great - wonderful performances.If you liked this movie then try to find copies of 'London after Midnight' and 'The Phantom of the Opera' - both starring Lon Chaney, Sr.9/10.
This early adaptation of The Hunchback of Notre Dame shares much in common with Universal's later film, The Phantom of the Opera: the sets are great and Lon Chaney is great, but everything else is subpar, including the pedestrian direction of Wallace Worsely.Lon Chaney never gave a bad performance and his performance as Quasimodo was one of his finest moments, both as an actor and as a make-up artist.
His is the only fully realized performance in the film and unfortunately, he gets little screen time in comparison to the bloodless love affair between Esmeralda and Phoebus, played by Patsy Ruth Miller and Norman Kerry.
Miller does pretty well, though Kerry is pallid and underwhelming, just as he was opposite Chaney in Phantom and The Unknown.I'm not too sure why this is often classified as a horror picture, though it does have its creepy moments, such as Quasimodo stalking Esmeralda at night, intent on kidnapping her for his lecherous master.Overall, this is an alright movie, but nothing compared to the 1939 version, which has more depth and feels more iconic..
That Esmerelda's Got Something Going For Her. This silent version of The Hunchback of Notre Dame gets a lot closer to what Victor Hugo intended in his novel though by no means is it faithful to the plot.
Lon Chaney did a remarkable job it's hard to say which of his performances are his greatest because I really love them all,, it seems in this movie there are so many characters running around constantly, I don't know how many extras were used in the making of this film but it appears to be a lot.
this film has all of the old world classic stuff that you want to see, sort of the medieval time period ,, kings queens and stuff like that, the Cathedral of Notre Dame is much like a character in this movie,, I would definitely recommend this to anyone who is a fan of great early silent movies..
The first screen adaptation of Victor Hugo's novel isn't quite as good as the later adaptation with Charles Laughton, but it's still worth seeing, mainly for Lon Chaney Sr.'s performance as the deformed but magnanimous bell ringer in the famous Parisian cathedral.
Now that I've seen both, Hollywood's first talkie version of the story is the superior of the two, in my opinion, but this 1923 silent version certainly isn't a huge disappointment (this is coming from someone who hasn't read the book, mind you).Set in Paris, France, ten years before Christopher Columbus discovered America, Quasimodo is a severely deformed bell ringer of the Notre Dame Cathedral.
Lon Chaney is excellent, the sets are impressive, and Norman Kerry as handsome Phoebus isn't bad, although the script doesn't offer him a lot of complexity in his character; but I can't help wondering if Universal wore out their resources in getting this far, for the rest of the production left me somewhat disappointed.Patsy Ruth Miller plays Esmeralda as a generic leading lady with a contemporary cupid-bow mouth, eyes and hair, and poses that owe everything to the 1920s and nothing to a foster-daughter of the 'Court of Miracles'.
Despite Victor Hugo's disapproval, since 1832, many popular English-language translations of 'Notre Dame de Paris' have appeared under the 'Hunchback' title, promoting the supporting character of Quasimodo to the leading role.
Pushed to production by emerging "Boy Wonder," Irving Thalberg, the ceaseless willpower of its star, who shrewdly optioned the rights to Victor Hugo's epic novel, The Hunchback of Notre Dame became a lasting milestone of silent era Hollywood and transformed Chaney from a brilliant character actor into a superstar.The grotesque and lonely Quasimodo (Chaney), cathedral bell-ringer of medieval Paris, rescues Esmeralda (Patsy Ruth Miller), a beautiful gypsy girl, from public execution for a crime she did not commit.
VIctor Hugo's original literary classic is renown for writing the locations of his book, particularly the Notre Dame de Paris itself, as characters all to themselves.Wallace Worsley's direction carries as much weight, beauty and menace as any displayed in the German expressionist Horror films of the time.
Also not many versions tend to show Quasimodo's acrobatic skills of jumping from one gargoyle to another, but this film has one amazing scene where he literally climbs down from the bell tower to the streets of Paris.19 years old Patsy Ruth Miller is both beautiful and innocent in her demanding role as Esmeralda, and her performance just might be the most closest to Hugo's book.
Both men are fine in their roles and I think either one could have also survived a more faithful performance as Frollo, if the character had been kept like in the book.But seriously, the true star of this movie is Lon Chaney as Quasimodo.
Yet he does deserve equal amount of good credit from his role as Quasimodo.Although often marketed as "early horror film", the silent version of "Hunchback of Notre Dame" is most of all a historical drama.
The Hunchback of Notre Dame isn't Lon Chaney's best picture or performance but it is most definitely his finest showcase of his mastery of film make-up. |
tt0481459 | The Virgin Queen | In 1581, Walter Raleigh (Richard Todd), recently returned from the fighting in Ireland, pressures unwilling tavern patrons into freeing from the mud the stuck carriage of Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester (Herbert Marshall). When Leicester asks how he can repay the kindness, Raleigh asks for an introduction to Queen Elizabeth I (Bette Davis), to whom Leicester is a trusted adviser. Leicester grants the request.
Elizabeth takes a great liking to Raleigh and his forthright manner, much to the disgust of her current favorite, Christopher Hatton (Robert Douglas). As the court ventures outside, Raleigh graciously drapes his cloak (an expensive item borrowed from a reluctant tailor) over some mud so that the Queen need not soil her shoes. At dinner, Raleigh reveals his dream of sailing to the New World to reap the riches there. Elizabeth decides to make him the captain of her personal guard. He enlists his Irish friend, Lord Derry (Dan O'Herlihy).
Meanwhile, Beth Throckmorton (Joan Collins), one of the Queen's ladies in waiting, very forwardly makes Raleigh's acquaintance. Raleigh's relationship with both ladies is stormy. Beth is jealous of his attentions to Elizabeth, while the Queen is often irritated by his independence and constant talk of the New World. Hatton does his best to inflame her annoyance, but she is too clever to be taken in.
When Hatton informs Elizabeth that an Irishman is a member of her guard, Raleigh is stripped of his captaincy when he protests that his friend is loyal and refuses to dismiss him. Banished from court, Raleigh takes the opportunity to secretly marry Beth. Soon after, however, he is restored to Elizabeth's favor.
Finally, Elizabeth grants Raleigh not the three ships he desires, but one. He enthusiastically sets about making modifications. In private, however, Elizabeth reveals within Beth's hearing that her intentions do not include him actually leaving England. When so informed, Raleigh makes plans to sail to North America without royal permission.
Hatton tells the Queen not only of Raleigh's plot, but also that he is married to Beth. Elizabeth orders the couple's arrest. Raleigh delays those sent to take him into custody so that Derry can try to take Beth into hiding in Ireland, but they are overtaken on the road, and Derry killed. Raleigh and Beth are sentenced to death, but in the end, Elizabeth releases them. They set sail for the New World. | historical fiction | train | wikipedia | This is a very interesting programme, produced in Britain and originally shown on the PBS series, Masterpiece Theatre.This miniseries was directed by Coky Giedroyc, a veteran of television productions in Britain, including another royal-themed miniseries, 'William and Mary', in 2003.
Giedroyc brings an interesting modern twist to the series - rather than filming things in majestic, sweeping camera pans with classical music as a background, and rather than having the dialogue (and acting) be in a stilted, falsely formal style, Giedroyc incorporates modern music with medieval and Celtic flavouring to it (both of which have experienced a renaissance of sorts in the past decade), and the situations are decidedly modern without being out of place in their own times.This presents the life of Elizabeth from her young adulthood under Queen Mary, as a supposed participant in intrigues against the Catholic Queen, through to her death after serving decades on the throne of England as the Virgin Queen, the queen who never married.
In fact, the miniseries plays a tantalising game with Elizabeth's virginity, showing her desires (as well as those around her) without ever giving up the game of 'was she or wasn't she?' Anne-Marie Duff plays the part of Elizabeth, and does a remarkably able job for such a complex figure.
Duff won the Irish Television award and was nominated for the BAFTA award for best actress in a television drama in another series, 'Shameless', last year.Duff is joined by Tom Hardy, who plays the role of Robert Dudley, the favourite of Queen Elizabeth.
Dudley is also an extraordinarily complex role, as he played several sides in the political struggles during Elizabeth's early reign, and was part of a family well experienced in regal intrigue - Robert Dudley's family had tried to manage the reign of Elizabeth's brother Edward, engineer the accession of Lady Jane Grey (placing Guildford Dudley on the throne with her), and is sometimes referred to as 'the uncrowned kings of England'.
The situations presented give good insight into the overall pattern of Elizabeth's reign and some of the principal concerns during that time period, although to compress such a long reign into such a short time frame as a four-hour miniseries by necessity means that the history has had to be selectively chosen.
In the end, Elizabeth made the right decision for the time, if not for the future.This is a great production for television, and holds up well against other major productions featuring the Virgin Queen Elizabeth of a few years ago..
The strongest aspect, as I viewed it, was neither the story, the costumes or the scenes, but the bold performance of Anne Marie Duff.
Dudley, portrayed by Hardy, was a good foil; his perhaps son, but certainly step son, Essex portrayed by Hans Matheson, were interestingly cast, not so much by the actors but rather for the dramatic interpretation brought to each character.
It is only bested by the old Bette Davis version of Elizabeth and Essex in spotlighting how the Virgin Queen sought male affection, but rebuffed any control but her own.What burden the Queen, a bastard, a princess, and then a monarch must have endured in her private life, a life often dismissed for her political reign, or exaggerated for her fancy of her childhood friend, Robbie.A most worthy addition to the pantheon of Tudor drama..
A different look at Queen Elizabeth's life.
Retelling a story in history in the framework of film can be tricky business and Masterpiece Theatre's The Virgin Queen doesn't attempt to adhere to accuracy in the slightest.
But, if you're like me, you would love to experience the story of Queen Elizabeth a thousands times over in a thousand ways, and this film richly succeeds in it's own right.I have never seen such accurate costuming, beautiful sets or clever a soundtrack in any Elizabethan film (Oh my God, the soundtrack).
More than many films of this historical powerhouse, I appreciate the attention paid to the human side of Queen Eliazabeth--her vanity, weakness for the opposite sex (considering her royal responsibilities), and infamous indecisiveness.I could have done without the laughably overblown Casa Nova characterization of Lord Robert Dudley (Tom Hardy, ).
He came off as a retired Backstreet Boy, looked far too young for the part, and portrayed none of the cultivated finesse that those familiar with the real man know, in-turn, leaving the audience wondering what about this man is worth the scandal.If you have any interest in a new take of Elizabeth's life since the 1998 film Elizabeth, I truly recommend this mini-series.
For a more historically accurate glance of the time period in England, check out BBC's Elizabeth (1971) starring Glenda Jackson..
Having read the previous comments I would concur with what has been said, but here in the UK this was shown as 4 90 minute episodes, not 60 minutes as inferred in the previous post.I loved everything about this production even down to the usage of the group the 'Medieval Baebes' (who perform mainly medieval AND Tudor/Renaissance popular music) which gave one goosebumps when you think that this music was probably well loved and performed by the real Queen and her courtiers.If you check out the BBC Drama website it gives the background as to how the costumes were made to look in period and yet so modern and also the locations used.
It was quite refreshing to see a British produced history series actually filmed in the UK and not in one of the old Eastern bloc countries as with the Channel 4 'Elizabeth I' and that other history series with Ann Marie Duff playing a character 'Charles II: The Power and the Passion' Well done BBC...it will not surprise me if another BAFTA is not forthcoming for this production.
Australian Cate Blanchett, Helen Mirren and now Anne-Marie Duff have essayed in the last ten years to portray Gloriana on the screen.This version is more watchable, more accessible, more **alive** than any before.
Jeremy Irons looked like he had risen from the grave playing Robert Dudley to Helen Mirren's Elizabeth in that BBC production focusing on her middle years.
The Cate Blanchett movie version tries to portray Elizabeth as a kind of early feminist--a concept that would not exist for many centuries.
Agreed, Dudley seems to age little compared to Elizabeth, who gets older in appearance if not in demeanor.
They in no way detract from the impact of this splendid version of history with its colorful sets, fine costumes, excellent acting and unforgettable musical score..
I'm afraid invidious comparisons are inevitable when two of the four major television channels choose to bring out 'mini-series' on the life of the same monarch within the same year.
Channel 4 succeeded because they cast a middle-aged actress of great experience to portray Elizabeth in her later years.
And the final two episodes felt badly rushed, in particular the decision to gloss over the entirety of Elizabeth's reign post-Essex in the course of a single voice-over, and her death-scene in a few sentences.
There is too much prurient focus on Elizabeth's virginity and very little on the Virgin Queen's real-life record as mistress of statesmanship and manipulator extraordinaire -- she knew how to project herself as larger than life, but the BBC doesn't seem to know how to do the same, leaving the great speeches to fall limply.
This one was something of an anti-climax.Historical accuracy, for all that much-vaunted research, seemed dubious, from Essex's haircut to Queen Mary's death.
However it's turned out to be a festival of historical inaccuracies, anachronisms and above all, poor casting.The death of Mary Tudor didn't take place as was depicted, and in episode one Chancellor Gardiner was shown announcing Mary's death to Elizabeth in 1558, but Gardiner died three years before that in 1555.
Anne-Marie Duff, fine actress though she is, hasn't the fire and authority to play Elizabeth as she should be played.
Jeremy Irons was just right for the part in the Channel 4 production "Elizabeth I" last year.
And to cap it all, they were burned in their best frilly nightshirts!Lazy research by the writer, anachronistic quotes which seem to have escaped the script editor and lines no self respecting actor should have allowed to pass their lips have all combined to make The Virgin Queen a very poor example of a historical drama, which the BBC usually do so well (Charles II was excellent).
You can read the other reviews to see all the debates over the historical accuracy, the choice of Duff as Elizabeth I, and the fact that all we see are movies about Elizabeth and not other interesting choices.
So I've decided to give a review on something a little different...The costumes were pretty accurate for the time period, with some obvious differences in colour choices and the lack of abundance of embroidery (embroidery was a way for people to immediately tell how much money you had and what class you were in - sometimes the wearer would also have their family crest or symbols embroidered as well).
The colours situation is just that back then, the dyes were not as stable as they are now and tended to fade quickly and were not as rich and bright as they were portrayed in here.I have to admit, what kept me going in the second half of the series is the use of make up and effects on the actors.
The vanity of the day is nothing short of today (minus the ability for Botox or anti-aging creams), and they believed their makeup would make them look younger, while today looking at them, it could send children running from the room in terror.If you're looking for something to pass the time, or you happen to be a lover of period pieces, take a looksie at The Virgin Queen.
Priming up to teach Renaissance history I've looked into just about every Elizabeth I movie around--from Bette Davis to Helen Mirren.
I endured the dry Glenda Jackson series for its historical perspective, enjoyed the brief comedic overacting of Dame Dench in Shakespeare in Love, totally skipped Cate Blanchett's version due to the reviews openly praising this Hollywood take on known history.As to this newer version, I couldn't bear to finish it, and I usually don't quit movies.
There were other aspects I didn't care for, but the Robert Dudley part needed to be more nailed down seeing how important he was to Elizabeth's reign.Helen Mirren's version to me presents the most personable, the one that really brings out the personage of the queen.
What would film and TV companies do for historical dramas if Elizabeth I had never reigned?
Nobody's done it for at least 6 months!" This 2005 mini-series although having authentic costumes, delivers nothing that hasn't been told (more accurately and better) a hundred times before in novels, biographies, operas, dramas, documentaries and even historical pageants.In this latest effort it seems that a lot of pieces from the jigsaw that was Elizabeth's life have been lost, and the bits that remain have been haphazardly bunched together to create some sort of patchy biography.
Consequently there's very little flow to the production as a whole, with just a scant look into the inner character of the "virgin queen" in particular.
As for Ann-Marie Duff's speech prior to the Armada battle, I'm afraid she didn't inspire me one iota, (even though she looked a very young 55 yrs as Elizabeth was at the time), and neither did the rest of her somewhat insipid performance.
The real Elizabeth needed to be, and was, made of sterner stuff.Overall the sketchy script is equally uninspired, and is only adequately performed, however if one can watch it without being too critical of historical mistakes, it is in parts enjoyable...that is if you're an ardent Gloriana fan.
This production falls far short of the wonderful Glenda Jackson's "Elizabeth R", albeit even that series now looks a little stagy and dated.I really do think it's time to give "Good Queen Bess" a miss...at least for another six months, maybe even a year.
It has been said that when making a courtly, historical drama, once of the most important things you need is austerity.
I found the direction of 'The Virgin Queen' to be unsubtle, totally lacking in any poignancy and solely aimed at creating an over-the-top, unsophisticated sense of melodrama wherever and whenever.As for the acting - with a part like Elizabeth I, comparisons between this and other performances of the Queen are inevitable, yet Anne-Marie Duff, who by her own admission had a rather shaky knowledge of the subject beforehand, somehow decided it would be best not to view other performances, wanting to 'portray the part for myself', which unfortunately (for the rest of us) wasn't that good.
Although I don't think Duff was the right choice for Elizabeth anyway, her performance would have been greatly improved if she'd looked at what other actresses had done.
When I was little I watched bits of 'Elizabeth R' and was totally enchanted by Glenda Jackson.
In contrast, when watching this, I felt disappointed by Duff's weak, lacklustre performance.Thinking about the drama as a whole, it's fair to say that the effort went into it.
I actually thought there were some really cool lines, although most of these were wasted on Duff who, having not done enough research, delivered them badly (eg, when Elizabeth plays with language in front of the Spanish ambassador).'The Virgin Queen' is a BBC production and I watched it with high expectations.
I preferred it to Elizabeth, and Elizabeth the Golden Age, as they were exploiting a very interesting part of English history, particularly the Tudor Period.
Dudley Elizabeth's love of her life was NOT actually portrayed during/after Tilbury properly, he went on to govern her forces in the Netherlands for some years.
The Earl of Essex, well Errol Flynn was a better actor in looks admittedly, but again, he was portrayed or characterized less romantically than in other films, that I feel was justified.But I as a student of this period feel it was OK, dragged a bit sometimes but I would recommend it to a history student, that I wouldn't with others who have tried to make a saga out of Elizabeth 1.
But this TV mini series and Elizabeth as portrayed by the actress given this part was very good.
If you've seen Cate Blanchett as Elizabeth in the Oscar-winning movie and the great Helen Mirren as Elizabeth in the recent HBO film, it is easy enough to dismiss Anne-Marie Duff and all of "The Virgin Queen" as a distant third in the competition.
Nonetheless, I thought Duff acquitted herself quite well, especially as the younger Elizabeth, and this BBC production may actually do a better job of recreating the period than the other two.
In my opinion, the HBO production is the best of the three, mainly because of Mirren, but also because it is given more time to explore the history of the period than was afforded the Blanchett film.
They've managed to take what was one of history's great stories add a pretty impressive cast and then through a masterful mix of dumbing down, historical inaccuracies, cringe worthy attempts to make it "current" and what can only be described as generally 'hammy' execution throughout made this an absolute pig of a show to watch.It's like a history of Elizabeth I for the Simon Cowell generation.
Especially Duff makes a very good and at times a very realistic Elizabeth.
You have to make the story simple it seems, so we have essentially a love story, two actually, the second being someone credibly suspected as her son.Seeing things like this help you understand just why you come to films.
There are many films and dramatisations of the life of Queen Elizabeth I, which is understandable as she was/is one of the most interesting monarchs.
After outstanding offerings such as the 1998 'Elizabeth', 'Elizabeth I' with Helen Mirren', 'Mary Queen of Scots' and especially 'Elizabeth R', 'The Virgin Queen' was somewhat of a disappointment.Certainly not bad, as there are a lot of impressive things.
For starters, 'The Virgin Queen' looks wonderful.
If there isn't an album for the soundtrack that is a shame, because if there is a music score of a TV series that deserves one it's that for 'The Virgin Queen'.Some great scenes here too, especially the stirring Tilbury speech and the blistering confrontation between Elizabeth and Mary Queen of Scots.
Anne Marie Duff is a miracle in the titular role and succeeds in making Elizabeth a complex, which she was, and easy-to-root-for character.
Joanne Whalley, despite the one-dimensional way Mary Queen of Scots was written (writing her as somewhat of a pantomime villain was rather extreme on the writers' parts), is similarly outstanding.Hans Mattheson brings passion, charm and loyalty as Essex, and Michael Feast and Robert Pugh despite being present only for a short amount of time register highly too as does authoritative Ben Daniels as Walsingham.
Tom Hardy is too young, overwrought and too much of the prissy and wimpy Casanova sort of character, while Dudley was underwritten in 'Elizabeth I' there was much more complexity and finesse in Jeremy Irons' interpretation than Hardy's.
It is also distractingly anachronistic, trying too hard to attract to younger and modern audiences by taking simplicity to extremes and it all sounds too modern and more like how we'd speak now rather than back then.Am really not trying to use historical inaccuracy as a criticism here and felt reluctant too, but some of the liberties really do scratch the head and suggest poor research rather than accommodating dramatic license, sadly while with some great scenes the storytelling is not consistently compelling enough, likewise with a lot of the characterisation, to overlook this.On the whole, 'The Virgin Queen' has many areas where it excels, but others are wanting and quite badly.
Anne Marie duff easily makes the best Elizabeth and looks the most similar to the paintings! |
tt0199683 | Kikujirô no natsu | Masao, who lives alone with his grandmother in an old Shitamachi area of Tokyo, receives a package, and in looking for a seal finds a photo of his long lost mother. He finds her address in Toyohashi, several hundred miles to the west. Leaving home to see his mother, he meets his grandmother's neighbors, Kikujiro and his wife. Kikujiro's wife forces Kikujiro to accompany Masao on a journey to see his mother, telling Masao's grandmother that they are going to the beach.
At the start of their journey, Kikujiro is not serious about reaching Toyohashi. He gets absorbed in track cycling races and gambles away their winnings. Later, left outside a yakitori restaurant, Masao encounters a molester. After a narrow escape, Kikujiro promises to keep to the journey and take Masao to his mother. When the taxi Kikujiro steals breaks down, they are forced to hitchhike to Toyohashi, meeting various people along the way. They get lifts from a juggler and her boyfriend on a date, and a travelling poet who delivers them to Toyohashi. When they finally reach the address of Masao's mother, Kikujiro finds her living as a housewife with another man and their daughter. Masao's mother lives a completely different life from what he expected. It is almost as if she has forgotten him. Kikujiro tells Masao that she has just moved away, pretending not to have seen her. He tries to comfort Masao with a small blue angel bullied from two bikers whom he happens to come across.
Masao is so disappointed that Kikujiro cannot help but try to brighten up their return trip to Tokyo. He tells him an angel will come at the sound of the bell.
They visit a summer matsuri held in a local Shinto shrine. While Kikujiro gets into trouble with some yakuza over a fixed shooting game, Masao dreams of dancing Tengu.
Back on the road, they meet the poet and the two bikers again. They decide to camp a few days together. Masao enjoys playing some traditional games with them.
Kikujiro is reminded of his own mother (it is implied that she, like Masao's mother, also left him as a child). Kikujiro gets one of the bikers to take him from their camp to his mother's nursing home in Daito-cho, a small country town, but he eventually decides not to see her and returns to the camp.
The men continue to do their best to entertain Masao by larking about for a few more days. Before they are to return to Tokyo, Masao dreams about them appearing over the Milky Way. In the morning, the bikers say goodbye to them and leave the camp. Masao and Kikujiro get a lift in the poet's car to Tokyo. After dropping them off at a bridge, the poet continues on his way to Osaka and Kyūshū.
Before Masao and Kikujiro part, Kikujiro says "Let's do it again sometime" and Masao thanks him. Kikujiro tells Masao to take care of his grandma. Masao asks Kikujiro's name and Kikujiro answers "Kikujiro! Now scram!". Masao passes a small bridge with the Angel bell ringing. | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | In the title role of this highly original 1999 road movie, Beat Takeshi - with his twitching eye and bow-legged shuffle - looks and acts like a cross between Mickey Rourke and Harvey Keitel with a heavy dose of Walter Matthau's sourpuss demeanor (circa "The Bad News Bears") for good measure.
As the director and screenwriter of said film, Takeshi Kitano - the same guy - has fashioned something quite unique from a tired premise - a boy's search for his mother and the gruff man who begrudgingly helps find her.
In fact, Kitano does such a resolutely offbeat job that at certain times, the film reminds me of the narrative ellipses and low steady shots that were the trademark of Yasujiro Ozu's home dramas, intermingled with a surprisingly intense Quentin Tarantino-like, in-your-face edginess.
The protagonist of the film is really the latch-key nine-year old, Masao, who is on a quest to find the mother whom his grandmother says is "away working".
My favorite scenes come toward the end when Kikujiro organizes a motley crew of misfits to play games with Masao and have them masquerade as Indians, aliens, marine life and even watermelons.
The variety in tone between chapters makes for unexpected tonal shifts, but somehow it works and adds to the greater context of the story.That Kitano is able to manage a consistent film-making style with a strong visual sense is a credit to the talent behind the camera - not only Kitano's direction, script and film editing but also his artwork showcased throughout the movie, Katsumi Yanagishima's sharply rendered cinematography and Joe Hisaishi's evocative Windham Hill-like score.
One would think the story would climax when Masao comes upon his mother, but Kitano confounds expectations with every new scene.
On paper the plot looks very Disney-like (grumpy old coot hits the road with an unhappy kid), but hey, this is Beat Takeshi, so what he does with it is always original and surprising.
I enjoyed 'Kikujiro' a lot, and the more Kitano movies I see, the more I think he is one of the most underrated directors working today..
But as we see only moments later the boy would be better off alone, as kikujiro's fondness of gambling and (very amusing) way to treat people makes the journey a funny and quite touching odyssee.
Eventually, Kikujiro left his family".I know Kitano Takeshi made this film because he has been tired of violence/gangsters/life&death in his previous film, but what made him writing a story about his father-a man who abandoned his family when Kitano was young.
Does Kitano himself desire a father too much, so he is willing to accept his father's bad habits as long as his father is still at his side.It is not really a film I'd say, I feel like I am seeing the characters in real life.
From its hauntingly beautiful soundtrack by Joe Hisaishi to the wonderful characters who inhabit Takeshi Kitano's magical Japan - everything in this movie comes together to make this one of modern cinema's truly underrated masterpiece.The story involves a petty thug, Kikujiro, who is coerced into accompanying a young boy, Masao, on his cross country journey to find his birth mother.
Some friendly, some mysterious, some quirky, some abrasive, but all of them refreshingly human.A lesser writer or director would have settled for a quick dose of weirdness from the main characters' fellow wanderers, but Takeshi Kitano milks them for all of the depth and endearment that the too few minutes we are graced with their presence allows.If you enjoyed the whimsical, go-nowhere feel of Lost in Translation, you will LOVE this movie.
It's really a loving portrayal of one little boy, Masao's, summer, spent with this seemingly eccentric retired gangster "Mister" played by Kitano.
Joe Hisaishi's theme music for "Kikujiro" certainly is catchy and the score gave Kitano's film its rhythm and accents along this unlikely pair's journey - a grown man, who's become childlike once more while escorting Masao on his quest to fulfill the dream of seeing his mother.
An interesting aside to analyze that theme would be the carnival scene, where people entrusted with family entertainment turn out to be violent cheaters, whereas even the heavy-metal biker folk are more than willing to go out of their way to help Masao.The film itself is from Masao's perspective, as a childhood's slightly photographic memory comes into play, mixed a lot with colorful imagination.
I think Kikujiro is mainly about loneliness.Takeshi's character and the boy, Masao, seem really different on the surface.
Masao is only a child, and all this kind of disappointment is new to him.In a less realistic film maybe the characters would be, in their characteristic brooding way, like, "Eh, them's the breaks huh kid".
That everyone loves, and everyone cries, and just because their lives have been particularly worse than others doesn't mean they can't reach out to and come to an understanding with others.The film's long takes sometimes feel kinda pointless, like they're just there because that's part of the director's style.
It doesn't feel like some kind of deliberately tragic cliché, but still adds a great amount to the mood of the movie and helped bring me to tears at some points.Some negative reviews I've read call Kikujiro shallow or emotionally manipulative, but I can't see that at all.
But this Japanese weird stuff has got to stop.The first 2/3rds of the movie are fairly interesting - the kid and a guy who's maybe him except older go in search for his mom.Then for the last 1/3rd we get to see a string of scenes where weird people do random & silly things.
Takeshi Kitano plays Kikujiro, a combative, ne'er-do-well drifter who is badgered into taking a young boy, Masao, from Tokyo to Toyohashi to meet his mother--for the first time ever.Someone with a little money and with what passes these days for common sense could get there in maybe an hour by bullet train.
But this is, on the whole, a good-hearted movie (...somewhat rare for Kitano) that managed to make all of us smile....really, though, the title should have been "Masao no natsu", Masao's Summer Vacation..
Takeshi Kitanos 1999 film is about a young boy searching for his estranged mother in his summer vacation.
Masao and Kikujiro takes a wild road trip into a Japanese countryside where they meet Angel like strangers, who in real life were outcast and alienated people.
This movie is exactly what I was hoping that Takeshi Kitanos other film, A Scene At The Sea, would be like.
The film is really beautiful and is both funny and touching.Takeshi Kitano plays a character that, at first seems similar to some of his other characters, but has a lot more heart.
All the other people they encounter on their trip are also great and fun to watch, which adds to the movie.The film is interestingly shot and edited.
The director/star/editor of "Kikujiro" (Takeshi Kitano) began with stage comedy, then became known for his hyper-violent (yet hypnotically artistic) gangster films, and is now known as a modern master of art cinema.
If "a picture is worth a 1000 words", Takeshi Kitano milks every last syllable."Kikujiro" is a beautifully wicked road movie about a cute little kid looking for his momma.
Takeshi Kitano plays the guardian: a loud-mouthed, selfish, good-for-nothing troublemaker who decides to exploit the kid for all he's worth.
I could go on for ages about the clever symbolism and poetic themes, the complexity of Takeshi Kitano's character, the power of the film's final scene...
Before Battle Royale, I had the chance to see this film on TV about a boy who wanted to see his father and then later befriends Beat (who is unnamed until the end of the movie) and a couple of bikers.It's very entertaining to see how a grown man and a little boy can get into such mischief.
The theme will more than likely leave you in tears by the time you have your fun adventures with Beat and Masao and see them...well, it's best to see for yourself.A stellar film and a must watch..
The result is a film that manages to be funny and touching in the same time and it accomplishes that without relying on the clichés that are usually present in films of this kind.Little boy Masao decides to go on a long trip in order to visit his mother whom he had never seen, but in order to do that he must be accompanied by an adult.
His directing is also precise and he makes great use of the wonderful score from Joe Hisaishi.With "Kikujiro", Kitano started from a formula that you can also find in Hollywood movies (that of two very different people traveling together), but the final result doesn't look like anything from Hollywood.
Takeshi Kitano (who writes and directs) plays a deadbeat adult who agrees to take little Masao on a cross-country summer trip to meet his estranged mother.
The cast of characters are all rather unique and fun to watch, and the interplay between Kitano's character and the young boy is both delightful and upsetting.The film's events are divided up and introduced as events in Masao's summer diary.
Being PG rated (Hana-Bi was NC16), the queue of those expected to watch this film was again snaking, even though most of the (free) tickets were already snapped up.The story centers on the deep friendship which develops between a quirky, mean and uncouth middle-aged man, and a young boy.
It doesn't start off rosy, as Kikujiro (played by Takeshi himself) gets assigned, against his wishes, chaperon duties to assist and ensure that the young boy Masao (Yusuke Sekiguchi) gets to find his mother.
So begins a road trip of sorts, with the duo encountering a host of situations and characters (aren't road trips all like that?)The movie can be seen as two distinct halves, with the first half in my opinion the more superior portion of the film.
Somehow Yusuke Sekiguchi, who plays Masao, doesn't seem to act cute at all, and I thought it was kind of mirroring real life - imagine between a baby and an adult, who's the one playing the fool most of the time in their interactions with each other?Nonetheless, Kikujiro is still an admirable story on friendship, amongst the unlikeliest of couples, with Kikujiro cutting a father like figure to Masao's little child.
For those who liked this movie, and wants to see some good others, see the Hana-Bi (little violent, but even more deep) and Dolls (i was crying - one reason was i was touched, second - beauty of the colors and form).....For me its just one word - Outstanding..
For those who liked this movie, and wants to see some good others, see the Hana-Bi (little violent, but even more deep) and Dolls (i was crying - one reason was i was touched, second - beauty of the colors and form).....For me its just one word - Outstanding..
This is a film about a violent man doing a SWEET deed if you will, Sentenced by his take charge wife to take the boy to see his mother who has abandoned him for a new life in the country...THAT is pretty much the story.
Although I believe that the strongest shots in Takeshi's films are the silent ones, the music is absolutely beautiful and adds flavour and style to the movie..
I have seen "Kikujiro no natsu" at the Vienna filmfestival and I have to say, that for me it is an outstanding and excellent work by Takeshi Kitano.
I loved every minute of the film, especially where at the beginning of the film, the kid decides to search for his mother and the determination on his face as he ran off made me feel so good.Still, much of the credit has to go to the composer of most of Takeshi's films - Joe Hisaishi - With his excellent composing and Takeshi's beautiful visions, Kikujiro no natsu is a must see..
The basic premise is a road trip, where Kitano is the unlikely chaperone for a little boy who wants to go and find his mother.
The basic premise is a road trip, where Kitano is the unlikely chaperone for a little boy who wants to go and find his mother.
I don't know what others might think about this movie, but (Takeshi) Kitano, again, gave us extreme quality.It's incredible, but he can't stop amusing me!
In this movie Kitano plays a basically ordinary man, who gets talked to guiding a 10-year old boy on a journey to see his mother for the first time.
Among other things, the man played by Kitano makes this film fun to watch.
Takeshi Kitano's title character is one of the most intriguing I've ever seen on screen.There's something to be said for films like 'Midnight Run' and 'Gods and Monsters'.
I wasn't really sure what to expect, not knowing anything about 'Beat' Takeshi.I think that what helped me enjoyed the movie was that I recognized what the title character (Kikujiro, played by Takeshi) is all about.
This isn't at all like some of Beat's gangster movies (Hana-bi, Sonatine) but an incredibly emotionally powerful story about a young boys search for his mother who left him to live with his grandmother.
Takeshi Kitano manages to display on the screen a remarkable tale of a grown-up being taught how to enjoy life by a small child.The story starts with little Masao wondering where his mother is.
To soften his sadness Kikujiro decides to brighten the little boy's world before returning home.And this is where the movie goes wrong.
This is a shame, because up until the point where Masao finds his mother this movie was beautiful, well acted, and just plain good.The most memorable piece of dialogue must have been when at the beginning of the film Kikujiro's wife tells Kikujiro to "stop playing gangster".
Not being a fan of gangster movies, Ihad always wished that Kitano would make a film with all hisusual elements sans the violence.
The plot is a relatively simple road movie, but the way it is filmed, the combination of comedy and tragedy, and the insanity that has become a trademark of Takeshi Kitano films make this a real treat.
Perhaps one must already be a fan of Takeshi Kitano to like this film, since he plays a very unlikeable character in it.
Kitano plays a cantankerous middle-aged man, possibly mentally retarded in some way, who more or less kidnaps a young, friendless boy one summer and goes on a road trip with him.
The big problem is, Kikujiro (which is Kitano's character's name - he doesn't reveal it until the last minutes of the movie, like I'm supposed to really care) is a gigantic jerk.
In Takeshi Takeno's film 'Kukijiro', a young boy is taken by a strange old man he hardly knows on a journey across Japan to find the mother he has never met.
Kikujiro is a sweet road film full of amusing little scenes.
Fans of Takeshi Kitano's other harder films such as Sonatine and Fireworks will be a bit disappointed in Kikujiro but there is still enough in this movie to make it worth your while..
I rented this film after it was recommended to me, and it appeared to be well-received by a number of people I talked to and who apparently rate movies here on IMDb. After I finished watching Kikujiro I was left feeling like I was stuck behind a cultural barrier.
The film worth watching more than once (actually I have watched it five times, feel still not enough) I have watched all movies directed by Takeshi Kitano who is my favorite).
'Kikujiro' which I saw last night is a very special film in the Japanese cinema and in the filmography of Takeshi Kitano.The fans of Kitano will notice that he is taking the character he usually plays in the gangster movies and creates here a failed version of it.
The name - which we learn in the last scene - is the real name of Takeshi Kitano's father which is said to have shared at least some of the vices of the character in the movie like gambling.
The feelings of the little boy and his permanently sad look may have been inspired by the feelings of kid Takeshi and his disappointments in the relation with his father.By the time Kitano made this movie the 'grumpy man - lonely kid' films (which had the classic in Chaplin's Vagabond) were making a comeback.
Takeshi Kitano is a very well known name for me and I'm a big fan of his work however thinking in the subject I have seen only 3 films, 2 of them directed by him (Kids Return and Brother) and the other just with him as actor (Battle Royale).
Then I have the world of Kitano still to discover and certainly I really liked those 3 films and now "Kikujiro" was not the exception.
He is a great and strange character, he can be a total a****** and a good friend and thanks to Masao (Yusuke Sekiguchi) we are going to watch both sides of Kikujiro.
Masao is the protagonist of the film, a young boy who lives only with his grandmother, they used to be neighbours of Kikujiro and his wife.
It's a long way from Tokyo to where she lives in the country, so a family friend talks her husband, a grumpy ex-Yakuza, into accompanying the boy.The film is about the budding relationship between the older man, Kikujiro (played by Beat Takeshi who also directs), and the little boy.
But they also encounter some fun loving characters along the way and enjoy adventures together.By the end of the film, their van driver/poet drops them back off in the city where Kikujiro tells the little boy that it's been fun and that they should do it again. |
tt0087359 | Grandview, U.S.A. | Eighteen-year-old Tim Pearson, a soon-to-be graduate of Grandview High School, wants to go to Florida to study oceanography. Tim's father, Roger Pearson, loans Tim his brand new Cadillac to go to the Prom with his date Bonnie Clark. Later, while parked near a stream, Tim and Bonnie are making out in the Cadillac, when they feel the car moving, only to discover that the car is falling into the stream. Tim and Bonnie walk to "Cody's Speedway" to get a tow truck, Bonnie calls her father, who is so angry about the accident that he punches Tim. Mechanic Michelle "Mike" Cody comes to Tim's defense, and has Ernie "Slam" Webster, a local demolition derby driver, tow the car, taking Tim along. Slam stops at the bowling alley to see if his wife Candy had been there, but she wasn't.
The next morning, Tim goes to see his father at his office. He talks to Tim and hints to him that he does not want Tim to drive his car again. Tim runs into Mike and thanks her for helping him with the car.
Tim goes out to the Speedway, where he meets Mike's mentally challenged brother, Cowboy. Later on that night, Mike goes to the bar to see her uncle, Bob Cody, and asks if she can borrow $10,000, so she can fix up the Speedway. Bob doesn't have that kind of money, but wants to help her. Just then, they both hear a drunken Slam beating on a video game. Mike and Bob help Slam out to her truck. Mike and Slam talk about old times they had together.
Slam is at work the next morning, hungover, but his boss tells him to go home. Slam gets home and sees his wife Candy with another man, Donny. Enraged, he jumps on the lover's car demanding that Candy come back to him; in the ensuing struggle, Donny accidentally shoots himself in the foot. At the hospital, Candy declines to press charges, but refuses to come home with him.
That night, Mike sees Slam sleeping in his truck. Mike tries to comfort him, believing that he does not really love Candy, and is simply afraid of being alone. Later that day, Slam comes back and asks Mike if she wants to go out for dinner, but she tells him has to go to a County Commission meeting.
Tim and his dad go the same meeting, and Tim tells Roger that he wants to go to Florida; Roger is not too happy with his decision. At the Town Hall, Roger asks Tim to go to his office and get his Rolaids. In the office, Tim sees plans for the Speedway renovation on his dad's desk. At the meeting, Mike asks the commission for more time to come up with the money to fix up the Speedway, but the commission won't give it to her. Tim comes in and reveals what they have planned. He then gets into an argument with his father and leaves. He runs into Mike, who thanks him for saving her place. They both go for a hamburger at the local restaurant, and Mike invites Tim to her house, where they spend the night together. Mike asks Tim if he still wants to drive in the Derby, she gives him a car to drive. In the morning, Slam shows up at the door and discovers them in bed together; he leaves, upset.
Later on that day, Roger sees Tim near the stream, and says he is sorry about the fight. He asks Tim to give Illinois State University a chance, but Tim wants to go to Florida.
At the Speedway, Mike sells her old cars to make extra money; this upsets Cowboy, who runs off crying.
Slam goes to his house and sees his stuff on the lawn. Donny stands by the door and taunts Slam, telling him he called the cops. Slam gets his things and leaves.
Later that night, the Demolition Derby is going on, and Tim is in the race, competing against Slam. At the race's climax, Slam crashes into Tim. Mike is mad cause she thinks Slam did it on purpose, and tells him to leave the track.
Later that night, Candy and Donny are having sex in Slam's house when, suddenly, Slam appears on a bulldozer and knocks the walls down. The cops arrest Slam.
As Tim and Mike drive home from the hospital, they see firetrucks passing by, and discover that the Speedway has burned down. Mike asks her mother what had happened, and she says it just started up. In the morning, however, the police discover that the gas tank was unlocked. It is eventually revealed that Cowboy started the fire because Mike sold the old cars. Tim and Mike talk, and she admits she is in love with Slam.
Mike goes to bail Slam out from jail. He offers to help fix the Speedway, but Mike says she will sell the land to Roger Pearson; that way, they can afford to start a life together. Mike asks Slam for a favor.
Tim is on his way to Chicago, with his family in tow to say goodbye. The bus leaves and a car is driving by the side of the bus; it is Slam, who gives Tim the old car and money for his trip to Florida. | revenge | train | wikipedia | A great movie about life in a mid western town..
This movie is really great about life in a mid western town, a great cast in this movie.
A young soon to be high school grad,Tim Pearson,played by C.
Thomas Howell(The Outsiders, Red Dawn, and Soul Man)has his dreams.
Tim goes to Cody's Speed Way where they have demolition derbies there, he meets Michelle"Mike"Cody, played by Jamie Lee Curtis(Halloween, True Lies, and Freaky Friday).
Patrick Swayze(The Outsiders, Red Dawn, and Point Break) as Ernie"Slam"Webster, is awesome.
Ernie is a former boyfriend of Mike Cody, Ernie is married to Candy, played by Jennifer Jason-Leigh(Fast Times At Ridgemont High, Single White Female, and Rush), who is cheating on Ernie with a guy named Donny Vinton, played by 1950's heart throb Troy Donahue.
A love triangle goes on between Tim,Mike,and Slam.
Mike has her troubles too cause the county want to shut down the Speed Way, they feel her pace is unsafe, but the real estate man, Roger Pearson, played by Ramon Bieri, Tim's dad has plans for the site the Speed Way. Tim has a romantic night with Mike Cody,they start to be more close.
Slam has problems with his marriage and wants to get close to Mike.
The Speed Way gets burned down cause of Mike's little brother, nicknamed Cowboy, who like gum very much.
Mike and Slam start over together, Tim Pearson goes to Florida cause of Mike and Slam giving him his car.I think this movie is underrated and should have been giving a lot more credit.Grandview U.S.A. has a good supporting cast like Michael Winslow(The Police Academy movies, Spaceballs)as the announcer at the Speed Way.M. Emmet Walsh(Blade Runner, Back To School, and Missing In Action)as Bonnie's father.John Cusack(Better Off Dead, One Crazy Summer, and The Grifters)as Tim Pearson's friend,Johnny.
Joan Cusack as Johnny's sister.Carole Cook as Mike Cody's mother, Betty Welles.John Philbin(Children Of The Corn and Point Break)as Cowboy.I give this movie a 2 thumbs up and 10/10, I had the honor to see it filmed, I was staying with my aunt in Pontiac, Illinois, where the movie was filmed..
There have been more bad critical reviews and comments about THIS movie than good.
It contains an excellent blend of comedy and drama about life in a rural American location (no mention of state or town but Texas is a good possibility).
Observant touches and crazy-romantic characters more interesting than the plot.
Tender-but-tough divorcée, the struggling owner of an outdoor demolition derby arena in small town Illinois, is faced with a $10,000 upgrade from the county; one of the commissioners is trying to get her property cheap so he can build a country club on the spot, but is unaware his teenage son has a crush on the older woman, who is also being courted by her star-driver.
Surprisingly complicated character-driven film from director Randal Kleiser, he of the hits "Grease" and "The Blue Lagoon".
Working from Ken Hixon's mercurial script, Kleiser hands a wonderful role to top-billed Jamie Lee Curtis, who finally gets to show off an appealing range (it's one of her tightest performances).
Thomas Howell is still doing his puppy dog bit (soulful eyes and trembling bottom lip), however Patrick Swayze is terrific as the macho star involved in an all-out war with his cheating wife (Jennifer Jason Leigh, convincing as an unrepentant tramp).
Just as good as the younger players is Ramon Bieri as Howell's father; the under-appreciated actor stews in realistic exasperation with his kids, and Kleiser is careful not to mock him (the father's actions aren't fully considered, but we are able to perceive the man's character in Bieri's weary eyes and seasoned face).
What doesn't work are the dream sequences/music videos which appear to be included to appeal to the teen market.
It was filmed in my home town.
This movie is special to me because it was filmed in my home town of Pontiac,IL.
I was a little kid when they were filming it and I got to meet Jamie Lee. it was awesome.
In Pontiac,IL not much goes on, so you can only imagine how fun it was to have a movie with real stars being made there!
It's fun to watch this and look out for stuff that's there, not there and see some of my friends in little pieces of the film.
So if you are from or have ever been to Pontiac,IL I suggest you watch this film!!.
This is the first 1 I've ever given a movie at the IMDb. There are some true dogs in the wide world of cinema, and this one is king of the scrap heap.Unmoving setting, snore-worthy climax, angry married people sleeping around, choreographer Patrick Swayze sporting his usual Labrador retriever look; a sad-eyed Jamie Lee Curtis (believably, must say) reprises another unconventional woman with father issues; a couple of a-romantic love affairs with a heavy scene of pseudo BDSM, and people doing it in moving (!?) cars; and a ceaseless string of unfunny clichés about post-adolescence in the mid-80s, complete with silly spoofs on MTV (back when MTV actually played music videos.) Avoid.
But if you do indulge, look for the bad cameos of Michael Winslow as Spencer, Grandview's most visible Black man.
1 deep regret out of 10, but don't take my word for it; Jamie Lee reportedly said so, herself.
this might just be The Bad 80s Movie.
this might just be The Bad 80s Movie.
The cast is all the Usual Suspects: Patrick Swayze, Jamie Lee Curtis, Jennifer Jason Leigh, etc.
OK, so some movies don't age as well as others, but I mean, come on!
Upon JLC's appearance, my first thought was that this must have been a 'rent' movie, early in her career.
She'd already had success with Halloween, Halloween II, and Trading Places!Viewing this film today, 20 years on, is more an exercise in humility than nostalgia..
Set in a small town in the mid-west,"Grandview USA" is neither the best nor the worst of the films to come along in the wake of "American Graffiti".Nothing much really happens,but C.
Thomas Howell's recurrent music video fantasies are entertaining,and the snippets of small-town America during the opening credits are fun.The little kid who's sharing her ice-cream cone with her dog was my favorite.A pleasant,unoffensive,little film..
I wanted to see this because of the presence of Jennifer Jason Leigh in the cast.
The others are not bad, but not extraordinary either: Jamie Lee Curtis, C.
Thomas Howell, Patrick Swayze..
This is a strange movie and another spicy relationship from Kleiser coming back from Santorin.
That was indeed my feeling in my own hometown before leaving for the big city
The movie takes a long time to get settled (while it's only 100 minutes), but it's worth staying because this coming of age story (a theme that has always resonates in me) is about a grad teen having a crush for Jamie Lee !
Sure her occupation is crazy (manager of stunt cars) but in her cowboy clothes or in the teen fantasies as a rock star, she is totally stunning and thus i was really connected with what's happening between them.
Swayze was solid as a poor hick unable to save his weeding while Jenny was a big disappointment : she thus plays her unfaithful wife but like the future Tralala from Red Hook, she is too much into teasing and nothing else
As this small town is near Chicago, we have also as bonus, the locals siblings from the area, maybe in their 1st appearance as both sister and brother are still young !.
This is a troubling movie to review.
More good pass the time movie fare in the world of ordinary, although you do get caught up in the characters and their hardships, problems, aspirations, mistakes, etc.
It's well acted by all, and if you're a C Thomas Howell fan, like me, it's a plus, although like Soul Man, here, I didn't buy that Oceanography was his passion, a similar study to what the late Paul Walker did, him choosing marine biology.
Anyhow, he gets caught up in an affair with an older woman, the always capable and talented Jamie Lee Curtis.
Her best friend and ex lover (the late Swayze) a car derby driver who revels in his profession, is now going out with a trashy, but delicious looking sort (Jennifer Jason Leigh, in one of the film's standout and memorable performances) who's doing others, besides him.
The film has an average script, and less so plot, but one feels the movie is not built around that.
If you disregard that, and just live through the characters here, you'll come off okay, while a plus, is being a Christopher Howell fan.
Another asset is two dream sequences, one featuring Howell in a choreographed dancing number in front of a locomotive, surrounding by an entourage of beauties and studs, where the prize inside the carriage is Jamie Lee Curtis who I myself, has never found this horror icon, attractive.
Also an intimate lovemaking scene, on the derby ground, between the more mature Curtis and younger gent, Howell, in a brake locked car, which executes a perfect donut.
An enjoyable time passer with memorable moments, and characters, but don't look higher than that.
Here too, before Soul Man, Howell takes one in the gulliver..
This movie was a real waste of some good talent.
As I recall, it was a dud in the theaters, so I'd imagine after paying the talent, they lost money.The story is stupid & 1/2 way into it, you find yourself saying "who cares?" This movie has the same dumb storyline as the movie Roadhouse David vs Goliath.
Why should anyone care about trying to save a broken down demolition derby racetrack?...Mike (Jamie Lee) would be smart to sell it, take the money & run, thus saving us from the pain of watching her & the other losers from trying to save it.The only highlight is seeing Jamie Lee naked.It was filmed in a little one-horse town in central Illinois, I have been through there several times.
Even with a nice midwestern setting and a truly honest effort to make a film that most people could relate to on some level, this movie just comes up way short.
I just stopped caring about these characters about halfway in, and I spent the remainder of the film waiting for the predictable ending to take place.
It's not that this is a bad film, but I would call it generic, and it has a basic storyline that would be familiar to most movie-goers.
I'm quite certain that you can easily find a better film than this next time you're looking to kill some time with a movie..
If Small-town Midwestern Life is so Idyllic, Why are all the Kids Moving Elsewhere?.
People didn't revel in their small town status.
And pepper's considered pretty darn exotic.Jamie Lee used to show up at the bar I used to frequent after work, during the shoot.
First time I saw her I'd been in there about 10 minutes and a roadie walked in and she flashed her breasts at him and said, "How do you like these sets?"I suppose the movie does capture the grinding nothingness of it all.
I found the plot insipid and the acting pretty bad.
Surely you have something better to do than to watch this movie.
Trapped in someplace like Fairbury, IL they convince themselves that they love small town Americana.
This movie will be known for being the worst film made by many of these popular actors & actresses.
I lived near Pontiac IL for 12 years and after seeing the movie and recognizing places I went when I was growing up it was special.One question though if anyone knows Was the main house in the movie the funeral home in town?
thats where I lived and went to school thru 7th grade, my parents worked in Pontiac at the chair factory, then my mom worked at the hospital and my dad worked at the prison.We always thought that the track was near Fairbury but I guess not is there any place where this movie can be rented I have check Block Buster and they don't have it i think its one of those hard to find movies.
In first watching Grandview, USA, you might be puzzled by the scattered storytelling.
Simply put, the movie concerns a few small town Illinois residents, but each with their own assorted, and somewhat separate, small town struggles.
C Thomas Howell, at least in the trailers, is made to look like the main character of the story, the teenager just aching to break free of the provincial setting.
Jamie Lee Curtis is Mike Cody, a speedway owner who is fighting to hold on to her property.
And, Patrick Swayze plays "Slam the Ram," a rather cumbersome character who plays a speedway driver on Cody's lot who is dealing with his sleazy wife (Jennifer Jason Leigh) cheating on him.
The entire story is, as said before, simply scattered and without focus.Jamie Lee Curis and Patrick Swayze, however, are no less entertaining despite this.
If only they had developed their characters and story enough, you might have had quite an enjoyable little film.
For me, it was still an entertaining film, so long as you don't mind obscure movies and you're in the mood for something different.
C Thomas Howell's teenage angst can be kind of annoying at points, especially the music video daydream sequence with the 'Steele Man of Action' bit.
Look for John Philbin (as one of the speedway employees), John Cusack and Joan Cusack (as C Thomas Howell's friends) in minor parts.
Lighthearted teen drama, directed by Randal Kleiser, fresh from "Grease" and "Blue Lagoon" box office hits, which like "Footloose" it was set in rural America, in this case a Midwestern small-town called Grandview, features a cast of the 80's 'usual suspects' in this particular genre such as Jamie Lee Curtis, C.Thomas Howell, Patrick Swayze, John & Joan Cusack, John Philbin and Jennifer Jason Leigh, among others.The movie surely looks good and perfectly fits in the 80's visuals and the general tone, with that appealing 'small town vibe'; a bit cheesy in parts with over-the-top characters and campy acting & dialogue delivering, pumped with an emblematic 80's rock /pop soundtrack, performed by Air Supply, Jack Mack and the Heart Attack, Eddie & the Tide or The Pointer Sisters and even with some staged musical numbers MTV style in Howell's dream sequences, choreographed by the star Patrick Swayze and his wife Lisa Niemi, on the other hand the weak part is the way the story was written and presented to the screen, which seriously lacks focus with a myriad of sub-plots among the characters which turned the main plot, whatever it was, into a sub-plot itself.18 years old's high school graduate, Tim Pearson (Howell) lives in Grandview and wants to leave the small town to go to Florida to be an oceanographer, against his father's will; 27 years old's and divorced tomboy, Michelle 'Mike' Cody (Jamie Lee Curtis), which owns a Speedrome after her father died of a heart attack, fights to retain it open against Tim's dad, Roger Pearson (Ramon Bieri), who wants to buy the land to built a golf course & a wealthy resort and Ernie 'Slam' Webster (Patrick Swayze), a speed racer in Cody's circuit, a frustrated husband of the shameless and unfaithful, Candy Webster (Jennifer Jason Leigh), who's having an affair with the way older & sleazy salesman, Donny Vinton (Troy Donahue).
"Slam" and "Mike" always had a crush on each other, although they have never dated, but when "Slam" finally leaves Candy, after a physical confront with her wife's lover and tries to pursuit his happiness alongside "Mike", it may be too late, because his former crush is starting to feel the hots for the much younger Tim...If the plot's summary sounds like a 'teen soap opera", it's because is close to being it, but after all it's a Randal Kleiser flick and his own style of being cheerful, dreamy, mawkishly sentimental and corny, it's once again, very patent here.Jamie Lee Curtis, in all of her sexiness, leads "Grandview U.S.A." in her second adult role, following the success in the previous year of "Trading Places", trying to distance herself from being typecast in another horror / slasher film as the iconic "Scream Queen" in service; C.
Thomas Howell, still a bit green in his acting and Patrick Swayze, in a thankless role, both still fresh from their work as the brothers Curtis in Francis Ford Coppola's "The Outsiders", reunite here in the same year that they also performed together in the John Milius' cult-movie, "Red Dawn".The supporting cast is full of familiar faces: from the 50's heartthrob, Troy Donahue, which performed his sleazy role so 'hammy' that almost looks like a parody, to the "Police Academy" Sgt. Jones', Michael Winslow and the Cusack brothers (even if you blink, you will miss Joan's tiny part on screen); John Philbin, who surprisingly delivers a good performance as the mentally retarded "Cowboy", and the character actors Ramon Bieri, M.
Emmet Walsh & the always great, William Windom.The sex / nude scenes between Jamie Lee and C.
Thomas Howell look a bit awkward and odd, not only because the age difference is noticeable (Howell looks like a callow kid next to a matured Jamie), but also that he was underage during principal photography, i don't know how it passed through the censors, maybe it was one the mysteries from that decade, whatever it happened during the 80's, it stayed in the 80's...In short, "Grandview U.S.A." is a movie aimed to the devoted fans of 80's teen movies, which love this genre and can truly appreciate it, even when they aren't that good like in this particular case, for the general viewers, it's better skip this one and go rent / buy something else. |
tt0038455 | The Dark Mirror | Dr. Frank Peralta is stabbed to death in his apartment one night. The detective on the case, Lt. Stevenson (Mitchell), quickly finds multiple witnesses putting Peralta's lover, Terry Collins (de Havilland), at the scene. However, when Stevenson finds Terry and questions her, she has an iron-clad alibi with multiple witnesses. It is revealed that Terry has an identical twin sister, Ruth (de Havilland), and the pair share the same job and routinely switch places for their own benefit. Stevenson and the district attorney are unable to prosecute, since the twins refuse to confirm which one of them has the alibi.
Unable to accept the "perfect crime", Lt. Stevenson asks Dr. Scott Elliot (Ayres) for help. Scott is an expert on twin study, and has been routinely encountering the Collins twins at their shared place of work, but does not know which one is which. As a front, Scott asks Terry and Ruth if he can study both of them individually as part of his research. The twins accept, though Ruth is worried that Scott might find out that Terry was at Peralta's apartment the night of the murder. However, Terry is attracted to Scott and insists that they can keep the secret for the sake of seeing him. She also comforts Ruth, reminding her that she was only at Peralta's apartment but didn't kill him.
From Scott's psychological tests and by spending time with them, he discovers that Ruth is kind and loving, while Terry is highly intelligent, insane, and has been manipulating Ruth almost their entire lives. Terry is jealous that people keep preferring Ruth over her, and is again enraged when Scott falls in love with Ruth instead of her. Terry starts methodically gaslighting Ruth, making her believe that she's hallucinating and going insane, in the hopes of pushing her to suicide.
Scott reports his findings to Stevenson, who advises him to warn Ruth immediately. That night, Scott arranges to meet with Ruth at his apartment, but Terry intercepts the message. Terry leaves Ruth alone at their apartment, and sets a music box in a hidden place to further drive Ruth to madness. Terry goes to meet Scott, but he's aware of who she really is. Scott explains everything he's learned about the twins' relationship and Terry's intense rivalry with her innocent sister. Scott also believes that Peralta, who didn't know they were twins, wooed Terry but was really in love with Ruth, and Terry killed him for it. Just as Terry is considering stabbing Scott, he receives a phone call from Stevenson, who is at the twins' apartment, having visited her on a hunch and found Ruth dead.
Scott and Terry go to the sisters' apartment, where Terry "confesses" to Stevenson that her "sister" killed Peralta and committed suicide out of guilt. Terry confirms all of Scott's psychological test results, but she herself claims to be Ruth, and says that she's relieved that "Terry" is dead. Just then Ruth enters the room, alive and well, which causes Terry to throw her glass to a mirror in anger. Stevenson did visit Ruth on a hunch but only found her in distress, not dead; he then faked the phone call in order to trap Terry, who is arrested. | good versus evil, murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt1827512 | Le gamin au vélo | The story begins with Cyril, a 11-year-old boy in a children's home in the working class town of Seraing near Liege, attempting to reach his father by phone. His single father, no mother is ever mentioned, promised him that he would only live there for 30 days. The children's home staff tells him to hang up the phone since once again his father is not going to answer and go outside to play with the other children. Cyril refuses and when the phone is disconnected he bites a carer then runs from the director's office, attempting to abscond by climbing over a fence with two carers on his heels. He is pulled from the fence and restrained before being returned to the children's home, where he is later seen sleeping in a dormitory as forlorn music plays. Soon after Cyril absconds again successfully by lying to a carer that he needs the toilet one day after school, when he is supposed to be outside playing with the other kids. Instead he flees through a side door and takes a city bus alone in search of his father.
To get inside the building he uses the intercom to buzz the medical clinic and lies saying he fell off his bike. He goes directly to his father's apartment though and bangs on the door until a neighbor tells him to go away because no one is there. When the caretakers find him, Cyril flees to a doctor’s office that buzzed him into the building, where he grabs onto a woman in the waiting room. She says she doesn't mind if he holds her, only don't squeeze so tight. Trying to alleviate the situation, the caretakers take Cyril to the empty apartment, confirming that his father has really abandoned him.
The next morning, the woman from the doctor's office, Samantha, shows up with Cyril’s bike. She says she bought it from someone in the projects, but Cyril thinks it was stolen from his dad. He likes Samantha though, and asks if she would take him in on weekends. She agrees and Cyril begins to spend much time at home and in her beauty salon. Samantha and her partner Gilles are very good to Cyril providing for a carefree typical childhood experience. In the local neighborhood he enjoys playing with other children, running errands, and most of all riding his beloved bike for hours on end. Still his refusal to accept his father's abandonment continues to haunt him and prevent him from thriving in this healthy newfound environment even after discovering through an old personal ad that his father actually sold his bike. One night in Samantha's home, where Cyril has his own bedroom, he gets up and goes to Samantha's bedroom, only to run back to his own room when he sees Samantha and Gilles undressed in bed with implied sex. Samantha follows him back to his bedroom to find out what is his problem and he tells her that he is okay but just really wants his father.
In response to this, without permission from neither the children's home director nor Cyril's psychologist, who has advised against doing so to protect his emotional stability, Samantha soon tracks down Cyril's father by contacting the police department and drives Cyril to see him in another town.
When Cyril's father does not come to meet with them at the agreed location and time, they go looking for him at Cyril's insistence. At his new address, they encounter a woman who is hostile and suspicious, but tells them Cyril's father is at her restaurant preparing for the day. At the restaurant, after much knocking and shouting, they finally come face to face with his father, who reluctantly invites Cyril inside while Samantha elects to remain outside to give them privacy. Inside the restaurant, Cyril follows his deliberately aloof father around the kitchen asking why he still has to stay at the children's home to which his father non-chalantly responds "What? They are not nice to you?" giving Cyril no indication of when he will live with him again. Finally, after giving him a snack and writing down his cellphone number to call later, he tells Cyril he has to leave and let him work. He walks Cyril to the door and asks him to wait outside while he speaks privately with Samantha inside. Cyril's father admits to Samantha that he has no intentions of ever raising Cyril alone now that his grandmother is dead, has started a new life which has no place for Cyril, and tells her Cyril is her problem now asking that she tell Cyril this. Back outside Samantha asks Cyril what his father said to him about future contact then marches him straight back to the restaurant door demanding that Cyril's father be honest with his son. His father tells him he must stay either at the children's home or with Samantha, because he doesn't care to see him again. On the way back home, Cyril has such a severe nervous breakdown that Samantha has to stop the car and hold him until he calms down.
Cyril, heartbroken by his father's rejection, turns to Samantha for comfort. But despite Samantha's care, Cyril is soon taken under the wing of Wesker, - an adopted pseudonym from the Resident Evil character - a local gang leader known as "The Dealer". When Cyril stays out late one evening and does not even bother to use his cellphone to call to check in, Samantha and her partner go looking for him and are none too pleased that he's keeping company with ne'er do wells when they happen upon him. Cyril's fresh mouth doesn't help matters and this leads to an argument between the couple with Gilles demanding that Cyril apologize and telling Samantha she must choose between the two of them. Samantha chooses Cyril and Gilles gets out of the car furious. Samantha crying and upset then gets into the driver's seat to drive them home. Cyril still fails to understand how much Samantha cares for him however as he has no concept of unconditional love and continues to run wild with Wesker almost ruining his chance at a good life completely soon after.
One night rather than go out to a movie with his new friend and the boy's parents as he has been invited to do, Cyril throws a temper tantrum and demands to be allowed to go off out to roam the streets alone instead. He doesn't tell Samantha that he's supposed to meet Wesker to commit a crime of assault and theft, but she figures out that something is going on, refuses him permission, and tries her hardest to keep him indoors by blocking the doors. In frustration and uncontrolled anger, Cyril screams he does not want to be with Samantha anymore to try to manipulate her, but she tells him to go right ahead and call the orphanage's director to come pick him up if that's what he wants, but he won't be leaving the house to run the streets like a hooligan regardless. His anger boils over and in a last ditch effort to get his way, Cyril stabs Samantha on the arm with a pair of scissors and bolts out the door while she's crying and in shock. At The Dealer’s prompting, Cyril robs a newsstand owner and his son, knocking them down with a baseball bat. The Dealer, fearing Cyril had been identified, forces him to keep quiet and keep the money. Cyril tries giving it to his father only to be rejected and chased away as his father does not want to get caught by the law. Dejected, Cyril returns to Samantha and finally accepts her care for him. He apologizes for hurting her arm. The robbery is settled through mediation, where Cyril with Samantha by his side apologizes personally to the owner, who accepts, but his son does not and, in a chance encounter, tries to get his revenge. Shortly after the case is sorted out, the shop owner's son against his father's wishes confronts Cyril as he is riding on his bike to buy charcoal for a cookout. In the ensuing chase, Cyril climbs a tree and falls when struck by a rock the son throws. While he lies unconscious, the owner and son discuss what lies to tell the police and dispose of possible evidence that could be used against them, because they figure Cyril is either dead or dying. While they're talking however, Cyril regains consciousness and declines the suggestion that an ambulance be called although he has been knocked senseless. The shop owner and son watch aghast as Cyril picks up the charcoal, gets on his bike, and pedals away as if nothing happened clearly no longer the disturbed and violent child they first encountered. | revenge | train | wikipedia | One that pulls you in by the honest and genuine storytelling told in the Dardenne brothers' trademark naturalistic and guileless tone that is refreshing and sorely missed in today's too often rambunctious style of movies.The story is simple and organic, the kid initially breaking out of foster care to find his father, and his bike both of which give him some identity and purpose in the world.
Some characters are good (Samantha), some not so (Wes) and some have their own agendas to make a living.In this way, the film is not unlike (and I quote the Dardennes) a fairytale - the boy (hero) on quest in the wide world which various characters and dangers lurking, yet set in this ultra realistic (read social-realist) setting.The style of film-making here is pure and simple in that social-realist style, simply presenting characters who live on the fringe of society; who live in poor social economic conditions or don't have the opportunity of good schooling or the genuine love of a mother or father.
The Dardenne brothers (L'Enfant, Lorna's Silence) once again demonstrate their mastery for crafting character studies around broken souls trying to get by in France, with their newest film, The Kid With A Bike.
Of course the audience knows the revelation he is most likely going to receive.Soon he comes into the care of Samantha (the always great Cecile De France), a hairdresser in the town nearby who runs into him by chance, and this is where the film really starts to succeed.
My heart sank in the moments with his father (played well by Dardennes regular Jeremie Renier), warmed in the few bright spots in his life and when he was in danger I almost drew blood from digging my nails into my palm due to the tension.Along with the emotional journey that the Cyril/Samantha dynamic takes you on, the Dardennes also imbue the film with a dark fairy tale metaphor that I found added a great new layer to Cyril's story.
Cyril spends the film wearing a variety of red tops, clearly representing our Riding Hood lost in the woods, and at a certain point he encounters our version of the Big Bad Wolf; a troubled youth who didn't have the luxury of a Samantha in his life.
Cyril Catoul (Thomas Doret) is living in a state run home and school for children after his single parent father Guy Catoul (Jérémie Renier) abandoned him.
A kind single woman, Samantha, (Cécile De France) takes pity on him and tracks down the bicycle that his father had sold and buys it and returns it to Cyril.
Yet the Dardenne brothers have fashioned an unsentimental, realistic drama, The Kid with a Bike, about an 11 year old boy, Cyril (Thomas Doret), who is fortunately taken in by a guardian, town hairdresser Samantha (Cecile De France), but not without serious setbacks that are understandable given his unstable background.The title evokes thoughts of the famous Italian neo-realist Bicycle Thief, in which a young boy is introduced to life's hard knocks through an imperfect father.
In Kid, the father is a deadbeat deserter whose brief appearances are depressing because it's clear a reconnection with his son is not going to happen.Cyril is running through most of the film, either by bike or foot, a motif signifying his desperate desire for a parent.
Throughout the film you're questioning your reactions to things (boy, that Cyril seems like an awful little monster at first) or asking "What would I do?" Again, the camera-work is immediate and unfettered by stylistic flourishes, putting you right inside the lives of these characters.
They are trapped and miserable in front of life, whether it's the young abandoned kid, or insolvent father or a hairdresser who agrees to foster a ragging child in random act of kindness.
Unable to accept his father's rejection, he constantly ditches school in search of him, but along the way comes across his fairy godmother, Samantha (Cécile de France), who takes an inexplicable shine to the stern-faced 11-year-old.He begins to stay with Samantha on the weekends, but all is still not well for Cyril.
Torn between Samantha, Wes and his own father, who he still longs to please, Cyril has to decide who really has his best interests at heart.This fairytale's 'happy ending' is somewhat bittersweet, but The Kid with a Bike still takes the Dardennes into far more fluffy territory.
After a while, the fairytale form begins to feel like little more than a justification for the formulaic and uninspiring way in which the narrative unfolds.Doret's performance of Cyril strikes the perfect balance between diffidence and angst, and de France is warm and convincing.
The emotional turmoil this child goes through is written relatively simply but the unfathomable depth of the film comes from his absolutely outstanding performance.The staple cinematography of the Dardenne brothers consists largely of shots that take up entire scenes, which along with the natural colour pallet really help bring another huge layer of realism to the film.
In cinematic history, the bicycle has served as the main vehicle to the working class life as in the neo-realistic tearjerker, The Bicycle Thief; in more recent times, the bike literally transports us on a fantasy escape against a moonlit sky, as in E.T. Yes, the bicycle is one amazing and powerful piece of equipment.Which leads us to the foreign film, The Kid with the Bike, a film that doesn't quite amaze its movie-going audience, but does still deliver a powerful message.
One courageous and kind soul who approaches this troubled boy is Samantha ( Cecile de France ), a hairdresser who hopes to help Cyril through this emotional upheaval.
Belgian filmmakers Jean-Pierre and Luc Dardenne have fashioned a simple story about a kid whose only direct link to his missing father is his bike.
This meeting builds rather nicely to some tense moments, but it is midway into the film that the directors begin to lose some focus and gloss over the seriousness of Cyril's actions, diminishing the real life and legal ramifications of this behavior in favor of an ironic twist of fate to be used later in the story.
But when you hear the Dardennes talk about their movies, they insist on their aversion toward clichés or cheap emotions (hear, hear Spielberg): they can use scores, a few familiar set-ups but they'll never indulge to "tricks": their stories are simple in their straightforward and not too fancy directing but through their characters, the brothers drilled soils of human complexity with an equipment as effective as the truth and a certain respect to our intelligence.As the title implies, the film centers on a kid, and so does the first frame: Cyril (Thomas Doret) holds a phone, seeking someone desperately, an unseen adult tries to dissuade him, the case seems hopeless but the kid resists, entrapped in the frame but freed by his certitude.
Telling the rest of the film with as many details would spoil the experience so let's say the story will be about a kid in quest for anything that would make his childhood meaningful, that can cancel out the feeling of sheer abandon, and anyone to provide him, if not love, true guidance.
Cyril's reaction against the thief earns him respect and a nickname that was going to be the original title: pit-bull.A recurring theme in the Dardennes' riveting portrait of the 2000s, we catch "pitbull" at a crossroad of his life, like Renier in "The Promise" where he could either follow his father's footsteps or redeem himself by helping an African migrant.
The Dardenne brothers are Belguims's answer to Ken Loach, and 'The Kid with a Bike' is a beautifully (and painfully) observed little story of a child growing up without the love of his parents.
A young boy tries to find his fatherStarring Thomas Doret and Cecile De FranceWritten and directed by Jeanne-Pierre Dardenne and Luc DardenneThere is something incredibly charming and captivating about some of these French movies with subtitles and this is no different.It's just a great story with no bells and whistles.
Somewhere beside him lurks the angelic figure of Samantha (Cécile De France), a hairdresser, who selflessly devotes herself to bringing Cyril comfort and a new home.The Dardenne brothers neorealist drama, much reminiscent in tone to movies of era gone, is a slight, lingering tale, which imbues itself into the conscious with its humanist tale full of longing, rejection, but ultimately delivers a oft forgotten positive outlook on the human condition.
Desperate for his father's affection, Cyril is given the opportunity of a fresh start when local hairdresser Samantha (the ravenous Cecile De France) who agrees to foster him during the weekends.
A troubled young boy Cyril (Thomas Doret) lives in a Children's Home after his father decided he was no longer able to cope with caring for him.
The woman, a hairdresser called Samantha (Cecile de France) accepts and the boy spends time with her while she attempts to free him from the anger and rage that keeps getting him into trouble.I first heard about this film last May when it won the Jury Prize at Cannes.
Maybe I'm missing the point that the film is about the woman's attempts to help the boy redeem himself but I just thought that he was an annoying kid with a sad back story.The father-son relationship did make me feel sorry for the child and it was horrible to see a father treat his son with such disdain.
Considering I didn't like the kid, it was clever of the film to still make me worry about him.I thought that young Thomas Doret's acting was incredible for a boy so young and Cecile de France was infinitely better than in the only other film I've seen her in, the quite frankly very poor Clint Eastwood drama Hereafter.
Educator Leo Buscaglia has said, "Too often we underestimate the power of a touch, a smile, a kind word, a listening ear, an honest compliment, or the smallest act of caring, all of which have the potential to turn a life around." The empathy in this case is that of Samantha (Cécile De France), a hairdresser in Jean and Luc Dardenne's The Kid with a Bike who connects with young Cyril (Thomas Doret), an angry 11-year-old who has been abandoned by his deadbeat father (Jérémie Renier) and placed in an orphanage.Winner of the Grand Jury Prize at the 2011 Cannes Film Festival and set in Seraing, Belgium, on the surface The Kid with a Bike is a simple story, yet, underneath, it is a complex portrayal of real people struggling to find their place in the world.
Known for their gritty films of social realism that demand much of the viewer ("The Child," "The Son") the Dardenne brothers' latest film is just as tough-minded as the others but it also has humanity and warmth, and its use of music (the adagio from Beethoven's Emperor Concerto), unusual for the Dardennes, makes it a fuller and richer experience.Cyril lives in an orphanage after being deserted by his father, but refuses to believe that his father will not come for him.
Unfortunately, the job leads to unanticipated repercussions.Marked by a stunningly natural performance from first-time actor Thomas Doret who convincingly conveys Cyril's innocence as well as his pain, the Dardenne brothers' refusal to give in to manipulation or sentimentality makes The Kid with a Bike an intense and emotionally gripping experience.
The film grittily follows their principle of consistency, a point- of-view depiction of social margin's dire straits, this time the linchpin is a deserted boy from a foster care house, with a Dardennes' regular Jérémie Renier as the pitiless father, which could be interpreted as a sequel of THE CHILD.
2. Cyril education in the institution where his father left him, to understand why this boy is so much stubborn and has so little skills to think about a fact before acting; for instance, why he doesn't take into account Samantha advice to avoid any relationship with Wes, the drug dealer and thief?
Like a young detective, he methodically tracks him down — visiting the bar and pastry shop his dad took him to, calling a number that is always disconnected, talking his way into his dad's former apartment, where he is sure he will find his bicycle and perhaps Guy (Jeremie Renier), his father.Winner of the Grand Jury Prize at Cannes 2011, "The Kid with a Bike" is another empathetic film by Jean-Pierre and Luc Dardenne, the brothers from Belgium who have strong sympathy for alienated children and young people, and who avoid melodrama and sensation in telling their stories so movingly.
Samantha (Cecile De France), who owns a local beauty shop, tracks down the boy and buys the bike from his father.
The score of this film was used sparingly, close to No Country For Old Men devoid of score throughout, but it worked to get us entrapped in this beautiful and engaging story of a young boy unable to cope with the fact that his father has rejected him and a kind hairdresser taking him in on weekends.
This film is the story of Cyril, a boy abandoned to a foster care system by his father.
The boy gets some fostering support from a local hairdresser who helps him in trying to find his father, stay out of trouble and work out what is next in his life.
It tells the story about a 12-year-old boy named Cyril Coutet who has been sent to a foster home after being left by his father.
Acutely and engagingly directed by Belgian filmmakers Jean-Pierre and Luc Dardenne, this rhythmic fictional tale which is narrated mostly from the protagonist's point of view, draws a moving and heartrending portrayal of a mother-son relationship between a conflicted adolescent boy who has been abandoned by his father and a hairdresser who opens her heart and home to him.
The reason is his father, who has abandoned him and wants nothing more to do with him.But the boy meets this angel-like hairdresser, who feels love when she meets him.
If "The Kid with a Bike" were an English language film, chances are it would be structured so that the title character wouldn't find his father until the end, at which point there would be some kind of emotional climax and narrative resolution.
Even if there is, it will not present itself in a moment of sweeping melodrama.The kid's name is Cyril (Thomas Doret), a troubled eleven-year-old boy in foster care.
He was sure his father would have given it to him.By pure chance, he runs into a hairdresser named Samantha (Cécile de France), who later returns the bike to Cyril.
This time, the story is about a young boy in search for his father, and the hairdresser who takes care of him.
What really stands out in this film is the way the young boy, Cyril, is played by Thomas Doret.
I went to see the Kid with a Bike knowing just the basic story, and that it was a film by the famous Dardenne brothers.
He meets Samantha, a hairdresser who agrees to take him in on weekends while he searches for his dad.The directors do a good job of showing Cyril's disintegration as he realizes his dad wants no part of him, but this all happens within the first half of the film.
Directed by Luc and Jean-Pierre Dardenne, "The Kid With a Bike" stars Thomas Doret as Cyril, a sullen child who has been abandoned by his parents.
After repeatedly running away from his orphanage, Cyril is taken in by Samantha (Cecile De France), an angelic woman in possession of tremendous grace, patience and love.Unlike other films by the Dardenne brothers, "Bike" eschews social realism for austere, almost Bressonian minimalism.
Cyril's father here, for example, is the young father seen in the Dardennes' "L'Enfant", a film about an irresponsible couple who fall into a life of crime, abandoning their newborn kid along the way.
The story is quite simple: a 12-year-old boy abandoned by his father and the kindly woman who randomly meets him and becomes part of his life.
The latest film from The Dardenne Brothers, "The Kid With A Bike" is once again about lower class life in Belgium, this time focusing on the story of Cyril, an eleven-year-old boy living in a state-run facility after being abandoned by his father.
The film was shot in Belgium, in the town of Seraing, where the Dardennes held approximately 100 auditions and settled on an outstanding child actor neophyte, Thomas Doret, who plays the 10 year old protagonist, Cyril.According to Wikipedia, the Dardenne brothers wanted to tell their story much like a fairy tale and chose not to develop many of the adult characters in the film.
Trying to keep Doret on track, Cécile De France gives a great performance as Samantha,whose every attempt to support Cyril France lays bare,as the boy finds his bike..
In a good drama you believe this is the way they should end.If Cyril is the hero, the mystery character of the film is Samantha, the woman who helps him, takes care of him, plays the role of a mother to him.
Eleven-year old Cyril (played by Thomas Doret) has been sent by his father to live foster care.
Cyril Catoul (Thomas Doret) is a young boy who starts the film looking for his bike from his distant father.
The relationship the film tries to build up between Samantha and Cyril made no sense to me because it seemed to come out of no where that this women would do anything to help this child.
Also the fact Cyril cried for his father so much was just annoying because he seemed to act like a baby not listening to what he was told and the boy in this film is old enough to understand what people are saying. |
tt1278469 | Temple Grandin | The film follows Temple Grandin's (Danes) life, providing background through a series of flashbacks. As a child, Grandin is uncommunicative and prone to tantrums and is diagnosed with autism. The medical consensus at that time was that autism is a form of schizophrenia resulting from insufficient maternal affection. Despite recommendations to place her in an institution, Grandin's mother (Ormond) hires therapists and works to help her daughter adapt to social interaction.
As a teenager, Temple travels to her aunt (O'Hara) and uncle's ranch to work. She observes cows being placed into a squeeze chute to calm them, and, during an anxiety attack, she uses the chute to calm herself. Inspired by her teacher, Dr. Carlock (Strathairn) to pursue science, she is admitted to Franklin Pierce College where she develops an early version of the squeeze machine to calm her during stressful times. Her college misinterprets the use of the machine as a sexual act and forces her to remove it. In response, she develops a scientific protocol to test subjects' reactions to the machine, proving it to be a purely therapeutic device. Grandin graduates with a degree in psychology and pursues a master's degree in animal science.
Temple faces sexism while attempting to integrate into the world of cattle ranching but ultimately designs a new dip structure designed to allow cattle to voluntarily move through rather than being forced. Initially, the device works as intended, and garners favorable coverage in local press, but ranch hands, not understanding her design, dismissively alter it, resulting in the drowning of several cows. Angered, Grandin visits Carlock, and leaves the meeting encouraged to continue her efforts to improve the industry.
The conclusion of the film depicts an autism convention that Temple and her mother attend. Given the rudimentary state of autism research, the speaker cannot answer many questions from the audience, but Temple speaks out from the crowd explaining how she has adapted. Temple also describes her mother's contributions to her success. Excited by the opportunity to hear from someone with real experience, the audience calls her to the podium, marking Temple's transition into autism advocacy. | inspiring, psychedelic, cruelty, romantic, flashback | train | wikipedia | I'm a parent of a child with high-functioning autism, and while my child's condition isn't nearly as severe as Ms. Grandin's, I was touched and awed by the portrayal in the film on a deeply personal level and as a fan of film.Not once during the entire film was I able to sit back and say, unequivocally, that's Claire Danes on the screen.
Not once, because that was not Claire Danes - it was Temple Grandin, or at the very least what we saw on the screen was %99.999 the character brought to life with an unbelievably immersive portrayal of Ms. Grandin by Ms. Danes.I've seen those looks, those pensive stares filled with wonder and awe and fear but on a level so completely foreign to those of us who do not have autism.
It is the mistake of the viewer to make general assumptions based on a single incident.Temple Grandin shows more about someone with a psychological condition than just having the ability to persistently have a big heart as in "Radio," or "I Am Sam," (important to say that those characters were not autistic)even though they served their own purposes.Autism is a different way of experiencing the world, but the individuals who are autistic are individuals as any one else.
As far as the movie illustrates to us, in Temple Grandin's life, she needed to be taught self-reliance, self-awareness, and have her potential recognized and cultivated as well as patient, loving, and understanding emotional support.Temple Grandin's story explains this all quite well I think.
I feared that someone watching this movie with little to no autism experience would take the presentation of this great story the wrong way.
It does a great job of letting you see the world through the eyes of Temple Grandin.I've seen the real Temple in documentaries and such several times, and although Claire is too good looking - she does a great job of capturing what it is like to be Temple.The movie is intense and I almost felt like I was experiencing the world the way Temple would.
Autism is not for the Hallmark Card set - it is not for the After School Special digesters - it is difficult and rife with woe but also filled with newness and, forgive the hyperbole, wonder.I thought the director and Danes went to important extremes that were so vital to telling this great, great story.I have A.S. and I will tell you - the moment Temple realigns the uneven wallpaper in her mind - it had me.
An indication was telling the mother that the 4-year-old girl should be institutionalized, ostensibly for the rest of her life, because there was no "cure." This movie, and Temple Grandin's life, shows that there is no cure, but it also shows how that cannot hold back a person with the correct motivation.I've always liked Claire Danes, as a pleasant actress in lightweight roles, but her performance here caught me completely off guard.
I have seen many, many great performances in my 50+ years of enjoying movies and none were better than hers here.Julia Ormond is her mother Eustacia and Catherine O'Hara is her Aunt Ann, where Temple first was exposed to life on a farm while visiting her for the summer before college.Temple had difficulty but managed high school, and then also college.
It hurts to know this film is not nominated for a Best Picture Oscar nor Danes for Best Actress, for which I believe she would and should win -- the acting demands of her performance exceeding Dustin Hoffman's in "Rain Man." She had more emotional and intellectual notes to play and she played them to perfection.
As for the film, it touches on the subject of life and death, not only for animals but humans as well in a searingly raw and truthful way, much as my own mother, suffering from dementia at her deathbed asked me, "After I die, then what?" Dane's performance reminded me of Patty Duke's in "Miracle Worker" in which the entire performance transcended the craft into pure belief.
TEMPLE GRANDIN has a committed following group of admirers of fine film making: the reason the group is not larger is that this little film is a 'made for TV' movie and that at times puts it into the 'inconsequential' category in people's minds.
While there have been other films that deal with the various forms of autistic behavior ('Adam', 'Rainman', 'What's Eating Gilbert Grape', I am Sam', 'The Other Sister', 'Forest Gump', 'Little Man Tate' to name a few of the better known ones), few succeed on the level of this beautifully written adaptation of autobiographical books by the title character Dr. Temple Grandin (adapted by Christopher Monger and Merritt Johnson).
Claire Danes BECOMES Temple Grandin, so fine is her acting and her ability to bring the audience (and the cast of characters) into the inner workings of the autistic mind.
It is an astonishing performance of a mute four year old girl encouraged by her mother (Julia Ormond), her aunt (Catherine O'Hara), and one particular science teacher Professor Carlock (David Strathairn) who teaches her that doors (a common thread throughout the film) are meant to be opened because opportunity lies beyond.
How Temple progresses from special schools, learns to build a hugging machine that supplies the lack of embraces she apparently missed as a child, and becomes obsessed with the inhumane treatment of cattle in her observations of ranches and slaughter houses in Arizona, leads her to earning not only a college degree, but also a Masters and a PhD in Animal Husbandry.
Throughout the movie Claire Danes maintains her character's idiosyncrasies and her reaction to the frightening world around her with such credibility that she takes us with her on a journey of understanding the miracles that can happen with the minds of autistic people: no one thinks outside the box in a more positive manner than does Temple Grandin.
And I laud the rare individuals in her life who looked past the "handicap" the rest of society saw helped her along the way.While a few reviews feel this was a trite movie, I think they are wrong and missed the point of the presentation.
Mick Jackson and the writers didn't feel the need to get overly graphic when showing elements of the meat packing industry, but they did make their point by showing that Temple made some significant and humane changes to the industry.BRAVO HBO for backing yet another excellent movie that tells the story of a woman who in spite of fear, handicap, and social stereotyping opened doors to new opportunities for herself and for many others around her..
The first thing that must be said in commenting on this movie is that Claire Danes is absolutely superb as Temple Grandin - this is truly one of the best performances I've seen in any production in years.
I've known people with autism/asperger's, and she captured the condition perfectly - from her fear of human contact, to her inability to interact "normally" (whatever that is) in social situations, to her brilliance - because many with this condition truly are brilliant people who (as the movie points out) just happen to perceive the world and think about the world in different ways than most of us.
Few stories have been better suited to the film format that the life of autistic scientist Temple Grandin.
The HBO original film "Temple Grandin," directed by Mick Jackson and starring Claire Danes in the title role, does a brilliant and beautiful job of illustrating how her unique brain thinks in pictures.
Instant recall of every image you've ever seen is both a blessing and a curse and the movie shows how she learns, with the help of her mother, aunt and teachers, to use her assets, even as she struggles with the limitations that autism imposes on her.Diagnosed as autistic at the age of four, Temple Grandin was encouraged and sometimes pushed by her devoted mother, depicted here by Julia Ormond, to engage with the world, take a look at it from her distinct point of view and make it a better place.
(I'm not really giving away the plot by telling you this, because the film is not about what she does, so much as the way she does it.) As I watched this movie, I wondered, "Why couldn't this film have come out before 'Rainman?'" Then, at least, parents of autistic children -- and the world at large -- would have more than one popular image of what autism can be.Claire Danes is amazing; she just disappears into the role of Grandin.
David Strathairn, one of my favorite actors, portrays her immensely supportive science teacher, Dr. Carlock, with quiet genius.The real star of the film, though, is the director, who took what some might have turned into a mundane Lifetime movie-of-the-week and drew a startling and unforgettable portrait of a beautiful mind.As the parent of an autistic child, I was mildly disappointed to find a couple of things missing in the film.
This is missing from the film, which focuses on her more creative and natural means of calming herself in the face of stress.The description of Temple that her mother instilled in her, that would later become her motto for autistic people everywhere -- "different, but not less" -- is a moving and simple message that I sincerely hope the world adopts as its view of autism.
We may not always understand these special people, but as "Temple Grandin" so brilliantly illustrates, they have so much to offer the world and a unique way of looking at it.(For a glimpse at our experience parenting an autistic child, check out the "Spinning Plates" blog at www.AmandaBroadfoot.com.).
If you are like us, you will come away from this movie thinking about people, about animals, how we interact with animals and people; and, how we can all make improvements in our lives.The person portrayed by Clare Danes has much to show us about how we cope with life around us.
She worked out what confused and frustrated her about the people in her life and became much better equipped to live within the world then many of us ever do.This movie is funny, heartwarming, educational, enlightening, entertaining and definitely should be on everyone's must see list.A winner for best picture of 2010..
Knowing that an Autistic person isn't so much staring in space, but seeing things in such a way it can be overwhelming makes one appreciate what they and their families contend with.I read an article where someone asked Grandin if she could be "cured" of Autism, would she do it and her response was a resounding "no"-to her, Autism is as much a part of her as the mind it affects and she is who she is because of it.
The person who gives what I think is one of the best Actress performances I have ever seen is Claire Danes as Temple Grandin.
This kind of cinematic and emotionally-satisfying fare pleased the general public and filled the coffers of the movie studios that now reject practically every intelligent project that comes their way, and actresses like Claire Danes and so many others have to wait years before being offered something that truly suits their talent, and then it is often for the "small" screen.
Temple Grandin (Claire Danes) is an autistic woman staying at her aunt Ann (Catherine O'Hara)'s ranch getting ready to go to college.
With the help of her loving but overwhelmed mother (Julia Ormond), mentor Dr. Carlock (David Strathairn), and others, she is able to study, publish, and work on animal handling despite facing a disbelieving and alien world.This is a surprisingly powerful movie.
I really enjoyed it.I liked how they showed the way things happened in Temple's head, it was really cool, because in that way we get to understand her better and relate to her.There is so much trash on TV and movies these days, it was refreshing to see something interesting and inspiring.
You see,having family afflicted with autism,and with my mother particularly involved in various causes and functions in the cause over thirty years,Someone like Temple Grandin has been a familiar name for quite some time now.
Just take a look at a photo of both women!),much credit goes to director Mick Jackson and the editing,which is able to give about as good a sampling of what Professor Grandin's thought processes are as can be done in a "one-shot" movie can give.Not a real populous cast(i.e. much of the people involved are mostly "non-entities": people who have contact with Temple but have either negative or no direct impact on her life),but the support is largely patient and fit in well--David Straithairn as a kindly science teacher who sort of sets Miss Grandin on her way as a youth;Catherine O'Hara as the aunt living in Arizona who goes out of her way to accommodate the title character and Julia Ormond as Temple's strong-willed(if perhaps sometimes hard-headed),educated mother--and aid the movie along its stated path.Perfect for HBO(I frankly have no real idea how this movie could EVER be sold as a large screen offering,and that's NOT a knock on this film at all!),it's running time moves like a breeze and,if you are in any way engaged by what you see in it,will want to see it more times and maybe even do some real digging about the main subject(who is currently in her mid-sixties,still a tenured professor at Colorado State University),either or both by internet research and her numerous writings.
As you can understand Temple Grandin is a really important to the society and that's something that is obvious nowadays.I liked very much this movie because it's based on a true story and it shows us from a different way how is to be an autistic person.
We get an antiseptic look at what goes on there, but enough of the ugliness is conveyed so we don't miss the importance of Grandin's contribution.The film is about a woman with autism, who, with the help of understanding family, friends and inner drive, can make a significant contribution to the world ..
The special effects work, as they help us understand the way the Temple sees her world.No film can totally capture issues, but Temple Grandin does a good job of setting up the character so we can understand her, and it has an inventive, fresh and interesting way of telling her story..
But when I turned my TV on today "Temple Grandin" was on (the scene when her mother is talking to a doctor about 4 year old Temple) and I got hooked before I could turn to something else.The real Temple Grandin is an autistic woman who struggles but overcomes her limitations and has become a world authority on animal husbandry and autism.
Claire Danes is wonderful in this and all the awards for this movie are well deserved.I will definitely be researching Temple Grandin more for my project she seems like an inspiring woman.I highly recommend this movie, 2 hours fly by when you are watching it and your eyes won't be dry by the end!.
This accuracy was possible due to a director with true passion for his subject - who read Grandin's books carefully, researched the places and people of her life, consulted closely with the animal scientist herself, and--most of all--chose the brilliant Claire Danes to represent her.
Temple Grandin (Claire Danes) isn't diagnosed as Austic until much later in life, but she is lucky enough to be born into a wealthy family with a loving mother who never gave up on her child's challenges.
Claire Danes gives a magnificent portrayal of this woman and her life, while at the same time educating the viewer on how an Autistic person sees and deals with the world.
Temple Grandin is a wonderful movie about the true story of an autistic women going through early parts of her life.
The film Temple Grandin is the real-life story of Temple Grandin, who was portrayed by Claire Danes.
After graduating from college, Temple went on to get her Masters of Science degree and became an advocate for treating animals in humane ways.Temple Grandin is an uplifting story of a person overcoming disadvantages and making a life for herself when others did not want to give her a chance.
If you take this film at face value, it leaves you thinking that the world needs altruistic people like Temple Grandin to serve as the Mother Teresas for life on Earth.
Claire Danes took on the life of Temple Grandin, and made it her own.It is a unique perspective, into the life of Autism.
Also the musical score provides a great backdrop that links with the visuals in the movie to give you a wondrous effect of how "Different, but not less" her mind views the world.This story would not have turned out to be the inspiration that it is had Temple's mother, Eustacia followed the advice of the day.
It is a joy to watch.Temple Grandin, born with autistic behavior, has difficulty in learning academically and socially except for her mother and a few teachers that recognized how different her world is.
This movie captured what it was like to be diagnosed with Autism, and it also showed how much pain the mother had to go through in order to help Temple function in the world and not be locked in an institution.
This film was truly a masterpiece of television and was brought together by the performance of Claire Danes, whom many will know from Homeland, who plays the titular character and plays her so convincingly that you would think she was Temple Grandin. |
tt0075796 | California | A deserter who had been an Army lieutenant, Jonathan Trumbo is hired to guide a wagon train bound for California during the California Gold Rush. When a woman named Lily Bishop is accused of cheating at poker in a saloon, farmer Michael Fabian invites her to join the wagon train over Trumbo's strenuous objections. Trumbo, too, accuses of her of cheating at cards after losing to Lily, an insult she promises not to forget.
Lily leaves with Booth Pennock, a ruffian who injures Trumbo with a whip before departing. Lily ends up in Pharaoh City, running a saloon. The town is controlled by Pharaoh Coffin, a former slave trader who opposes the law and order of California approving statehood. Trumbo turns up and gets involved in a saloon brawl. Lily orders him never to set foot there again, but Trumbo wins the place in a poker game.
She mistakenly takes Pharaoh to be an honest man and moves onto his hacienda. Coffin's men beat up Trumbo, who is rescued on the trail by Mexicans and vows revenge. When his wounds heal, Trumbo returns and becomes a spokesman for statehood advocacy. Coffin's hired men kill Fabian for similar beliefs, causing Lily to finally see Coffin for the crazed villain he is. Trumbo forms a posse and corners Coffin, who is descending into madness. Lily shoots him. Trumbo, in love with Lily, promises to return to the Army to atone for his desertion, hoping someday to return to her. | western, revenge, violence | train | wikipedia | Guiliano Gemma in a sinister Western.
No wonder that California isn't as popular as so many other Spaghetti-Western.
IMO California is one of the last real Spaghetti Western but the filmmakers didn't want to do a typical Western.
Somehow it reminds of one of the many 50's Western flicks but with a darker a more sinister story.
Maybe you can compare California with Keoma or The great Silence.
Also like in these Movies it isn't so easy to say who really the hero is.
Is it Guiliano Gemma as California, who hates his old name and has enough from all that Killing and Shooting?
His opponent is Raimund Harmsdorf a German actor and is best known in supporting roles in so many B-Movies or German TV Shows.
In California Harmsdorf has a fairly good role and he did some fine acting.
He is a ruthless Bounty Hunter who kills Confederates Soldiers for Money.
Unfortunately politics changes and he is getting an Outlaw.
Sorry but the figures aren't simply Black and White in this drama and there are no funny jokes of Guiliano.I wasn't quite happy with this melodramatic Organ 70's like Music.
Towns and people seemed to be destroyed by the war and this world has nothing to do with the beauty as you can see in Once Upon a Time in the West.
Some Scenes are taking place in a Ghost Town.
A travel at the end of the American Civil War and then a Vendetta as it we have already seen in so many contributions to the Genre.
But it wouldn't be a typical Spaghetti Western if this Vendetta wouldn't be different.
California (1977) hasn't a lot in common with Gemma's first western A Pistol for Ringo (1964).For me this melodramatic western was a big surprise.
The storyline and the figures are fine written.
It's not a Feel Good Movie or just another action loaded Hero Tale of the West.
Director Michelle Lupo did a good job and it was his last serious western too.
Buddy goes West (1981)is more a Comedy than a Western.
One year later Lucio Fulci master of Giallo and Horror directed a Spaghetti Western with a similar look: Silver Saddle (1978).
Guiliano Gemma is the main cast again but Fulci's Movie isn't so sinister and dark than this one.
IMO these two Movies were the last Highlights of the Spaghetti Western Genre and then this fascinating Genre ended..
Notable , decent Spaghetti/Paella Western co-produced by Spain and Italy , being shot in Almeria , as usual.
Twilight Spaghetti/Chorizo Western with dark scenarios , atmospheric cinematography by Alejandro Ulloa , good musical score in usual Spaghetti style and being professionally directed by Michele Lupo .
This entertaining , engaging as well as violent movie is crammed of pursuits , fist-fights , punches , kicks , killings , overwhelming stunt-work and lots of shots .
After the Civil War , Michael "California" Random (Giuliano Gemma) , is released from Union prison along with a young Confederate soldier (Miguel Bose) .
Both of whom , California and his partner William , go to Missouri .
And being attacked by a nasty group of bounty hunters (Romano Puppo , Robert Hundar as Eric Plummer , and several others) led by Rope Whittaker (Raimund Harmstorf) .
After that , it happens a hanging and Michael California decides to return the belongings to his family : father Mr Preston (William Berger) , mother Mrs Preston (Dana Ghia), daughter and help them against outlaws .
Meantime , Michael falls in love for a beautiful woman , Helen Preston (Paola Bose) .
But she is captured and later on , California sets out in pursuit the kidnappers and seeks vendetta against the cutthroats .
Charming Chorizo-Spaghetti Western co-produced by Spain , Italy and follows the American models regarding the twilight Western , as well as Sergio Leone style .
This Western is a superior outing because it displays violence , thrills , emotion , shoot'em up , brawls , intrigue , riding pursuits and many other things .
There is plenty of action and violent events in the movie , guaranteeing some shots or stunts every few minutes .
This sinister picture is a tale of justice and revenge , as a soldier carries out a hard mission to execute a merciless vengeance when his friend is hanged and his girlfriend is kidnapped .
The basic plot is typical spaghetti western fare , but what makes this movie stand out is its style .
The lighting-paced storyline slows down at times , but frenetic fight/action sequences make up for it .
The starring called Michael California is stunningly played by Giuliano Gemma .
Gemma as a brave and two-fisted Confederate military is terrific .
Gemma , along with Anthony Steffen and Gianni Garco , results to be one of the greatest stars of the Spaghetti genre .
Gemma in his beginning worked as stunt-man , practiced many sports in his life, boxing , gymnastics, such as is well proved at the movie .
Then the director , Duccio Tessari, gave him the first role as protagonist in the film " The Titani" and the first spaghetti western films where he often worked under the name of Montgomery Wood , playing Western as ¨A pistol for Ringo¨, subsequently the would play similar role in other Spaghettis , as ¨The return of Ringo¨ and others as ¨Adios Gringo¨, ¨Arizona Colt¨, ¨The price of power¨ , ¨Day of anger¨ and later ¨California¨.
However, his first big opportunity came with the important Italian director, Luchino Visconti in ¨El Gatopardo¨ this was followed by important roles in "Angelica" , ¨Tenebre¨ , ¨Young Lions¨ and ¨The master touch¨.
In the movie appears habitual support actors as Spanish people : Miguel Bose , Paola Bose , Diana Lorys , as Italian secondaries : Chris Avram , Enzo Fiermonte , Franco Fantasia , Alfio Catabiano , Alberto Dell'Acqua , Ottaviano Dell'Acqua , Roberto Dell'Acqua , Tom Felleghy , and , of course , the ordinary Robert Hundar .
They are a lot of secondaries from B Italian series seen in several genres as Spaghetti Western and Peplum .
It's a co-production Spanish-Italian and shot on location in Almeria , Spain , and Lazio , Rome .
There are many fine technicians , as nice assistant direction , excellent production design by Carlo Simi , Sergio Leone's regular , and atmospheric cinematography by Alejandro Ulloa , he creates a magnificent scenario on the interior ranch and barren outdoors , scrawny villages as well as dirty landscapes under a glimmer sun .
Adequate and sad music original by Gianni Ferrio in Spaghetti style .
The musician composes a nice Spaghetti soundtrack and well conducted and including splendid leitmotif ; it's full of enjoyable sounds and emotive score .This is one of the last and best Spaghettis and was compellingly directed by Michele Lupo who made all kinds of genres .
Lupo directed Giuliano Gemma , his fetish actor , in several films as ¨Master touch¨ with Kirk Douglas , ¨Stay away¨ with Amidou , ¨Arizona Colt¨ with Fernando Sancho and Nello Pazzafini and ¨California ¨ with William Berger and Romano Puppo.
This is an acceptable entertaining juvenile that will appeal to Western buffs .
Rating : essential and fundamental watching for for Giuliano Gemma fans.
Rating : Above average Pasta Western .
Well worth seeing ..
So dark even William Berger isn't smiling.
Dark, moody, angry, filty, windy, dusty, bloody Spaghetti Western that highlights the plight of the Confederate army following the end of the Civil War. Why would that be dark?Guiliano Gemma is one such soldier.
Gemma doesn't want anything to do with anyone, but ends up travelling with a young guy called Willy, who earned himself a medal for valour during the war and is now looking forward to heading home to his family.It's not easy when everyone hates you.
They also keep crossing paths with a bunch of ruthless bounty hunters who kill everyone they are tracking down (led by giant German Raimond Harmstorf, who is most famous for crushing a raw potato in his hand on television).
A random fight with some relatives of a Yankee soldier lead to a sudden death and Gemma trying to find redemption.The only light that shines through the darkness is when Gemma and Willy try to catch frogs for dinner, because after that it's short tempered gunfights and trekking across the land, hostage situations and the spectre of the war hanging over everyone.
The stupidest thing about all this is that despite me watching The Master Touch, I was still taken aback by the ferocity of the fight between Romano Puppo and Gemma - they guys must have loved using each other's bodies to destroy things.It's a shame that the Spaghetti Western died a death, because these late-era films are amongst the best.
It's like directors like Fulci (Silver Saddle), Martino (Mannaja) and Lupo decided to pull out the stops give the best they could.
If you look at the films produced around this time that were more popular, sex comedies were top of the list.Maybe they should have put some boobs in there..
No, this Italian/Spanish production does not pretend to take place in California per se, it's just the nickname of our leading man, played by Giuliano Gemma.
The man becomes an outlaw when released from a prison camp on account of the end of the civil war (tough break!) We can tell his heart is in the right place as he defends the honour of a little white kitty (and a plate of beans) in this dreary wet town.
Young William Preston (singer Miguel Bose) also notices and being in the same predicament, keeps nagging California to take him on as a sidekick.
Naturally California resists at first, but they soon bond during a spot of leapfrog catching in the mud with some other nondescript men.
William wants to see his sister, who is actually played by the guys real sister Paola (a case of smart casting or of cheap family politics?).
As always, there is also a bounty hunter on their trail who goes by the name of Rope Whitaker (not the singer).You can tell this was made more than ten years after "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" by the fact that the three main characters are now "The Goodlooking, the Cute and the Handsome".
Just when you think the two heroes are getting a bit too close for comfort (they only have one horse between them), there is a shocking slow mo twist that I won't spoil here.
Well anyway, revenge is in order and California takes it upon himself to eliminate the bad guys one by one (as you do).
Whenever this guy gets into a fight, he literally tears the entire house down and leaves the other party lying in the rubble.
The action also includes more tiresome slow motion work that only John Woo fans can truly appreciate.
California eventually makes Whitaker sing his 'last farewell' and gets Williams' real life sister thrown into the bargain, but only at the cost of the decline of the Spaghetti Western.4 out of 10.
In the days following the Civil War, defeated Confederate Giuliano Gemma and a young traveling companion encounter various killers, low-lives and unsympathetic citizens.
When his friend is killed, Gemma stays with the boy's family and protects them from a vicious gang of bounty hunter turned outlaws.As usual, Gemma's good.
However, he's defeated by an unrelentingly depressing story, an atmosphere of doom and gloom and a grating, almost non-stop soundtrack.
One interesting thing though, are the sights of the crumbling, once great spaghetti western sets of the previous decade.One thing I didn't quite get is that early in the movie, the boy makes a big deal of how he comes from Georgia and his family lives in Georgia and how he's headed back to Georgia.
When Gemma gets to the family farm, it's in the middle of the desert!
1977:The Spaghetti Western was dying.....
The American western had already died in the 1960s,and now it looked as if the spaghetti western was going the same way,the novelty was beginning to wear off and the die hard fans of the genre from the 1960s were moving onto more modern stuff like Sci-fi and crime flicks and films like Star Wars were gaining popularity,good things don't last forever,yes,the spaghetti western was beginning to slowly fade away.But even in it's final days,the genre tried it's hardest to entertain and be everything it had been back in the 60s,California is a fantastic example of this...California is one of the best spaghettis in my opinion,it's got brilliant action scenes,psychedelic camera-work and soundtrack,a very robust storyline and excellent acting,the storyline is this,the Civil War is over and Confederate prisoners are being released from a POW camp,the young and naive Willy Preston befriends the world weary,serious California(Giuliano Gemma)(from where the film takes it's title),at first,California sees the young Preston as a nuisence,but as the two men make their way back home,they get to know each other and become very good friends,after a close run in with some northern bounty hunters who specialise in killing Confederate soldiers and collecting the bounty money ,the two men steal a horse and narrowly escape,the bounty hunters later catch up with theme and SPOILERS,Willy is shot and later hung,a sad and bitter California survives and makes his way to Willys home to tell his family,California falls in love with Willys sister,but one day on a trip to town,another gang of bounty hunters led by Rope Whittaker spot some Confederate soldiers in the town and shoot the place up,California is wounded and Willys sister is caught in the crossfire and captured by the bounty hunters,California sets out to get revenge and reclaim his love...There are a good amount of magnificent action scenes,the fist fights are done in brutal and uber-violent fashion and shootouts are no different,the brawl between California,Willy and the bounty hunters is spectacularly staged and the final fist fight between California and Whittaker is one of the best i've seen in the genre,the two men batter each other up like nothing normal,tables are thrown and smashed and both men crash through a solid wall before tumbling down a hill(in slow-motion of course)punching it out as they go along,prior to this fight,Whittaker is drinking from a whisky bottle when California punches the bottle which smashes while still in the formers mouth(again in slow-mo),wow,such style!.The shootout in the town between Whittaker and the three Confederates is also fast paced and excellent and the scene when Willy is killed is also done in bloodcurdlingly sadistic slow motion,an effect that works to the full advantage.The camera-work is very symbolic as it shows us what war can do to a country,the bleak scenery(and this is a VERY bleak film)work to the directors advantage for once,the scenes of the ravaged towns are a perfect example of this and i really love the soundtrack,i don't know why everyone complains about it,i think it fits beautifully with these images.The storyline is also brilliant,it's split into three sections,an anti-war drama which shows us what kind of effect war has on a nation and it's people and how it destroys a person,a tender love story and a brutal revenge tale,spectacularly done.Overall,one of the better spaghetti westerns,it shows us that even when running out of energy,the spaghetti western could still be exciting and have the power to entertain,highly recommended to all fans of the genre,9/10..
Exceptional Civil War Era 'Spaghetti'.
The American Civil War often serves as a back-drop for 'Spaghetti' Westerns, 'The Good, The Bad & The Ugly' being the ultimate example.
And while this movie never reaches the heady heights of that masterpiece, this is one of the best 'Spaghetti Westerns' I've seen to date.
The first half of the movie, in particular, is outstanding.
Beginning as the war ends, we find ourselves amongst Confederate prisoners looking downbeat and dejected amidst some striking rain-lashed cinematography.
The bleak, muddy landscape is a perfect setting for the sad, broken figures that begin the process of returning to The South to begin the Reconstruction.
Amongst them is 'California' played by Guiliano Gemma, a former Captain, who befriends enthusiastic young private Willy Preston.
But their return South is hampered by renegade Union soldiers and Northern vigilantes.
When Willy is killed in a barbaric fashion, California decides to take vengeance on behalf of Willy's family.The cinematography and acting are top-notch, and the very mournful score is outstanding.
It's a pity there doesn't seem to be proper DVD release for this, but keep an eye out for it on TV, or at Movie Fairs.
It's well worth it.A small classic..
Offbeat spaghetti western - just how I like it.
"California" was one of the last spaghetti westerns to be made, the genre being all but dead by the time this movie was made.
I have the feeling that the makers of this movie knew the end was drawing near, and decided to make something really memorable.
It has an offbeat storyline, for one thing.
It starts off as a tale of two Civil War vets struggling across the countryside, then changes to a tale of one of the vets finding peace and love on a farm, then in the last half hour turns into a quest for revenge and the recovery of a kidnapped love.
These changes helped keep the story from being unpredictable, and kept me interested at every point.
Additional interest is with the production values, with eye-catching ghost towns and a ton of rain and filth in the movie's first third that help make what we see feel authentic.
If there is a problem with the movie, it's that the musical score is greatly uneven, sometimes sounding okay but other times sounding lame and cheap.
But apart from that, the movie is a very good swan song for the spaghetti western genre and will please genre fans. |
tt1230165 | Rock On!! | Rock On!! begins in Mumbai, with the rock band Magik, in 1998. Joseph (Joe) Mascarhenas (Arjun Rampal) is the lead guitarist who feels the necessity to prove his worth as a musician. Aditya Shroff (Farhan Akhtar) is the lead singer who rebelled against his well to-do family to play music. Rob Nancy (Luke Kenny) who plays keyboards and Kedar Zaveri a.k.a. KD/"Killer Drummer" (Purab Kohli) comprise the remainder of the band. After a competition is announced by Channel V, they decide to enter, as the winner will be offered an album contract and at least one music video.
After they win the competition, the band has to go through some sacrifices while signing the contract. Joe feels the most slighted when his song, which he wrote for his girlfriend, Debbie (Shahana Goswami), and which was the only slow track in the entire album, is excluded from the track list to make space for a random remix song. Debbie is also rejected as the band's stylist without even being called for any demonstration. Later, when the cameramen focus only on Aditya during the filming of the music video, Joe becomes furious at the director and Aditya before leaving with Debbie. Aditya, who failed to notice that anything was amiss, is shocked and abandons music and his girlfriend Tania (Nicolette Bird) leaving a note for her. "Magik" thus disbands and its members become estranged.
Ten years later, Aditya is a high-powered executive of an investment banking firm. His wife Sakshi (Prachi Desai), hoping to relieve his habitual resentment, decides to gift him a gold-chain wrist watch for his birthday. K.D., who now works for his father's jewellery business, overhears Sakshi talking about Aditya at the jewellery shop, and introduces himself. Sakshi later conveys the meeting to Aditya who denies knowing K.D. When Sakshi finds a box filled with Magik's photos, she invites K.D. to the birthday party, telling him she wants to reunite Aditya with the band.
K.D. meets with Rob, who now makes a living composing jingles for advertisements. Together, they invite Joe, who lives largely unemployed, with an eight-year-old son. The family is supported by Debbie, whom he has married and who holds a grudge against the band and also she working on a small-time fishing business. Joe feels he should reconcile with his old friend but Debbie sees this as his weakness. K.D. and Rob thus attend the party without Joe, and Aditya is shocked to see them. He later scolds Sakshi for trying to dig up his past, which he claims to have left behind. Sakshi is hurt, and she leaves him after informing him about her pregnancy. Sakshi's friend Devika (Koel Purie) persuades Aditya to face his past and meet with his ex-bandmates. K.D., Joe and Rob meet up and visit the place where they used to practice as a band. Aditya also turns up and reconciles with Joe and the rest. They start practicing regularly at Aditya's house. Learning about this, Sakshi, too, returns to Aditya.
Channel V announces another contest, and at Rob's insistence, the band enters. Debbie arranges a guitar-playing job for Joe on a cruise-line, expected to set sail on the same day as the contest. It is later discovered that Rob is dying of a brain tumour and his last wish is to perform with Magik. The contest is aired on the radio, and while Joe is on his way to the airport, he hears Magik perform the song he wrote for Debbie 10 years ago, and dedicate it to him. This prompts him to join the concert, where he and Aditya sing duet in another song. The epilogue reveals that Rob died two months after that performance. Sakshi gives birth to a baby boy, whom they name "Rob" as a memorial to their friend. Devika is dating K.D., who starts a record company with Joe. Debbie quits her job in the fishing business and becomes a successful stylist. The band members and their families meet every weekend to keep the band's "Magik" alive forever. | cult, flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt5022680 | All Hallows' Eve 2 | After a night of trick or treating, Sarah (Katie Maguire) is surprised to see that Tia (Sydney Freihofer) and Timmy (Cole Mathewson) have received an unmarked VHS tape in one of their bags. They decide to watch the video which contains three stories featuring a creepy clown (Mike Giannelli). The first features a young woman who is drugged and kidnapped by Art the Clown while waiting for a bus. She awakens chained in a room with two other women. Demonic creatures enter, killing two of the women and taking the third to a room where a devil-like creature rapes her. A humanoid fetus is then removed via c section by the creatures. The second features a woman living in a new countryside home who begins to experience strange occurrences. It's revealed she's being stalked by aliens, and as she's dragged off by the aliens, she grabs a sheet which pulls away to reveal a painting of Art the Clown. The final segment features a college student driving down an isolated road. Stopping at a gas station, she finds the attendant furiously kicking out Art who had apparently smeared feces all over the bathroom. The attendant fills her tank and goes inside to fetch her directions. When he doesn't return, the girl inspects to find Art chopping up the attendants body with a hacksaw. She flees and a chase ensues. Eventually Art catches her and she comes to on a crude operating table with her limbs cut off by Art. It ends with Art laughing silently but maniacally. Disturbed, Sarah attempts to shut off the tape but to no avail. Art then steps into frame in a dingy looking basement. He approaches Sarah from within the screen and begins to pound the television glass, ending when she pulls the TV cord. Sarah goes to check on the children only to find out that Art has murdered them. | dark, murder, violence | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0806203 | Carriers | An infectious virus has spread worldwide, killing almost the entire population - this disease is spread by breath. Two brothers, Brian and Daniel "Danny" Green, along with Brian's girlfriend, Bobby, and Danny's school friend, Kate, are heading to Turtle Beach in the Southwestern United States, a secluded beach motel where they believe they can wait for the viral pandemic to die out and so they can start a new life. They strictly follow a set of rules that they believe will keep them all alive and stop them from becoming infected.
On their way there, they meet a man, Frank Holloway, and his infected young daughter Jodie, who are stranded in the middle of a deserted road due to their Suburban running out of fuel. After attempting to drive away from them, their car breaks down. The four end up returning to Frank in order to acquire his car, and are forced to take Frank and Jodie to a nearby high school where a serum for the pandemic is rumored to have been developed. Upon arrival they discover that the serum does not work, and the only doctor still alive is about to commit suicide with a remaining group of infected children (whom he plans to kill through non-voluntary euthanasia).
Meanwhile, Bobby is accidentally infected by Jodie while trying to help her when she coughs blood on her. She hides her infection from the others by wiping her face and hiding her blood covered shirt. Jodie tells her father that she needs the toilet, however she can't walk there alone due to the illness. Frank carries Jodie to the toilet, telling Danny that he knows he's a good person. However, Brian leaves Frank and Jodie behind and takes their car.
After this, they stop at a golf course hotel. Brian almost becomes infected after nearly slipping into a swimming pool containing the body of an infected man, however Danny manages to grab him in time. Bobby talks herself into believing she is not infected, as she is still unsure that Jodie's blood infected her. However, despite Bobby's efforts to prevent it, Brian kisses her and inadvertently infects himself.
Bobby berates Kate for believing her parents may still be alive, and suddenly a small group of armed survivalists, who are using the golf course as a base, ambush and capture the group. After a tense Mexican standoff, they declare their intent to keep the girls. As they force the girls to disrobe to check them for infection, they discover Bobby's rashes and bruises and force them away at gunpoint. Kate stresses that they will end up dead if Bobby continues to travel with them, and Brian ends up leaving a weeping Bobby behind at a deserted gas station.
They almost run out of fuel but encounter two women heading in the opposite direction to them. After Brian blocks the road with their SUV, Danny asks for help, stating that he has a pregnant wife in the car and that he is a fellow Christian, but they refuse. A desperate Brian shoots them for their fuel when they try to drive away, and ends up being shot in the leg himself. Danny breaks into a seemingly abandoned house in search of medical supplies to treat his brother's wound, and he is forced to shoot a stray dog that attempts to attack him.
Danny soon discovers that his brother is also infected after tending to Brian's wound. Kate urges Danny to leave Brian whilst he is sleeping, but as the two try to leave Brian wakes up and it is discovered that he has the car keys. Brian refuses to give Danny the correct car keys unless he can continue to travel with them, despite Danny's pleas. Brian admits that he doesn't want to end up alone like the rest of the infected and tells Danny to shoot him if he wants the keys. At Brian's urging, Danny shoots Brian and burns his mask and infected body. Afterwards, Danny and Kate reach Turtle Beach. | dark, cruelty, murder, violence, flashback, action, suspenseful, home movie | train | wikipedia | There are a few tense moments, but overall, the film is a tragedy.Four young people are traveling together after most of humanity is wiped out after an unexplained outbreak of a fatal, and highly contagious disease: Danny (Lou Taylor Pucci), a would-be Yale student, if it weren't for the epidemic, his brother Brian (Chris Pine), who's a self-proclaimed jerk, Brian's girlfriend, Bobby (Piper Perabo), and another friend, Kate (Emily VanCamp).
Chris Pine (you might have seen him in a little movie called "Star Trek" by J.J. Abrams) & Piper Perabo star in a very low key Horror movie, that doesn't even try to make you believe it has any big action scenes in it.
It's more about the characters and how they react to certain situations.Quite a few people were appalled by the fact, that there is not that much happening in the movie, but I liked it, because it was slow moving, because it took it's sweet time.
Instead, it is unfortunately, just another viral pandemic flick.Brian (Chris Pine), his brother Danny (Lou Pucci) and their two female friends Bobby (Piper Perabo) and Kate (Emily VanCamp) are your four typical just-out-of-college kids who are on the road to nowhere, literally.
After a viral outbreak incapacitates almost the entire population of the United States and potentially the world, they decide to hit the road and hopefully find somewhere to stay or somebody to engage with who is free of the virus.'Carriers' would be more aptly placed in the drama genre than the horror or thriller section of the local video store as nothing as note actually takes place in regards to the latter genres.
And it's how the characters engage with these various situations which they encounter along their journey, and this manages to breathe a little life into this heavily deflated film.Chris Pine, pre Star Trek, gives a brilliant performance as the brother who has had the emotional consciousness beaten out of him throughout the pandemic to the point the where the survival of himself and his younger brother is the only objective.
While Lou Pucci, who portrays Brian's younger brother Danny, also pulls out an equally inspiring performance as the younger brother who is constantly fighting with his conscience with regards to the tough decisions that Brian has to make.If Alex and David Pastor were given the opportunity to go back and shoot around thirty-to-forty minutes worth of extra footage, then 'Carriers' would have the potential to be a very good film.
Unlike most virus flicks, 'Carrier' focuses on the emotional and psychological aspect of the survivors especially their struggle when they have to leave one of their own behind (or even commit the act of taking their life) in order to ensure their own survival and the despair of the soon-to-be-deceased after they have been abandoned on their own to die a slow painful death.
In a world devastated by an outbreak, Brian (Chris Pine), his girlfriend Bobby (Piper Perabo), his brother Danny (Lou Taylor Pucci) and their friend Kate (Emily VanCamp) are heading to a beach where the brothers spent vacations in their childhood and they expect to be a sanctuary.
Further, they lose their humanity in their fight for survive."Carriers" is another "deadly virus genre" movie that uses the same premise of dozens of films and maybe the greatest difference is that there are no zombies in the plot.
Well fortunately, "Carriers" manages to be an exception to the rule of PG-13 horror sucking.The film deals with two men and two women-Danny (Lou Taylor Pucci), his brother Brian (Chris Pine), Kate (Emily Van Camp) and Bobby (the usually likable Piper Perabo)-who are all headed to the beach.
Like i said earlier this is a well acted and often suspenseful movie about 4 young people just trying to survive a serious viral outbreak and get to the ocean where they aren't certain is clean but its where the two brothers grew up and would be a nice place to end if it comes to that.A good watch!.
I liked the general premise but every step of the story is driven plot turns which feel more and more forced and only seemingly take place to get the story as far as the MacGuffin, in this case a secluded beach where the characters will be able to hide from disease and humans alike.On top of that the characters of the brothers become annoyingly cliché as each lives up to their sensitive-liberal-brain/makes-the-hard-decisions-conservative-brawn stereotypes.
This was easily the best film at frightfest.I absolutely loved it!Chris Pine ( Captain James T Kirk himself!) gives a terrific performance in this haunting horror drama which is genuinely It does what so many movies ( romero's diary of the dead, 28 weeks later, the zombie diaries etc) tried to do and failed.
To all intents and purposes, Carriers really isn't that much of a horror film, it's more a survivalist, character based, road movie.
After an infectious virus has decimated the Earth, two brothers (Chris Pine/Lou Taylor Pucci) and their two lady companions (Piper Perabo/Emily VanCamp) are heading to Turtle Beach in the hope that in isolation there they can ride out the epidemic and start afresh.What follows is that they encounter a man on the road with his sick daughter, and their plans then go astray.
Naturally the virus isn't the only thing to be fearful of, there's the other virus, that of the human condition in survival situations...Having sat on the shelf for three years, Carriers came a bit late in the day to make a telling mark in a sub-genre of horror that has tapped into our new age fear of the virus.
Four young adults ride cross country in the midst of a devastating viral pandemic, finding themselves sidetracked by a number of deadly threats and inescapable tragedies on their way to what they believe could be their only safe haven in all of America - their mostest favourite childhood holiday location EVER!!!Yaaaaay.Instead, they fall foul of everything that could possibly go wrong and whine about it endlessly until they get booted off set/die.'Carriers' at first and final glance is a basic, often clichéd and unoriginal post-apocalyptic flick aimed at the mainstream and especially kids aged 15 to 25; exactly what it is at final glance.Oddly enough, though, for how absurdly pretentious the story is, the film's production values are pretty impressive for a project of it's size.I just got the impression the directors are the type of people who frequently fantasise about the end of the world and their part in it, to the point that they finally had to indulge in a spot of film making based upon said wet dreams...I must however also give it credit for how organic it is, relying on some quality old-school stunts and practical special effects and also sporting (a few) actors that can act.
It's pretty vacant.'Carriers' tells a story that has been contrived countless times over the last thirty years or so and whereas it's well directed - though the two-man directing job is wasted - the story is muddled, there is little context and the dialogue makes up the majority of the cliché factor.Chris Pine (pre-Star Trek) stars as Brian, the alpha male (don't worry, he'll point that out a few times) and older brother of two, headed for the beach they used to visit when they were kids, where they hope to sit out the destructive effects of a worldwide plague.
It's just predictable and the ending you wait so long for is like the filmmakers having flipped you the bird (crappy end statement that tries to be arty and reflective and just wastes your time).If anything, 'Carriers' makes for a good educational film for media production students on how to make stupid look good enough to fool people with low standards.
For sure Carriers does not push boundaries or invents the wheel new, but it is a very good contribution and beats easy 90% of the genre's movies and got some known actors (starring Chris Pine, Piper Perabo, Emily VanCamp).
Let's discuss the premise " A virus spreads through out the world and a handful of survivors try to find sanctuary only to discover the virus isn't the only thing to threaten them " Hey sounds a bit like a certain British horror film from about ten years ago directed by Danny Boyle .
Not a lot happens incident wise , those hoping for a horror film will be disappointed , those hoping for zombie horror will be doubly disappointed , those scared and depressed by post apocalypse fiction ( Hello Mr Moo ) will be too depressed to enjoy it but those interested in this genre will greatly respect CARRIERS for being an American movie that examines kinship and friendship in the face of adversity without resorting to hyperactive living dead and biker gangs.
unlike outbreak this film is so dis-Hollywood, it presents to you the human nature at its worst, the worst dilemma's you can think about, the ultimate fear of disease and death and a lot of other big conflicts of life, but in a realistic manner, no monkeys, no army cover-up, no great heroic moments, just plain reality.in the past years horror had relate itself with cheap and cheesy acting, story-line, effects and off-course, a lot of fake blood and chopped human organs.
which of course, goes tits-up.However, despite the odd moment of "ish" acting, the story moves along at a decent pace, moral questions are asked in the struggle to survive which becomes increasingly desperate as they meet others in similar situations.The story, whilst not overly original is good, it makes you wonder "what would I do" and in such cases, what happens is what is likely to happen and as such adds weight to the film and how it captures you ....
It's a shame when someone gets a film made without all the usual Hollywood ado that usually comes along with a story like this when it ultimately fails to entertain in any meaningful way on it's own merits.In this movie we don't get the usual CGI enhanced money shots of thousands dying, dead lying akimbo along expansive city vistas, or even zombie like infected shambling along (or running willy-nilly) chasing our stories protagonists as one would expect.
And this would be a good thing if the movie itself didn't get itself quickly mired down in the drudgery of predictability and a need for every scene to be drawn out well beyond it's welcome on the screen.Basically at it's heart it's a road trip movie trying to transcend the usual coming of age angst and self-discovery learned along the way storyline by hiding itself inside of a coming of the end of the world angst and self-discovery of hate and loneliness learned along the way storyline.I really wished I could have liked this movie, as the story seemed to be fairly novel on the surface.
A group of four friends: brothers Danny (Lou Taylor Pucci) and Brian Green (Chris Pine), as well as the latter's girlfriend Bobby (Piper Perabo) and Kate (Emily VanCamp) pack up and head away towards a secluded beach, where they hope to live through the ordeal.
In order to survive the journey they agree on a set of basic rules, including one stating that the infected are already dead...A movie overflowing with potential and possibility, especially thanks to some crisp performances by Chris Pine and Piper Perabo.
Meanwhile the real strengths are in the moral dilemma caused by the situation and staying on the route of a survival thriller focused on the drama and character interaction would have done "Carriers" a world of good.The movie did bring about several poignant scenes (one memorable one includes a father and his sick daughter), where Brian, brutally executing the agreed plan, collides with Danny and the rest of his comrades over issues of right and wrong.
Unusually pretty Piper Perabo and Chris Pine (of Star Trek fame) leads an excellent small group of unknown actors in a well directed virus survival film.However, Carriers is simply an anomaly, there's no gloss, it has the spirit of big budget 'The Road'.
Some disaster movies at least paint a clever picture: Children of Men, 12 Monkeys, but usually the message is just "people will do anything to survive, all is dark and sad and purposeless, we should all be ashamed of ourselves".Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of a story that explores throwing off the system of social order and testing people's mettle in the face of horror, and I do believe some people would act like this film portrayed, but sadistic idiots aside, I seriously doubt society would just dissolve into every man for himself, that's just insulting..
Stewart), but in cinema, I always enjoyed the concept of an almost empty planet Earth, whether it is done with minimalistic images (like in the Mad Max saga) or visualized with epic special effects (like The Day After Tomorrow).I do not know if I enjoy those stories due to the latent misanthropy which makes me yearn a free of human infection planet Earth, or if simply because it is a provocative concept, which many directors and screenwriters have taken advantage of in order to examine the humanity on its purest condition, reduced to the fight for survival and the preservation of the species.Anyway, the film Carriers belongs to that sub-genus, and even though it did not leave me totally satisfied, I think it is enough interesting in order to deserve a recommendation.Due to the coverage Carriers had in the magazine Fangoria, I expected to find a post-apocalyptic horror film at the style of Resident Evil: Extinction or (with a lot of luck) the general work of director George A.
Romero.Now, after having watched it, I think it is much more precise to describe Carriers as an intense drama, because its screenplay ignores the fantasy in order to completely focus on the decay of modern humanity, and the replacement of the "civilization" for a values system in which the compassion and the altruism became into obsolete and almost dangerous artifacts, since they obstruct the objective of survival with emotions.So, before watching this movie, you do not have to expect to see battles against zombies, head-shots, cannibalism or supernatural elements.Carriers limits itself to reflect (with success) one of the most basic fears expressed in fantastic cinema: the man is the man's worst enemy.However, I have to say I lead to all those conclusions during the second half of the film.During the first half, I was upset by the stupidity from the characters, their irritating attitudes and the lack of logic from the screenplay.For example, who chooses an elegant Mercedes Benz as a vehicle to explore a post-apocalyptic world?
In the end, there are many similar scenes, in which the creation of the drama sacrifices the consistence from the screenplay.For the rest, the performances are adequate, and the atmosphere of isolation and aridity is well created.Despite its fails, Carriers is an interesting movie, and I recommend it if you wanna have a good time of post-apocalyptic suspense.Besides, it creates good expectations for the future work of co-directors Álex and David Pastor, who made their debut with this movie..
It had descent camera work, nice photography for it's budget (unfortunately, it doesn't look much different then any other modern movie) and acting is rather good, especially from Christopher Meloni who plays Frank and Chris Pine as Brian.but then comes the script...
Second, characters yet again keep telling about isolation since most of the world's population is dead, yet again, much like with the infection, we don't see or feel that, and since most of the time characters are just driving in their car, we might as well think they are on just a road trip, not trying to survive the apocalypse.Some other movies have done the same concept way better this exact same promise (look up "28 Days Later", where when one of the characters screams "Wolf!" you really believe there's a wolf and danger that comes with it).
Certainly, Chris Pine is one of the most unappealing leads I've seen in a while (he acts as pretty much the same type of one-dimensional hot-headed jerk that he played in STAR TREK) and the rest barely get a look in; Emily Van Camp, who might well be the best actor present, has about all of ten lines to contend with.Like I said, I love post-apocalypse movies
but this non-starter is nothing more than a test of patience..
To survive, they live by a set of rules of their own making: Avoid anyone with the disease, trust no one (not even your friends/family), immediately sterilize anything a carrier touches and realize that anyone with the disease is already dead.The four youths are Danny (Lou Taylor Pucci), his brother Brian (Chris Pine), his girlfriend Bobby (Piper Perabo) and Danny's school friend Kate (Emily VanCampo).
As far as performances go, Chris Pine as Brian and Lou Taylor Pucci as Danny were fine, as were Piper Perabo as Bobby and Emily VanCamp as Kate.The main problem I have with this film is the character Brian is such an ass-hole that I found it very hard to sympathise with him.
Four survivors—Brian (Chris Pine), his girlfriend Bobby (Piper Perabo), his younger brother Danny (Lou Pucci), and Kate (Emily VanCamp)—attempt to get to the coast where they hope to ride out the pandemic at the deserted beach-side hotel where the brothers spent their holidays as kids.I love apocalyptic horror films that deal with virulent diseases wiping out humanity, the fear factor heightened by the very real possibility of such an occurrence.
Brothers Danny (Lou Taylor Pucci) and Brian (Chris Pine) are traveling in a viral apocalyptic world with Bobby (Piper Perabo) and Kate (Emily VanCamp). |
tt0119272 | Heaven's Burning | Japanese bride Midori Takada (Youki Kudoh) arrives in Sydney with her new husband Yukio (Kenji Isomura). She believes her marriage is a mistake and uses the honeymoon as a means to escape. Colin O'Brien (Russell Crowe) is an experienced getaway driver. He is hired by an Australian-Afghan family to help rob a bank. During the robbery one member is killed. Midori is in the bank at the same time and they grab her as a hostage. After escaping, the two Afghan brothers decide to get rid of her. Colin will not allow this. He kills one of the brothers and threatens to shoot the other, Mahood (Robert Mammone). He and Midori escape.
Colin wishes to travel to see his father, Cam, at his ranch because he hasn't seen him in years. Midori chooses to stay with Colin. The duo rob a bank to fund their trip. Mahood and his father, Boorjan (Petru Gheorghiu), swear revenge and set out to catch Colin. The police, aware of the Afghani family's illegal activities, are also in pursuit. Yukio is told of his wife's involvement and he is aware that she left him by choice. His honor injured, he goes to find her.
Colin and Midori venture across New South Wales. The Afghans catch up with Colin and begin to torture him, but Colin manages to kill the patriarch and remaining son. Yukio searches for Midori, killing people along the way. Colin and Midori eventually reach the ranch owned by his father, Cam (Ray Barrett). The duo stays for a short while and officially become lovers. They then leave to visit the seashore.
Yukio reaches the ranch soon after and threatens Cam with death if he doesn't tell him where Midori has gone. Cam responds that he believes in karma and Yukio will soon pay for his evil ways. Enraged, Yukio doesn't simply shoot Cam; he drowns him. After some set backs, Yukio catches up with the lovers and shoots Colin in the torso. Midori retrieves a gun from their car and shoots Yukio, who then shoots her in the side. He tells her that he still loves her, but she counters that he doesn't know what love is and then kills him. The police hear about the shootout and chase the lovers. Midori drives while Colin is slowly dying in the passenger's seat. They reach the shore, but their car rolls over and catches fire. She shoots herself and the car explodes. The police watch as the car burns. | revenge, cult, murder, romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt1595833 | Babycall | Anna (Noomi Rapace) and her 8-year-old son Anders (Vetle Qvenild Werring) move into a large flat outside Oslo. Anna is concerned that they will be found by her violent husband after being relocated. The two receive occasional visits from two child care workers, Grete and Ole, who warn Anna that her ex-husband may soon reopen a custody case over Anders. Anders begins attending a nearby school.
Anna first forces Anders to sleep with her in her room, but when this is discouraged by the case workers she looks for a babycall (baby monitor) at an electronics stop and meets Helge (Kristoffer Joner), a shy gentleman whose mother is dying in a hospital. The two begin to visit regularly at and near Helge's workplace. Helge tells Anna that his mother is unwell and currently at a hospital, and Anna tells Helge about her son. The two developed a friendly albeit fragile relationship - while Anna is an over-protective mother, Helge was an over-protected son unwilling to acknowledge the negative feelings he has about how his mother treated him as a child. Compelled to feel charitable towards over-protective mothers, Helge is only too eager to ‘understand’ Anna’s refusal to let go of Anders. Similarly, Anna is only too eager to believe that an over-protected son might grow up to understand why his mother would not let him go.
The first night Anders slept in his own room, Anna hears disturbing sounds on the babycall, including screaming. Terrified, Anna runs to Anders' room but finds him asleep. The next day, Anna returns to the electronics store and spoke to Helge, who said that her monitor could pick up other frequencies if they were close enough, meaning that the screams were emanating from someone else within 50 meters. On a map of their apartment complex, drawn by Anders, Anna begins to try to decipher the source of the other frequency.
Anders approaches Anna with a similar looking boy as she waits to pick him up from school. Anders tells Anna that he has made a new friend and is going to take him home with them. Anna is fairly suspicious of the boy who hardly speaks and does not return Anna's gestures to connect with him. After hearing some ruckus Anna finds Anders in the kitchen, upset because he believes Anna ruined his picture, which now has a dead body covered in blood at the base of the apartments drawn on it. Anna denies adding this to the paper and attributes it to Anders' friend.
The next day, while Anders is at school Anna visits the lake near her home. Shortly thereafter Anders asks if Anna will show him the lake, and so she leads him to it, only for the two to arrive at a parking lot despite taking the same route. A few days later Anna follows a woman she believes had something to do with the screaming on the baby monitor. While she's there, Anna sees a man drowning a little boy, who is in fact Anders' friend. After the man and his party leave, Anna jumps into the water to try and retrieve the boy. She stays underwater for too long and blacks out.
Anna wakes up in a hospital, with a nurse telling her she was found looking confused at a parking lot, though her clothes were wet. Anna leaves the hospital and goes to Anders' school to retrieve him but she is told by the principal to leave him because there is a suspcision of child abuse. Anna disregards the principal and brings Anders home.
When the two arrive home Anna discovers that their front door is open. She suspects an intruder has entered the flat and has Anders hide in his room. It is revealed that the Ole is there. He tells her that his partner has quit that it is now only up to him if Anna is to keep Anders with the case soon to be reopened. Ole advances on an uncomfortable Anna and tells her he will be back that evening. Anna then goes to the workplace of Helge and invites him for dinner.
While the two eat, there is a knock at the door. Anna asks Helge to answer it for her and she hides. Helge, seeming confused, opens the front door but no one is there. When he turns around he sees Anders' friend, whom he mistakes for Anders, who shows Helge bruises on his body and then runs off to the room of Anders. Helge tries to follow him but is confronted by Anna who yells at him and he leaves. Anna opens the window and calls for Helge to return but he does not. She sees Ole and hurriedly leaves the flat to evade Ole.
The next day Ole is back at Anna's and tells her that her ex-husband is coming right now to retrieve Anders. Anna lets Ole in and shortly hears knocking on the door. Panicked that it is her ex-husband, Anna grabs a pair of scissors, which she stabbed Ole with, killing him just outside her door. Helge, who has just arrived, pounds on the door trying to get Anna to open it. Helge runs into the apartment, to see Anna sitting on the windowsill with Anders' arms wrapped around her. Just as he reaches Anna, she leans forward and falls off the windowsill. Helge rushes down the building, sees Anna on the ground, but no Anders. When Helge asks Anna where Anders is, she isn't able to answer. Later Helge is told that Anna's husband killed Anders years ago, and that her husband had killed himself as well.
Helge finds the drawing of the apartment complex with a grave marked on the forest adjacent to it. He goes into the forest and finds a body wrapped, buried in the earth. It is of the boy imagined to be the friend of Anders, murdered by his abusive parents. Later, Helge sits next to Anna's body and retells the story of a boy and his mother. The ending scene shows a happy Anders and Anna strolling in the forest towards the lake, then sitting down by the water. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0266391 | The Cat's Meow | November 15, 1924: Among those boarding the luxury yacht Oneida in San Pedro, California are its owner, publishing magnate William Randolph Hearst, and his mistress, silent film star Marion Davies; motion picture mogul Thomas H. Ince, whose birthday is the reason for the weekend cruise, and his mistress, starlet Margaret Livingston; international film star Charlie Chaplin; English writer Elinor Glyn; and Louella Parsons, a film critic for Hearst's New York American.
Several of those participating in the weekend's festivities are at a crossroads in their lives and/or careers. Chaplin, still dealing with the critical and commercial failure of A Woman of Paris and rumors he has impregnated 16-year-old Lita Grey (who appeared in his film The Kid) is in the midst of preparing The Gold Rush. Davies longs to appear in a slapstick comedy rather than the somber costume dramas to which Hearst has kept her confined. Ince's eponymous film studio is in dire financial straits, so he hopes to convince Hearst to take him on as a partner in Cosmopolitan Pictures. Parsons would like to relocate from the East Coast to more glamorous Hollywood.
Hearst suspects Davies and Chaplin have engaged in an affair, a suspicion shared by Ince, who seeks proof he can present to Hearst in order to curry favor with him. In the wastepaper basket in Chaplin's stateroom, Ince discovers a discarded love letter to Davies and pockets it with plans to produce it at an opportune moment. When he finally does, Hearst is enraged. His anger is fueled further when he finds a brooch he had given Davies in Chaplin's cabin. Hearst concludes it was lost there during a romantic liaison, and he rifles Marion's room for further evidence.
Armed with a pistol, Hearst searches the yacht for Chaplin in the middle of the night. Ince, meanwhile, runs into Davies and the two sit and talk with Ince donning a hat Chaplin had worn. Davies explains to Ince her love for Hearst and her regret at an earlier affair with Chaplin. She states "I never loved him" just as Hearst arrives behind them. Thinking Davies is referring to him, and mistaking Ince for Chaplin, a jealous Hearst shoots Ince. The assault is witnessed by Parsons, who had heard noises and went to investigate.
Hearst arranges to dock in San Diego and have a waiting ambulance take the dying Ince home. He phones the injured man's wife and tells her Ince attempted suicide when Livingston tried to end their affair, assuring her the truth won't reach the media. To the rest of his guests he announces Ince's ulcer flared up and required immediate medical attention. Davies, of course, knows the truth, and confides in Chaplin. Also armed with that knowledge is Parsons, who assures Hearst his secret will be safe in exchange for a lifetime contract with the Hearst Corporation, thus laying the groundwork for her lengthy career as one of Hollywood's most powerful gossip columnists.
After seeing Ince off, Hearst confronts Davies and Chaplin. He is berated by Chaplin, who expects Davies to join him. Hearst, however, challenges Chaplin to guarantee Davies that he can promise her a happy life. When Chaplin fails to answer, Hearst informs Chaplin of the vow of silence he and the fellow guests have made to keep the weekend's activities a secret. Chaplin despairs as he realizes the murder has strengthened Davies' love for Hearst.
The film concludes with the guests leaving Ince's funeral, as Glyn relates what became of them:
Livingston went on to star in a number of successful films and her film salary "inexplicably" went from $300 to $1000 a film.
Davies starred in more of Hearst's films before finally being allowed to feature in a comedy The Hollywood Revue of 1929, which was (as Chaplin predicted) a success. She stayed by Hearst's side until his death in 1951.
Chaplin married his teenage lover Lita Grey in Mexico and his film The Gold Rush was an overwhelming success.
Parsons worked for Hearst for many years and subsequently became one of the most successful writers in the history of American journalism.
Tom Ince was largely forgotten after the events of his death. Very few newspapers reported it, no police action was taken, and of all the people on board only one was ever questioned. It is concluded that in Hollywood, "the place just off the coast of the planet Earth," no two accounts of the story are the same. | romantic, satire, murder | train | wikipedia | The story has many versions, but the `whisper told most often,' is the one recounted in `The Cat's Meow,' directed by Peter Bogdanovich, a dramatization of what may or may not have happened during that extended weekend birthday-party cruise in honor of pioneer film director, Thomas Ince, which included an eclectic guest list of the rich, famous and powerful.
Hearst, however, has other things on his mind; rumor has it that his mistress, Marion Davies (Kirsten Dunst), is being courted by Charlie Chaplin (Eddie Izzard), and he has brought them together, here, to observe and decide for himself if anything untoward is going on between them.
`The Cat's Meow' is a mildly enjoyable telling of a notorious tall story that has been told in Hollywood for nearly eighty years.Super-magnate William Randolph Hearst (Edward Herrmann) invites a diverse mix of Hollywood biggest names and its oddest fringe dwellers to celebrate the birthday of famed director Thomas Ince (Cary Elwes) aboard his luxury yacht.
Things begin to fall apart when Hearst suspects a guest - none other than Charlie Chaplin (Eddie Izzard), the most famous man in the world - of having an affair with his actress girlfriend, Marion Davies (Kirsten Dunst).Although the film is entertaining, there is something underwhelming about it.
Ironically, Izzard actually resembles the real Thomas Ince far more than does Cary Elwes, and as a real-life cabaret performer could conceivably have brought the flamboyance and eccentricity of the real-life director to life better than Elwes does.The film also takes an annoyingly facile view of women, perpetuating the dull cliche that all women spent the 1920s with a bad case of St Vitus' dance and addicted to laughing gas.
Unfortunately, the more interesting conflicts in Marion's life, such as her growing alcoholism and her dissatisfaction with Hearst's insistence on casting her in leaden romances rather than the comedy to which she was so obviously suited, are only touched on lightly.Though it could have been a thought-provoking and complex experience, as Joanna Lumley's poignant final statements imply (and like `Gosford Park' to which it has been compared), in the end `The Cat's Meow' doesn't feel much more substantial than your average game of Cluedo..
So when it happens, it doesn't seem preposterous at all.The story concerns newspaper honcho William Randolph Hearst (Edward Herrmann) and company celebrating the birthday of Hollywood producer Thomas Ince (Cary Elwes) on Hearst's yacht.
That company includes Hearst's lover/actress Marion Davies (Kirsten Dunst), Charlie Chaplin (Eddie Izzard), author Elinor Glyn (Joanna Lumley), gossip columnist for Hearst's newspaper Louella Parsons (Jennifer Tilley), and Tom's lover.
While much of the screenplay is presumably speculation, it is interesting to see the effects the murder on some of his other guests, like Marion Davies, Hearst's mistress, Charlie Chaplin and Luella Parsons, among others.This film couldn't fail for me its subject matter involves William Randolph Hearst, a foe of my main obsession Orson Welles, and it contained one of my favorite entertainers in the cast, Eddie Izzard as Charlie Chaplin.
And while Eddie Izzard was fantastic as Chaplin, and Kirsten Dunst wasn't her usual irritating self as Davies, it was Joanna Lumley who I thought was the breakout star of the film.
Eddie Izzard is more effective than I expected as Chaplin (partly thanks to an excellent hair and makeup job by some talented designer); Joanna Lumley is compelling as novelist Elinor Glyn; and Kirsten Dunst is winning as Marion Davies (though why movies never use her real-life stutter is difficult to explain).
I am abhorred that the Oscars could ignore this film for all the categories it so well deserved:Best Actress (Kirsten Dunst) Best Actor (Edward Herrmann) Best Costume Design Best CinematographyAnd those are just the obvious ones!Peter Bogdanovich is one of my favorite Directors.
media tycoon, movie producer and one of the richest and most powerful men in America at the time William Randolph Hearst organized a lavish private cruise on his yacht with many important Hollywood players invited on board.
Among them: movie producer Thomas Ince with his mistress actress Margaret Livingston in tow, Hearst's own mistress - actress Marion Davies, Charlie Chaplin, writer Elinor Glyn, gossip columnist Louella Parsons, etc..
Fuelling these further was the fact that possible foul play witness Louella Parsons, up to that point a mere Hearst columnist in New York, soon after the events got a lucrative lifetime contract with his corporation.In "The Cat's Meow" Peter Bogdanovich, himself not a stranger to Hollywood entanglements involving good looking young fame-seeking starlets, jealousy, murder, and desperation induced by lack of money, takes one version of the events ('whispers heard most often' as the movie tagline puts it) and runs with it.
Director Peter Bogdanovich recreates it based on rumors in "The Cat's Meow," a 2001 film starring Kirsten Dunst, Edward Herrmann, Cary Elwes, Eddie Izzard, Joanna Lumley and Jennifer Tilly.
The weekend in question is a celebration of producer Thomas Ince's birthday aboard Hearst's yacht with a guest roster that included Hearst, Marion Davies, Ince, his mistress, Margaret Livingston, Louella Parsons, writer Elinor Glyn, Charlie Chaplin and others.
The writing of this character may be incorrect as well, as it's doubtful that Chaplin would have actually wanted Marion to leave Hearst.All in all, though it's not an edge of your seat kind of film, "The Cat's Meow" is a good film about a fascinating piece of Hollwyood lore.
The screen play is by Steven Peros, who also has a small role in the movie.The story is loosely based on an incident that happened in Mr. Hearst's yacht in which a famous producer, Thomas Ince is murdered.
Kirsten Dunst makes a perfect Marion Davies.The supporting members of the cast are perfectly cast, the most fun being Jennifer Tilly, as Louella Parsons, the famous gossip diva of the Hollywood of those years.
If you're tired of Zoolander, Freddie Got Fingered, and all the rest, here is a movie for you.Kirsten Dunst is very pointedly listed as the star -- and those who have any qualms about her aptitude for period roles should take a look at her performance as the little Nazi girl in "Mother Night", or later in "Little Women." Hollywood doesn't have a clue what to do with interesting actresses -- Dunst deserves better than "Bring it On."I especially liked the scene where Dunst, as Marion Davies, stumbles upon Charlie Chaplin, who has decided to fall asleep rather than join in a sexual threesome.
Kirsten Dunst grins her way through her role as silent movie star Marion Davies like she thinks she's in "Legally Blonde." The guy who plays William Randolph Hearst overacts to the point where you want to reach into the screen and slap him.
Nice Gem. Cat's Meow, The (2001) *** 1/2 (out of 4) Extremely well acted and marvelously directed drama tells the story of the legendary producer Thomas Ince (Cary Elwes) who boarded a ship owned by Willam Randolph Hearst (Edward Herrmann) and a couple days later was dead.
While there are various reports as to what happened, this film follows the most talked about which is that Ince informed Hearst that his girlfriend Marion Davies (Kirsten Dunst) was having an affair with Charles Chaplin (Eddie Izzard).
The film is, as I said, very slow as it really takes quite a while for things to finally fall into play, and the film is only for serious film fans, as your casual movie watcher will find it hard to watch.The setting of the film is a tale that Hollywood seems to have forgotten, as the year 1924 and the story of the murder aboard William Randolph Hurst's yacht is not a commen topic of conversation.
A speculative rewrite of an obscure historical incident played out like a jazz-age Hollywood remake of Gosford Park, The Cat's Meow takes place during a trip on the private yacht of media tycoon William Randolph Hearst (Edward Herrmann) when a murdered guest turns up amid the Charlestons, hair oil, cocktails and gay banter.It's all a bit lightweight given that it's meant to herald director Peter Bogdanovich's return to form but Kirsten Dunst, Joanne Lumley and Jennifer Tilly breathe some much-needed life into it while Eddie Izzard gets quietly on with a likable impersonation of Charlie Chaplin.Ultimately as frothy and light as the cocktails they're necking, this is a seriously wasted opportunity for what could have been a slice of Hollywood Gothic..
Meanwhile Hearst has sworn all the guests to silence, and he is powerful enough to buy-off any of the local authorities that may be taking too much interest.Of the many versions of the story, this film opts for the sensationalist theory that Hearst's mistress Marion Davies was getting too friendly with Charlie Chaplin, and Hearst shot Ince after mistaking him for Chaplin - observed only by gossip-writer Louella Parsons, who was then given a lucrative contract by the Hearst newspaper group in exchange for 'confirming' the approved version of the incident.
But Chaplin denied ever being on-board (though he was), while it is not certain whether Parsons was.The triumph of the film is the casting of Edward Herrmann as Hearst, a suitably big, assertive presence, bearing an uncanny resemblance to the great man, and betraying more than a touch of Citizen Kane in his performance.
Hearst and his mistress, silent starlet Marion Davies, host the desperately-gay gathering of the wealthy and hungry: movie mogul and birthday boy Thomas Ince, his mistress Margaret Livingston, film star Charlie Chaplin, writer Elinor Glyn and Louella Parsons, a professional gossip who works for Hearst's New York American.
The plot involves Mr. Ince exposing Davies' love affair with "silent" comedian Charles Chaplin (Eddie Izzard), for personal gain...That Charlie Chaplin is madly in love with Marion Davies is the film's speculative breaking point...Known for his "Little Tramp" character, Mr. Chaplin has just impregnated underage protégée Lita Grey.
******** The Cat's Meow (8/3/01) Peter Bogdanovich ~ Kirsten Dunst, Cary Elwes, Edward Herrmann, Eddie Izzard.
Following his previous comedic hits like "Noises Off", Bogdanovich re-creates what might or might not have happened aboard W.R. Hearts yacht, in the mid-twenties, accompanied by his mistress, the young rising star, Marion Davies (Dunst) and the biggest movie star of the time, Charlie Chaplin (Izzard) along with a few other huge icons of the industry.
Edward Herrmann and Kirsten Dunst were also very convincing as Hearst and Davies, but it was more the satire that Bogdanovich creates that makes the story really believable.
Very good and interesting film,for me,all things work perfectly here,Eddie Izzard is a fine Charlie Chaplin,Cary Elwes is great as ever in all of his movies.The sets could'nt be better,set in 1924 this thriller makes you think that you're really there cause it's very realistic in all points,congratulations for that!
There is a lot of witty lines and comeback lines, and some interesting characters, but many seem to be only cardboard cutouts of what a person of that stature and time should be like.Edward Herrmann was great as William Randolph Hearst, the overconfident man who turns to a insecure child whenever it comes to his relationship with his girl, played by Kirsten Dunst, who is good as the nurturing figure that was the light to Hearst.
Here he tells the near legendary tale of Thomas Ince's fatal weekend on W.R. Hearst's luxury boat (in the company of other film luminaries including Charlie Chaplin and Marion Davies).
Eddie Izzard made a great Charlie Chaplin, and Kirsten Dunst was able to give this film a good amount of steam to the picture.
After waiting for its release for some time, I enjoyed a quiet Saturday afternoon at the cinemas viewing "The Cat's Meow." While in some parts, the pace is slow and does not seem to be moving anywhere; ultimately, the movie is a triumph in re-creating the suave, classic murder mystery.The story is one of the most talked about scandals in Hollywood.
It also includes the love affair between Charlie Chaplin and Marion Davies (played with superb excellence by Kirstin Dunst and Eddie Izzard) and the crazed jealously of William Randolph Hurst (played by Edward Herrman, perhaps being his performance of a lifetime.) Of course, the spectacular 20s craze is kept alive with the wonderful supporting cast including Jennifer Tilly as the soon-to-be most feared gossip columnists in the US, Louella Parsons.
Who knows what really happened aboard Hearst's yacht or if Ince was really murdered, but for my money, this version of the story if the cat's meow..
At this point, half way through the year, it's in the top 10%.This film takes an actual event about which there've been few facts and much rumor -- the illness of a Hollywood producer on a cruise with William Randolph Hearst & "friends" -- and spins a "maybe it happened this way" type of hypothesis.The major principals onscreen are known to most viewers -- Hearst (Edward Herrmann), Marion Davies (Kirsten Dunst), Charlie Chaplin (Eddie Izzard), Louella Parsons (Joanna Lumley), and Thomas Ince (Cary Elwes).The performances of these five are of Oscar nomination caliber: Hearst and Dunst for best actor; Izzard, Lumley, and Elwes for best supporting.As "Gosford Park" gave an "Upstairs, Downstairs" view of English classes in a similar era, so also "CM" gives us a view of the Hollywood elite -- the powerful, the has beens, the wanna be's, the hangers on -- its particular morality (or amorality), its social veneer, its way of dealing with the larger conventional society which supports it and off which it feeds.
With a boatload of famous early Hollywood personalities Bogdanovich offers up some grand supposition as he blatantly accuses Wily of the shooting of producer Thomas Ince in a jealous rage.Hearst along with movie star mistress Marion Davies along with Charlie Chaplin, writers Eleanor Glyn, Louella Parsons and others go off on a weekend cruise on his yacht off the coast of Southern Cal. On the surface it is supposed to be a leisurely frolic but an undercurrent of desperation in terms of career moves and dalliances makes for choppy waters.
Peter Bogdanovich's well-documented love for film history in all probability makes him the only director capable of adroitly tackling this adaptation of Steven Peros' piece about foul play in twenties Hollywood during a weekend yacht cruise organised by tycoon William Randolph Hearst.
The film's premise has Hearst (Edward Herrmann) madly jealous at Charlie Chaplin's (Eddie Izzard) open courtship of Hearst's lover Marion Davies (a ravishing Kristen Dunst), under the watchful gaze of rapier-wit writer Elinor Glyn (Joanna Lumley) and aspiring gossip columnist Louella Parsons (Jennifer Tilly) and over what was supposed to be a birthday cruise for pioneering Hollywood producer Thomas Ince (Cary Elwes).
Director Peter Bogdanovich, one of Hollywood's great critics and film historians, elicits strong performances across the board, especially from Edward Hermann as Hearst and Kirsten Dunst as his much younger lover, the actress Marion Davies.
Peter Bogdonavich's latest movie "The Cat's Meow" takes a look at what may have happened on William Randolph Hearst's yacht in 1924.
The movie was very beautifully shot, with all the glamour of the Jazz Age, and with a look at Hollywood decadence and corruption, referred to here as the "California Curse." Each character is brought to life in this story: media titan and megalomaniac Hearst, played by Edward Herrmann as a mean-spirited paranoiac; Kirsten Dunst as W.R.'s mistress Marion Davies, a gal who loves too much; Eddie Izzard as Charlie Chaplin, out of his "little tramp" persona, and pitching woo; Jennifer Tilly as Louella Parsons, here a pesky ditz, and not yet the powerful gossip columnist she would soon become; and Cary Elwes as Ince himself, the ambitious but doomed producer.
Kirsten Dunst is lovely, Joanna Lumley (Patsy from Ab Fab) is wonderful, Jennifer Tilly is a manic Louella Parsons (LOVE those hats!), Cary Elwes is boo-hiss slimy, and Eddie Izzard as Charlie Chaplin and Edward Herrman as Hearst do wonderful work.
The rumor this film decides to bring to light is that in fact William Randolph Hearst was responsible for killing Thomas, having mistaken him for Charlie Chaplin (Izzard) who he discovers is wooing his beloved young star and lover Marion Davies behind his back.
Based on a well-suppressed true story (first told to him by Orson Welles), The Cat's Meow relates the tale of a gathering on the yacht of William Randolph Hearst, to celebrate the birthday of Hollywood producer Thomas Ince.
Among the guests are Hearst's mistress Marion Davies (well played by Kristen Dunst), Charlie Chaplin, and notorious gossip columnist Louella Parsons.
Hearst (Edward Herrmann) and his mistress, silent screen star Marion Davies (Kirsten Dunst), are hosting a weekend getaway for their swanky friends.The guests all arrive with their baggage, and their, er, baggage: Thomas Ince (Cary Elwes), a once-omnipotent film producer who has seen his fame and fortune wane in recent years, wants to merge with Hearst's empire; Louella "Lolly" Parsons (Jennifer Tilly), a start-up gossip columnist already working for a Hearst paper, wants to move digs from Gotham to Tinseltown; Charlie Chaplin (Eddie Izzard), the notorious womanizer, wants to steal the nubile beauty Marion from Hearst; and the jaded English novelist Elinor Gyn (Joanne Lumley) wants another drink.There is plenty of fodder for naughty fun here -- lavish dinner parties, flashy costume balls, private film screenings, prohibition-snubbing libations, love, betrayal, and a murder -- but it's all just window-dressing.
the rumor that mogul William Randolph Heart (effectively played by Edward Herrmann) accidentally shot movie producer Thomas Ince (Cary Elwes, shedding his trademark smirk) while trying to kill Charlie Chaplin (an excellent Eddie Izzard) who was having an affair with Heart's mistress, actress Marion Davies (Kirsten Dunst, mesermizing as always).
Some scenes seem a bit stretched, and there is possibly one Charleston too many, but with that said, it's a cruise worth taking.Newspaper tycoon William Randolph Hearst, played by Edward Herrmann, and Kirsten Dunst as his mistress Marion Davies, invite a number friends and associates for a cruise on his luxury yacht.
The main characters are the publishing magnate William Randolph Hearst(Edward Hermann),his mistress and rising star Marion Davies (Kirsten Dunst),Charlie Chaplin (Eddie Izzard) and film mogul Thomas Hince (Cary Elwes). |
tt0107247 | Jack the Bear | Jack Leary and his younger brother Dylan start over in Oakland, California in 1972 following the death their mother Elizabeth. The boys live with their father John, who entertains late-night horror film audiences as Midnight Shriek host-commentator "Al Gory." John has a drinking problem that disrupts the smooth running of the household. Some parental duties fall to Jack, who takes Dylan to his first day of preschool. One of the Learys' neighbors, a young man named Norman Strick, who walks with a cane due to a car accident as a teen, is an anti-social neo-Nazi who feels the neighborhood is going downhill.
Jack has a love affair with his classmate Karen Morris. Jack's friend and next door neighbor Dexter, who comes from a broken home with his grandparents, begins suffering a downward spiral after his grandmother died while becoming acquainted with Norman. On Halloween, having given Dexter a Nazi costume, Norman approaches John to ask for a donation for a racially prejudiced candidate. During an airing of Invasion of the Body Snatchers, a drunken John interrupts the movie and mimics the racially charged beliefs of Norman while naming the candidate.
The next day, Jack is woken when Norman's golden retriever Cheyenne dies on their front lawn from poisoning, John apologizes for his actions on television while giving his condolences despite Norman refusing to shake his hand. Backlash from John's previous actions on his show jeopardizes his job and endangers Jack's relationship with Karen. Taking out his anger on Dylan and leaving him with Dexter, Jack learns that his brother was taken by Norman. Jack calls the police as he and John are extremely worried until Dylan is found in a nearby forest a few days later and taken to the hospital, traumatized by the ordeal of being left to die in the wilderness to the point of being rendered mute.
Three days later, bringing Dylan home with Norman not seen for days, John begins getting agitated to the point of taking out his frustration at the Strick home with a bat, terrorizing the Stricks for their son's whereabouts before destroying Norman's beloved T-Bird. Fearing for his current state of mind, John lets his in-laws take the boys to their home in Los Angeles as he decides to shape up. Jack sneaks back to Oakland and falls asleep watching The Wolf Man. By the time John arrives home, Norman cuts the power as he sneaks into the house. Stirred awake by the outage, Jack is aware that someone intruded but accidentally knocks John out with a bat. Found by Norman, Jack runs upstairs and out the bathroom window to a branch of a nearby tree with Norman in pursuit as John regains consciousness. However, chased up to the higher point of the tree, Jack watches Norman losing his grip and falling into the backyard behind the Leary house where he is mauled to death by the neighbor's Doberman Pinschers. Soon after, as Norman's parents move away, Dylan returns home while John gets his job back with his show now airing more comical horror films like Abbott and Costello.
One afternoon, the neighborhood children all appear and ask if John will play one of his monster games with them as usual. After his experiences with Norman, John tells the children he won't play the monster game anymore. When they ask him why, John sees Dexter smoking a cigarette while realizing he's going down a dark path. John looks to the children that there are real monsters out there, but he promises to play a better game with them. Later finding Jack playing his mother's lullaby on the piano while getting Dylan to say the lullaby's title, John tries to comfort his son when he breaks down crying. As John gives Jack and himself closure, the two embrace Dylan after he says the title of Elizabeth's lullaby: "Jack the Bear." The next day, with their lives beginning to return to normal, John watches his sons playing in the front yard. | flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0097714 | Last Exit to Brooklyn | The stories are set almost entirely in what is now considered the Sunset Park section of Brooklyn; the location is widely misreported as Red Hook, where one story is set and parts of the 1989 movie were filmed. Last Exit to Brooklyn is divided into six parts that can, more or less, be read separately. Each part is prefaced with a passage from the Bible.
Another Day, Another Dollar: A gang of young Brooklyn hoodlums hang around an all-night cafe and get into a vicious fight with a group of US Army soldiers on leave.
The Queen Is Dead: Georgette, a sassy transvestite hooker, is thrown out of the family home by her brother and tries to attract the attention of a hoodlum named Vinnie at a benzedrine-driven party.
And Baby Makes Three: An alcoholic father tries to keep good spirits and maintain his family’s marriage traditions after his daughter becomes pregnant and then marries Tommy, a motorcycle mechanic.
Tralala: The title character of an earlier Selby short story, she is a young Brooklyn prostitute who makes a living propositioning sailors in bars and stealing their money. In perhaps the novel’s most notorious scene, she is brutally gang-raped after a night of heavy drinking.
Strike: Harry, a machinist in a factory, becomes a local official in the union. A closeted homosexual, he abuses his wife, molests his infant son, and gets in fights to convince himself that he is a man. He gains a temporary status and importance during a long strike, and uses the union's money to entertain the young street punks and buy the company of drag queens.
Landsend: Described as a "coda" for the book, this section presents the intertwined, yet ordinary day of numerous denizens in a housing project. | realism | train | wikipedia | Those are qualities present in Selby's book and it would have been a shame for the filmmakers to abandon them, just as it would have been a shame for Aronofsky to cave to the pressures to find a happier ending for his film of Requiem...As a reader of the book I think those negative comments are even more misguided, because the screenwriter did quite a bit to try to make the material more accessible for the viewing audience.
The book doesn't end on the relief of the end of the strike, but finishes with an amazing coda that contains characters like Abraham, a man who spends money on clothes and his car but won't cough up to buy vitamins for his malnourished children.My one big complaint about the screenplay was the treatment of Harry Black's character.
I think his descent is more credible in the book, but Selby was also able to get inside Harry's head on paper in a way that's difficult to translate into film.Overall I think this film is a very excellent adaptation of extremely difficult material, and I recommend it to anyone who is willing to watch a story about the pain and suffering that happens in everyday life without the Hollywood gloss..
I believe its a superior adaptation.The film is based around a union strike which threatens to cripple the city of Brooklyn in the 1950s.
The film focuses several characters; Harry, the troubled union leader struggling to come to terms with his desires for other men and his gender-bending lover against the anger, aggression and hypocrisy of the era; a woman, TraLaLa, who sells her body for money but finds herself committing the ultimate crime of her profession by falling for a client - an army man destined to hurt her; a family with a daughter pregnant out of wedlock; a gang of aimless young men hungry for trouble; and a young teen looking for love in TraLaLa.Its a film full of fascinating performances which reinforce the greatness of this film.
Ricki Lake, Sam Rockwell and Stephen lang also excel in a great ensemble film.I can still picture vividly the majesty and intensity of the strike riot and the water spraying at the wire fence as strikers confront the police.There are many great scenes such as this which combined with striking performances and an unflinching script and score make Last Exit to Brooklyn a modern masterpiece.
It truly is the opposite of Pleasantville.Hubert Selby's dark vision of the common man is woven around several characters in a Brooklyn neighborhood.
When the envelope turns out to contain a lengthy love letter she doesn't become angry or disappointed, just confused.In addition to Leigh and Young, powerful performances are turned in by Jerry Orbach (the corrupt union boss), Stephen Lang (the closet homosexual strike-line foreman), Stephen Baldwin (a street punk), Ricki Lake (Big Joe's very pregnant daughter), and Alexis Arquette (the teen-age transvestite).The soundtrack is excellent and unobtrusive and Uli Edel's direction insightful.
Working class life in 1950's Brooklyn is disrupted by a strike.One of these films that seems about nothing in the explaining (the ups and downs of the roughhouse working-class), but is a very powerful piece in the watching and highly recommended.The film reminded me of an X rated version of American Graffiti where people go about their ordinary lives, but somehow, we become fascinated.
Certain scenes actually play no real role in the plot, but add to the feel of time and place.A lot of people will be shocked by this movie.
I found it quite hard to watch at times myself, but I think it is an important film and no insult to the classic Selby book which inspired it..
In 1952, a panoramic view of the other side of North America is presented through the life of different characters and their dramatic stories, having Brooklyn in common.
This sad, depressive and violent movie is another great work of Uli Edel, mainly known by `Christiane F'.
The author of the book this movie was based on said himself he thought this was one great adaptation of his novel.
Last Exit to Brooklyn (1989) is based on the book by Hubert Selby Jr. about a group of working class during a labour strike in early 1950's in the gritty streets of Brooklyn.
Stephen Lang plays Harry Black, the leader of the strike unit and Jennifer Jason Leigh is Tralala, a lost soul who works as a hooker for the various soldiers and other drunken males that use the services of the hookers drinking beer and acting dirty.
Just watching Harry's eyes when he first sees his new interest in the street shows how powerful cinema can be without one single word.Another important character is of course Tralala and she is also involved in the film's harrowing and almost unbearably sadistic and ugly end scene that finally (or what happens after that) makes the film a very strong experience.
The sets are very impressive and the atmosphere in this film is all the time like the actors could any minute start singing and dancing their lines!
What they tried to express through screaming and horrible noise should have been done more aesthetically and with the tools of the art and much more effectively.Last Exit to Brooklyn is a powerful, challenging and at the end, beautiful film about the most important and universal things in life and about humanity, and it is also a great film visually.
Which leads to the boys friends brutally beating Harry to the point where he was within an inch of his life from being dead and ending up being literally crucified in an empty back-lot; This is the level of brutality in this movie.
A violent brutal and at the same time shockingly honest movie about life in Brooklyn New York circa 1952.
With Jerry Orbach as the feisty and two fisted union president who sticks to his guns and in the end gets what he wants for himself and his union members and many many more good actors and the parts that they play in the movie."Last Exit to Brooklyn" is a very hard movie to watch but if you want a film with brutal realism and fine acting and photography as well as a story that will grip you right from the start and hold on to you long after the movie is over this is it..
None of us lived in the streets like the characters in the film but the violence from there was definitely reflected in our day to day life.
Heartwrenchingly faithful to the mood and sentiment of Hubert Selby's important novel I am continuously surprised at how films like this are overlooked in a larger, classic sense.
Jennifer Jason Leigh as Tralala, a hooker WITHOUT a heart of gold (for a change) and Burt Young as a union hard hitter coming to terms with his sexuality are most notably inspiring.
The picture of an innocent 1950s promulgated by films of the time was thoroughly refuted with the book Last Exit to Brooklyn, which portrayed a world of sex and violence that would ring just as true if written about the present age.
There are some memorable scenes, and Jennifer Jason Leigh gives yet another memorable performance mixing, as usual, intense character and clothes removal.I didn't think it was a great movie, but if I were more prone to dark, hopeless movies, as I was when younger, perhaps I would think so.
The story operates on the same level as many Selby stories do, of characters so devoid of faith or hope that they don't recognize how close they are to having what they want or just appreciating the potential in what they have, and that mistake causes their undoing (in Stephen Lang's case) or their uncovered possibilities of grace (Jennifer Jason Leigh).
Mark Knopfler's beautiful and melancholy score paints a haunting and pained picture, over this, an extremely hard-hitting drama, superbly directed by Uli Edel.For 1989, its release date and set around Brooklyn in the 1952, this is as strong as films got.
There's a sense of brooding beauty about it, in the same way that West Side Story had flawed characters, in so many conflicts, within their own community and incomers, such as military servicemen, at night, looking for a great time.
Maybe cos it has a heart; a survivoral instinct that's most apparent in the Italian families in the film, headed by Burt Young, who of course played Paulie, Rocky Balboa's wheezing training aide, in the Rocky movies.My Universal release has a fine transfer and is quite cheap, especially secondhand.
Classic films like Last Exit To Brooklyn stay in ones mind forever.
Hubert Selby, Jr's controversial novel Last Exit to Brooklyn is a classic and is transferred to the big screen brilliantly by underrated German director Uli Edel.
The acting is first rate, with Jennifer Jason Leigh (brilliant as usual) and Stephen Lang (now a cast member of the biggest grossing film in Hollywood history!) taking all the plaudits respectively as Tralala, the hooker with a hart of ice, money is all she knows and cares for; and Harry Black, the repressed homosexual leader of the strike.
Factory workers on-strike in Brooklyn, 1952 have nothing to do at night but get into trouble: the head of the strike office is leading a double life (he's married with a child, but is attracted to the drag queens who gather in an apartment in the neighborhood), his dumb-lugs friends beat up on servicemen, a platinum-haired tramp sets up horny soldiers to be rolled, and uncouth family man Big Joe (who urinates out the window when he can't get into the bathroom at home) discovers his daughter isn't just fat--she's pregnant.
There's the head manager of the plant, Stephen Lang, great, a married man, who can't come out of the closet, his last tragic scene, one of the most memorable in the film.
Since this film, Stephen Lang seems to have improved his image, at least playing the Godly "Stonewall" Jackson in "Gods and Generals." Lang's role here is just the opposite: perhaps the worst trashy person in the film and a character who falls in love with a transvestite by the end of the film.Depressing, gloomy, semi-pornographic, repulsive: these are just a few of the adjectives people used - even some Liberal critics - in describing this story, which is painted even worse in the novel.
The characters are "true-to-life", the acting so convincing you begin to feel their emotions, the directing as if by the author of the book himself, and the cinematography to linger in your mind long after watching it.
Uli Edel ('Christiane F.') directed this adaption of Hubert Selby Jr.'s classic collection of intersected short-stories set in Brooklyn in the early Fifties...The film, which as Darren Aronofsky's recent 'Requiem for a Dream', captures Selby's harsh worldview- and his compassion for his characters no matter how low they sink...The film takes the separate stories, 'Another Day, Another Dollar', 'The Queen is Dead', 'Strike', 'Tralala' et al and weaves them together.
This manages to yoke the disparate elements together in a cohesive whole (though an approach similar to Kieslowski's 'Dekalog'- where characters from other episodes appear in the background- would have been interesting)...This film is harsh, the previous comments on 'Last Exit' seem to be shocked at the film's content- what did the viewer think a film by the director of 'Christiane F' of a novel by Hubert Selby Jr. would be like????...To believe that Georgette would be mourned by his/her friends- they aren't friends- they just occupy the same zone...And to complain there is no end- well, it's simple- there is no end for the occupants of this slum.
This film, as the book doesn't intend to give closure; it is not entertainment...The performances are great- Stephen Lang and Jennifer Jason Leigh especially (note also a cameo by Hubert Selby Jr. as the taxi driver who runs over Georgette- he also cameos as a prison guard taunting Tyrone in 'Requiem for a Dream').
The performances are very good, Selbys story is beyond excellent and is faultlessly executed, Everything about this film is spot-on but, somehow, it failed to draw me in to the point where I could get any empathy with the characters.
this is a raw version of what is out in the real world.Excellent version of true street dramas.Powerful cast.True classic.A must have for your collection.Its touches parts of life that people don't like to talk about.Harry the union rep,i think is the most animated role in this movie.His love for the union and his desire for cross dressing men is sad prison of his life.Not knowing who he is or what he wants.Set in the blue collared steel mill town of Brooklyn ,not much money,no work,no direction for the towns younger adults.Bordem becomes a way life.The problem is which exit and when do they take it.There is no second chance .Your exit could be the last.
Hubert Selby Jr. gave us the book "Requiem For A Dream" and co-wrote the screenplay to Aronofsky's movie of it.
"Last Exit To Brooklyn" still has the vice and the multiple characters living sad lives, but it hardly does them the same justice Aronofsky did.The film seems laughably anti-gay at times.
Who'd have thought a drama about Brooklyners would feature action sequences and truck explosions?The director, Uli Edel has a skill level like that of a TV director, but he is far below the cut for real movies.
I recently read a review on this film that stated the lack of closure Edel offered for the film's central characters was evidence of his failure to make good film for the sake of being "artistic" and stood for this movie being nothing more than a "depressing piece of sludge".
Sometimes a strong warning can be the best recommendation for a difficult movie, and here's a perfect example: beginning with a vicious back alley beating of a wayward sailor and ending, 100 minutes later, with a marathon gang rape of drunken whore Jennifer Jason Leigh.
My reaction was not shock or horror, it was: "Here we go again." There is some semblance of a story in between the scenes of violence, but two thirds of the way through the film I had switched off completely, and couldn't wait for the end.If this is the best the film makers can do, they should find something else to do with their miserable lives, like making shoes or delivering mail..
Great Book, Good Movie.
There are a lot of really wonderful and talented actors in this film and they all do a good job but over all this movie pales in comparison to the book it is based on.
Good movie with great performances but it doesn't compare to the book..
'Last Exit to Brooklyn' is an icon of a film which I strongly recommend as one of the most special films one could ever hope to watch.It is a brilliant adaption of the controversial book of interconnected stories depicting low life in 1950's Brooklyn by Hubert Selby Jr., which was the subject of an obscenity prosecution at the Old Bailey in London in the 60's.
If we were to consider a movie as a long line of pretty images, then the creation known as "Last exit to Brooklyn" is by far more than that.
I'm sure that I was affected by seeing Requeim for a Dream before this film, as it annoyed me to what extent the story is manipulated and plotted to allow each of it's characters to have the most horrible and distressing endings possible.
No wonder Edel is a TV director; this movie looks and feels like a bad "made for TV" flick.
The thing that bothered me most about the film was the fact it had not one likable character.The acting was terrible, Stephen Lang is laughable in his part as a gooky eyed union leader who finds out he wants the same sex so much that he acts like a pathetic loser, trying desperately to be with a stuck up, snotty nosed, superficial, vampire looking gay man, all the while neglecting his child and wife.The film fails BIG time because I actually despised the douche bags on strike, and cared not one bit when they finally get work at the end of the film.Jennifer Jason Leigh is detestable as a sleaze bag of a hooker who robs naive Naval men while they are drunk.We have 'Uncle Pauly' from Rocky playing the same role here, a fat, foul mouthed, rude, unlikeable greasy buffoon.There's also a role played by a Baldwin brother who I cant stand.Need I go on?
I don't know much about film-making, but good movies have to tell some sort of a story...your characters have to start and complete their journey.
The whole book is about the prostitute who sure isn't described looking like the beautiful Jennifer J Leigh.
My true fascination is the social community, and this lured me into watching the film Last exit to Brooklyn.
This is the film version of Hubert Selby Jr.'s unrelentingly pessimistic 1964 novel "Last Exit to Brooklyn".
There are many great sub-plots, and performances; but, mainly, the film focuses on the character stories involving beautiful young prostitute Jennifer Jason Leigh (as Tral), and striking bisexual union leader Stephen Lang (as Harry Black).Writer Selby has said, "Sometimes, we have the absolute certainty that there's something inside us that's so hideous and monstrous that, if we ever search it out, we won't be able to stand looking at it.
Its shocking content must have put off a lot of viewers, at the time; yet, "Last Exit to Brooklyn" succeeds because its violence is not mindless.********* Last Exit to Brooklyn (1989) Uli Edel ~ Stephen Lang, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Peter Dobson, Cameron Johann |
tt4159182 | La dame dans l'auto avec des lunettes et un fusil | Dany, a secretary, accepts an offer from her boss, Michel Caravaille, to stay overnight at his house and complete a project. Dany formerly worked with Michel's wife, Anita, whom he says will be pleased to see her again. When she arrives, Dany realizes she has left her coat behind. Dany is disappointed when Michel and Anita step out for a dinner party together, and Dany fantasizes about having sex with Michel while he is out.
In the morning, Michel requests Dany accompany him and Anita to the airport to drive their expensive car back home. Afterward, left alone with the luxury car, Dany convinces herself nobody will miss it if she takes it for a joyride to see the sea. After treating herself to a shopping spree, a woman who owns a nearby café stops Dany and asks if she is feeling better. Dany insists that she did not visit any cafés in the town and leaves.
After stopping at a gas station, an unseen assailant physically assaults her, leaving her wrist injured. Several men come running when they hear her cries, but a mechanic is skeptical of her story, as he claims that she had already visited his station last night with an existing injury to her wrist. Annoyed that another person claims to recognize her, Dany says she has only just arrived and did not have any injury prior to entering the bathroom. The others are noncommittal about what they saw.
After being bandaged, Dany continues her journey to the coast, only to be stopped by a police offer who already knows her name. Concerned that she is driving with an injured wrist at night, he escorts her to a hotel. On a hunch, Dany asks the receptionist if she is already registered as a guest, which he confirms. When she points out that the handwriting is not hers, the receptionist says her injured wrist may have prevented her from signing. Confused and starting to doubt her own sanity, Dany exits the hotel and encounters a man who introduces himself as Georges.
Georges refuses to leave her car and asks for a ride. Dany initially refuses but relents when he points out she has obviously stolen the car. She explains her predicament to him, and he suggests the townspeople are playing a prank on her. When Georges learns Dany has two rooms reserved in her name, he ingratiates himself into the second room. As he flirts with her, Dany warms to him, and they have sex. As he sleeps, Dany finds Georges' passport, which has a different name on it. Though worried, she continues to allow Georges to travel with her.
Georges drives them to a scenic spot and leaves to get something from the car; when he does not return, Dany realizes he has stolen the car. Dany hitchhikes to a nearby town, where a trucker uses his CB radio to help her track down the car's current location. After stealing it back, Dany finds a rifle and corpse in the rear. Georges confronts her, and both accuse each other of murder. The two eventually resolve to dump the body and leave together, but Georges finds a note on the corpse that implicates Dany. As he grows hostile, she holds him at gunpoint, only to be knocked unconscious when he wrests the rifle from her.
When Dany wakes, she calls Anita for help, confessing to stealing her car. Anita directs her to a friend's house, where Anita says she will be safe. There, Dany finds her missing coat. Michel appears and explains that Anita had an affair. When the man blackmailed her, Anita killed him. Upset but unwilling to divorce his wife, Michel devised a plan in which she would dress as Dany and make herself conspicuous with a wounded wrist and luxury car. Michel would then murder Dany and arrange the scene to look as if it were a murder-suicide; however, Dany's joyride took her through the same route used by Anita and complicated the plan. Michel attempts to strangle her, but Dany shoots him. | murder | train | wikipedia | A slow-paced stylish dreamlike psychological dramathriller that kept my interest rather well.The story-telling is a bit vague at times and occasionally flat out incoherent but that suits the film and it's main character's state of mind who is a bit of a daydreamer, and is not always 'in touch with reality'.It's a bit of a mystery so the less you know regarding the plot the better you'll probably perceive the film.It felt a bit like something De Palma might have done in the 70's if he made a French movie.
I'm sure there are other French directors that would be better to be referencing but I haven't seen tremendously many French films I must admit.
Turns out it's actually a remake of another little known French film from 1970 by the same name.Just read the main actress Freya Mayor's bio and I was really surprised to find out that she is Scottish, she seemed to be speaking French rather well so thought she was a native French (although I of course is no expert on that).
Anyways she played the role well.It's a very visual film some critics claimed it was a 90 minute musicvideo, I don't agree with that but I guess I can see where they are coming from.
There is a lot of music in the movie and occasionally rather limited dialogue, but it works IMO and the soundtrack is great.
A worthwhile homage to a bygone type of film.
This is not a movie I would recommend to EVERYONE, but a certain kind of viewer would definitely enjoy it immensely, mostly those that are already familiar with the colorful, psychological (and very Freudian) mystery-thrillers popular in Continental Europe in the 1960's and early 70's--movies like "The Frightened Woman", "Girl on a Motorcycle", "La Piscine", "All the Colors of Darkness", "Footprints on the Moon" and even UK/American films like "Repulsion" or "Psycho" fit in here a little.
These films all are based on the old-fashioned idea of women as hysterical, mentally unstable creatures who are both easily manipulated by others and never too far from a complete psychotic break.
Most of these films are regarded somewhat ironically today by their fans (like myself), but, of course, the irony in this movie is completely intentional, just like the nostalgia factor.
The nostalgia meanwhile will no doubt appeal not just to fans of this long ago genre, but also to people who enjoyed other recent Euro films that pay homage to this era like the "OSS 117" films and the romantic French comedy "Populaire" (also a tale about tres sexy French secretary in pre-woman's lib days).I won't rehash the plot, but this is a fairly effective thriller that really keeps the audience guessing about whether the protagonist is hysterically crazy or is being manipulated by others.
Like the original films, it has a strong visual style, also very reminiscent of the recent French giallo homage "Amer", but not quite as over-the-top in its non-linearity and hallucinatory visuals.
The lead Freya Mavor is a very strong asset.
But the same can be said of all the femmes that originally played these beautiful head-case roles--Catherine Deneuve, Edwige Fenech, Barbara Bouchet--or the modern-day actress Deborah Francoise, who played the "shy", sexed-up secretary in "Populaire".The rest of the cast is mostly male and suitably either creepy and sinister or charming and sinister.
His younger wife, who was a former colleague of the protagonist before she married the boss, meanwhile is played by Staci Martin from "Nymphomaniac".
I doubt anyone will be too disappointed though because Mavor herself is certainly sexy enough for one movie and spends most of the film modeling various abbreviated fashions of the day or appearing in various stages of undress (and in one very hot sex scene).Of course, there are many people who are perfectly fine with the fact that they don't make films like this anymore (even in France).
Great aesthetics throughout, beautifully shot, amusingly playful dialogues -sometimes unreal, sometimes carrying shifting meanings or seemingly no meaning at all- this film is a dreamy, sensual ride with a gorgeous actress (and character) on which the camera often lingers...
The male counterpart can also be evocative though, but I like how the film just celebrates this beautiful woman, and with great music makes her attitude even more catchy.
Meanwhile, the character is ambiguous, sometimes naive, other times vindicative and strong, sometimes simply weak.
I struggle to find the underlying meaning of the film and though I have theories I am more than satisfied to let my appreciation of the movie be on a purely aesthetic level..
There is something quite Lana Del Reysque about this movie that is really intriguing and beautiful at the same time.The main female role is perfect.
Very French and suitable for this kind of mystery thriller.
As the girl is on her way to the sea ( that she has never seen) you get the feeling that she is not well mentally...that maybe she has a bipolar dysfunctional personality or something.
And the feeling of mystery - I would say - is the predominant in the movie.It is nicely shot.
8 from me.as it is some 2 hours and 45 minutes to midnight and new 2016, this may very well be the last movie I watched in 2015.
A boring simple film which tries to be artistic....
Freya Mavor is a Scottish (not French) actress and model.
She is thin and tall, easy one the eyes and definitely hot...Well, I really hope you like her ...a lot, because she is practically in ...every scene of this movie!
Walking, driving, observing, changing clothes...There is a plot but is simple and totally naive with today's standards.
The premise is really simple, just the narrative and the editing (lots of split screens and linear wipes) are confusing.Overall: It is a boring film witch tries to be artistic in terms of narrative, editing and cinematography.
The leading lady is practically in every scene so if you like her, you might be bored less.
Generally, I don't recommend this movie..
I love French films.
I was excited by the title of the this movie; I thought it screamed outrageousness and defiance.
The movie starts in an interesting way, but it is as if the writer is not able to handle the ideas or develop them in a compelling way.
The plot is predictable after about 25 minutes into the film.
The characters seem to devolve as the movie progresses instead of rises or becoming more fully realized.
The actors in the film are beautiful and their clothing is attractive.
However, the predictability of the film and the lack of character realization make it in some ways boring.
I guess some viewers might just like watching the actors for their physical appearance and the quaint French scenery.
So, I would not say that the film is awful, because it had potential but did not rise to it..
"La dame dans l'auto avec des lunettes et un fusil" ("The Lady in the Car with Glasses and a Gun") is a remake of a 1970 film of the same title starring Samantha Eggar and Oliver Reed, based on a novel by Sébastien Japrisot, who also wrote the earlier screenplay.
One minor change with significant implications is that in the 1970 film, Dany loses her way and by the time she realizes her mistake, continuing her journey doesn't seem like such a poor or drastic choice.
She is much more inclined to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune than to take arms against a sea of troubles, which makes the plot more plausible but doesn't make Dany a particularly sympathetic or interesting character.
Like the earlier film, the movie is set in 1970 or thereabout, when people used electric typewriters and carbon paper and revisions meant retyping the entire document from scratch.
If the character had instead checked into an isolated inn with a small staff, few guests and only one dining area, coincidental encounters and such might have seemed less unlikely.
Dany meets an egocentric self-serving rogue who is pretty much her opposite number in terms of personality, values and approaches to life.
The movie's best scenes involve their interactions.
This character could be a change agent who gives Dany the skills and outlook she needs to escape her predicament.
Eventually, Dany becomes caught up in the machinations of another character.
This character's grand scheme dramatically impacts Dany's situation.
The character tries to explain away some of the coincidences as some sort of preternatural force guiding Dany's choices.
Dany's early choices could have complicated the other character's grand scheme, forcing that character into various spur-of-the-moment changes.
(There is a bit of that in an encounter at a service station; however, how the other character came to be there in possession of a certain large object and managed to do things and leave unobserved by Dany or other witnesses seems implausible.) If Dany were to form an uneasy alliance with the rogue and develop new skills that allowed her to overcome increasingly difficult challenges presented by the other character's frantic efforts to adjust the grand scheme, it could have been a much better film.
Films like "The Game" and "U-Turn" presented unsympathetic characters attempting to overcome challenges that intensified despite their best efforts.
Dany spends much of the film doubting herself and doubting her sanity.
Instead another character explains everything to her.
At the end of the film, it's not clear if she has grown as a character and become better able to contend life's challenges.
The film leaves many questions unanswered.
The film stars Freya Mavor, which is about the best thing one can say about it.
The USA version,The Lady in the Car with Glasses and a Gun, despite of stars (Litvak Dir. with Samanthe Eggar and Oliver Reed) lacks of the the subtle perversion and 68 french touch of the Novel.
Joann Sfar entered in original text with extraordinary delicacy, and it is able to return to us all the flavors of the novel(including the hidden social dimension), amplifying everything with the music and and a stunning, innocent, sensual Freya Mavor.You must to see it, and enjoy it as a unmistakable song,.
For a long while I thought I was watching a live-action version of "Alice In Wonderland", or perhaps even a time-loop movie; when the elaborate plot finally comes together, it is in equal parts surprising and far-fetched.
I would suggest this movie to people who like slow and deeps flowing thrillers.
Don't get me wrong , i like good foreign film , especially when it is shot in an extraordinary way as this one, really , the directors job is nice and all the flashbacks are making the film very special but there is one huge problem to this film and its the fact that its very very boring.It starts nice and you can see that its full of potential but as it moves deeper into the script its just becoming less and less appealing to a person.I've always liked french actors for their high skills of acting ,this title is no exception , you will enjoy not only the acting of the actresses mark my words .Still , i don't think that this one will be interesting for a high number of public and to be honest i don't recommend it..
Coherence and sense make a lot of watching any film.
Without it, whether from a narrative or thematic standpoint, or both, there's nothing being communicated and thus barely anything worth watching.That's, for the most part, the case here with this film, which is a remake of the 1970's French film of the same name — appropriating that title and narrative, and trying to explore a deeper 'murk' with the operative of sexual encounters driving the confusion that is suppose to neatly unravel the twists in the plot.
However, the sex (why is it always sex?) only stalls the inevitable, underwhelming reveal, spoilers be damned.At very least — emphasis on the "very" — the performances are still somewhat compelling; Freya Mavor is almost effortlessly charming and instantly watch-able, and I definitely get a feel for her character, almost solely off her performance alone.
Also in supporting roles, Benjamin Biolay plays like he's auditioning for David Fincher's next noir thriller and Stacy Martin shows that she can transplant the natural charisma of Young Joe (Nymphomaniac, 2013).
A preposterous plot with a harebrained explanation at the end, where one of the main characters is killed.
Far better to have killed the script writer.
It's something about a secretary being framed for a murder committed by the wife of her boss, and it's kind of a movie about the end of innocence..
Well, to enjoy even the original story, you must either remember or imagine the times without cell phones and developed forensics investigation -- this seems to be a problem for some reviewers here.
If you can, the book has everything lacking in the movie: a beautifully crafted chain of events with the murderer's accomplice constantly modifying his plains to frame and kill Danny and the seemingly unlikely chances that let her escape the net again and again.
But these "random" events are deeply connected with her character that in the book undergoes an exemplary character development, first drifting with the events, then the self-doubt, and in the end taking the things in her own hand before reaching Marseille.
("The phoenix being born again" -- this is really dismal that this memorable point of the book is not shown in the movie at all, it's not even attempted.) Her inner strength is nowhere to be seen in the movie, although they succeeded in showing her meekness as well as her longing for freedom and luxury.The actors seem to have done everything they could within the limits of the script, but Benjamin Biolay is miscast as Monsieur Caravaille: he should be a heavily built strong man, menacing already in his appearance, but energetic and silken at the beginning, not annoyed and lethargic all the time.
Freya Mavor is rather good but her skin is not tanned, which is very important in the book -- this is why everybody she encounters on the road instantly believes she is from the upper class.
And the role of "Georges" is kind of quickly thrown together here, while vivid and remarkable in the book, so Elio Germano did not have a real chance either -- but succeeds to show at least a little from both his easy-going and menacing sides.The air of the sixties is well represented sometimes, in the indoor settings, her clothing and certainly in the mighty Thunderbird itself -- but come on, all the roads are empty and besides the actors there is not a living person in sight at Paris-Orly.
The Lady in the Car with Glasses and a Gun..
First, let me warn you, it's French, so if you don't read good...
It tells the tale of gorgeous redhead secretary Dany, who's tasked with finishing up some work for her boss, and then roped into staying with him in and his wife, to drive their car back home for them, lucky her!!
As she's driving through a small town, she decides to have a little fun, as she tells the locals, shes a corporate exec in advertising, and thats all cool until she's attacked in the restroom, and after that, reality gets a little weird, well, those same locals start talking to her about the stuff that she went through the previous night, with her car's break lights out, and hurting her wrist...
And as she just tries to get back home, she also engages in some naughtiness with a dude, that just seems to be waiting for her, and her alter ego, kinda just goes with it, and well gets screwed in a few different ways by this dude, but finding out the truth is more screwed up than anything that's happened.
Good movie, thriller, with a touch of artsy fartsy thrown in.
BTW, even a low rated foreign movie is better than anything produced in Hollywood!.
The main problem with The Lady in the Car with Glasses and a Gun is that the movie is too slow for its own good.
I am used to European movies with very slow pace; but this one has an editing issue.
Every scene is too long and there are too many unnecessary repetitions or flashback used to suggest the madness of the main character.
A timid secretary Danny is asked by her boss to finish a long and urgent job from his house; with the excuse to see again his wife (and old acquaintance).
The next day she is asked to drop her boss, wife and kid on the airport and return the car to his home.
Danny decides to go to see the sea; and strange things start happening.
The movie is somewhat surreal; but we spend most of the running time in Danny's head and we are never sure what happened or is happening until the very rush end..
Dany (Freya Mavor) is a mousy secretary, "thin with flaming red hair" who gets to work some overtime at her boss' house doing some typing (Pre-computer era).
He (Benjamin Biolay) leaves with his wife (Stacy Martin) and Dany gets to drive his Thunderbird and opts to take the long way home.
On her journey she encounters people who claim she was there the night or day before.
This is very confusing for a girl that talks to herself, bending the audience to a MPD explanation.The confusion that Dany felt, I felt too which appears to be the intent of the director.
There were times Dany had a broken glass lens and other times not.
The film was arty and aloof.
I did not enjoy this confusing thriller like the people who have read the book or seen the older version.French with English subtitles.Guide: F-bomb, sex, nudity (Freya Mavor, Stacy Martin) |
tt0469287 | Call of Duty 2 | === Soviet campaign ===
The player controls Private Vasili Koslov of the 13th Guards Rifle Division, initially involved in the defense of Moscow from the advancing German forces. The next level involves the destruction of a German stronghold in Stalingrad during September 1942. The next objective involves battling for strongholds throughout Stalingrad throughout December 1942, including re-connecting cut telephone wires and re-capturing the rail-yard and train-station. The final mission takes place during the final Soviet offensive in Stalingrad in January 1943, which involves the re-capture and defense of city blocks and Stalingrad city hall.
=== British campaign ===
The player controls a British soldier, Sergeant John Davis of the 7th Armoured Division in North Africa, led by Captain Price. The first level has the player taking part in a sneak attack on German Afrika Korps troops, ending with the destruction of a German supply station. The next level has the player defending a town from overwhelming numbers of Germans sending counter attacks from North, West, South and East; finally achieving victory by destroying much of the German tank force using artillery. This is followed by the Second Battle of El Alamein, during which the player has to fight through several trenches, machine gun nests, 88 millimeter guns and finally taking the German field headquarters. The assault on El Dabaa to intercept the remaining Germans in Egypt and destroy several 88 millimeter guns soon follows, ending the first British campaign. An addendum to the second set of missions has the player taking on the role of a British tank commander, David Welsh, while engaging enemies in Libya. The first mission of the third campaign in Toujane, Tunisia, has the player immediately under fire, holding a house until they break out and rendezvous with the second squad. They then retake Toujane with reinforcements the next day all before assaulting Matmata. The final British campaign takes place during the Battle for Caen as part of Operation Overlord.
=== American campaign ===
As Corporal Bill Taylor of the 2nd Ranger Battalion, the player starts off by playing a part in D-Day, at the assault of Pointe du Hoc, to destroy a German artillery battery, and hold it against a massive German counter-offensive in the following mission. Soon after, the player captures a nearby town and serves as a sniper against mortar crews until reinforcements arrive. The second objective is focused on Hill 400, involving the capture of Bergstein, a disastrous charge at Hill 400's bunkers and the defense against the German counterattack, with the player again performing sniper work against German mortar teams, destroying enemy armor, and generally holding the hill against the counter-offensive, all the while burdened by artillery and overwhelming numbers of German soldiers. The final mission is set amongst the Americans in the Rhine River crossing into Germany. It begins as one of the few missions with the player immediately under fire, providing cover fire against the Germans until reaching the river banks and then fighting through most of the town. The final fight has the player defeat two German Tiger I's.
=== Ending ===
The end credits depict the dramatic rescue of Captain Price from the Germans by a group of American soldiers. After the credits end, the words "No cows were harmed in the making of this game" appear, as in the original Call of Duty. This is a reference to the dead cattle visible in the Normandy missions. | violence | train | wikipedia | first great game for the 360 (deffinately not the last).
This was one of the first xbox 360 games that I bought, and along with Project Gotham Racing 3 and the recently released DOA 4 are proof that the 360 is indeed a next-generation system.
The game look pretty good on a regular TV set, but on a HD capable TV with surround sound the superb game truly comes to life with amazing graphics and intense sounds.
The bullets whizzing by your head, the fights your fellow soldiers are engaging in, and all the other sounds truly immerse you deeply in the game.
Of course any true hardcore game wouldn't try the game in anything less than the Veteran setting, which is particularly unforgiving (especially the later American levels) All in all this is a simply great game and is one of the few MUST OWN ones if you managed to get your hands on a 360.
It rivals any but the most maxed out computers currently out.My Grade: A(note: this review was written at the time of the game's release, but since the page on it didn't exist on IMDb then, I'm posting it now).
The best WWII video game ever.
This game is excellent!
The graphics are incredible.
When people are talking, you can actually see their lips moving along with the words!
That is something that video games barely ever do.
I love this game.
It is one of my top ten favorite of all time.
It is just so good.
It is a very long game with very long levels with lots of action in every level.
It is very realistic.
Your team mates know exactly where the bullets that are being fired are coming from and know not to go there and they can throw grenades and they can actually talk to you and stuff like that.
This game is actually even dramatic in parts but in a good way because some games try to be dramatic.
My first 360 game....
When I got my 360 for Xmas, this was the only game I received.
I'd pleaded with my Mum not to get it mixed up with 'Big Red One' for the original Xbox, and I was overjoyed when she hadn't.Pros:Graphics-The detail, lighting, and effects on this game are amazing!
the dust and smoke from the explosions, the flashing red screen when you've been shot, the grainy sand of the desert towns, the rock faces and water effects at Normandy....all of these amount to make one of the greatest looking games I've ever seen.Sound effects- These were excellent too.
The crashes of the explosions, the piercing gunshots as you move round the corner, the spit of the bullets as they crash into the scenery behind you all add to a great feeling of authenticity.
A.I-the Artificial intelligence has improved this time round.
Your squad-mates know when and where to provide covering fire, alert you to hidden enemies or tanks....a considerable yet not significant upgrade.
Cons:Repetition- Again, its just shooting and more shooting, punctuated occasionally by planting sticky bombs on tanks and distracting enemies with smoke grenades.
Setting- I know this is Call of Duty and it's set during WWII, but the 1940s setting is beginning to drag on a bit.
Perhaps you could play as one of the Axis officers, or maybe they could make a Call of Duty set in the future....who knows?Overall: A vast improvement on Finest Hour, so in my opinion, this gets 9/10..
Not bad.
Well, I was always interested to play Call of Duty sequels, first of all, I would like to say that "United Offensive" was awesome, but that's not what we are talking about here.
There's not much to say about this game, except that it was good in it's own way.
I think that first Call of Duty had excellent story and game play, and to mention that high voltage action...
this game has weaker story, but of course, better graphics, nothing surprising there.
Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of good action scenes, pretty well done and there are some thrilling moments in the game, but I gotta be honest I found the first COD better.
Again, you play with Americans, British and Russians, I loved all of them, especially Russians, I don't know why, maybe they have more intense and more thrilling missions.
But, don't listen to me, try it for yourself, maybe you'll like it more.
And you're definitely will not be disappointed.
Well, of course, if you enjoy plays World War 2 first person shooters..
Just another WW2 Shooter...
I think not!.
All I can say is wow!
WW2 games were really starting to get old at this point.
Do you really wanna storm Normandy Beach on D-Day once again?
Hell Yeah!
The graphics are incredible the lighting effects make for an amazing experience, but it is still a FPS, (First Person Shooter) like any it becomes somewhat repetitive wishing levels were over much before they are.
The game makes up for this in it's difficulty the notorious veteran mode had me stumped on the game for almost 2 and 1/2 months.
Not that you'll want to replay the game anytime after you beat it for the first time.
It needs a good 6th month break before picking it up again.
The partial reason this game seems so great is that it takes a well know genre and steps it up a few notches.
It is an improvement for its' predecessor and the genre in general.
Simple but great fun!.
This was my first 360 game and it did not disappoint.
Although it hasn't used the 360's full arsenal of high tech abilities it has everything you need for an extremely enjoyable FPS (first person shooter) This hasn't incorporated any special button trickery and is pretty straight forwards from unwrapping to fragging, so its good to have a friend over for a game as well!
The details in the graphics are amazing too, and i found my self in awe at some of the battles unfolding before my eyes, and no cheesy cut scenes, your in there, watching everything as it happens, trying to get to cover and trying to get out of harms way.Thats another thing this game has, it feels real, i know you can get shot a few times and not die, but i don't mean realistic, i mean it feels like your in the battle.When a tank rolls in you want to get out the way, you fear that turret of death, you slowly come to associate with the band of brothers around you and come to hate the Nazi's.
When you see a MG32 nest slaughtering your mates, you feel for them and get out of whatever pit your hiding in and start shooting.
This is the only game I've found myself feeling slightly scared at how worked up it makes me feel.The multi player game is great fun, although no amount of skill can save you from the sheer luck that seems to befall you, which comes into play in single player as well.
there's just a few frantic moments in this game which really annoy me, silly little things like your gun moving slower than the guy running away from your sights, like about to be diving into cover when discovering you have been stuck on some random object which gets you killed.
Also the amount of times that the enemy knows your there gets a bit disheartening, especially when your on hard mode and have five angry Huns armed with large calibre rifles knowing your every move.Other than these small nuisances, this is a fantastic game, with the most realistic smoke effects I've ever seen.
And you can have an amazing array of tactics and freedom through it as well, either smoking and running in, or flanking your enemies, your allies seem to respond instinctively to what your trying to achieve and help you with it, whilst your enemies too, slowly adapt to your strategies.Its also great in the fact that your not a super human soldier, you can die in as many shots as your enemies can, and are as likely to get hit by a wry grenade as any other grunt, but have the ability to regenerate.
This is great as it means you don't feel like some sort of super soldier, but one of the lads getting done over by your enemies, yet you seem to have a real impact on battles, despite being so mortal.There are also some great scenes, such as a level where you are falling back, fighting your enemy until compromised then falling back to the next position until your at your last stand.
Then another scene where you are to hold out on top of a hill you will end up loathing, and loving.
All of these are amazingly well done, with a running commentary from several of your friends voices that become familiar and comforting throughout the game.This game might not have the best graphics, or the most original storyline or situations, you might even be quite limited in your range of movements on the battlefield, but this game has something others don't.
Its literally like being in a film, but having an active role, although it is let down by some unsavoury moments involving bunkers and inescapable grenades that make you want to scream, its a riot of fun too, whether your looking for a solid FPS to frag on or something to mess about on with your mates, this will have it.It even has some replay value, just for certain battles though..
The first and only COD I have ever played..
First off, I know I am only asking to have people dislike my review as I am going against the grain and when one tends to do that to a video game none of your points are taken.
They see you do not rank their favorite game until the sequel comes out low, and this for reasons tear a person up inside.
I like Final Fantasy games, but I do not care if others do to the point of dismissing that person's opinion all together.
Still, I know what I am in for, but I shall press on and say, this game just did not make for an enjoyable game playing experience.
It looked stunning, and I did enjoy it a bit at first, but it was just a game I could not get into and none of the commercials of the later games makes me want to play them.This was one of the first games I played on the Xbox 360, which is why I initially enjoyed it.
It showcased the new systems power quite well as the graphics were stunning.
Very crisp to say the least.
The game is your standard first person shooter, however, and this is a genre I am not a big fan of.
I see why others like it, I just am not crazy about it...just as others out there hate RPGs and such.
You run around with only your gun present and you are constantly being hit which in real life would be a one way ticket to a hospital or grave, but your guy can withstand quite the onslaught of bullets and shrapnel and can be completely healed by a first aid kit.
If only thing progressed like this in the real world, wars would last infinitely as long as conveniently placed first aid kits and ammo was scattered throughout the world.
The game is divided into different areas and you take on the role of a different soldier in each level or front of a World War II battle.
You have a different goal each time, and this is probably another reason why I did not care for the game as much as others.
I prefer to have a more interconnecting story.
Here you must battle in one place and another as a different person each time.
I do not know why this did not work for me, I am a bit insane if that helps explain.All through the game you are killing others in this very detailed environment.
It is a bit strange that this Call of Duty game is rated T rather than M.
I am also not a big fan of first person shooters where you kill other soldiers.
I prefer an alien or monster force to oppose, which is why I sort of liked the first Halo game and Resistance.
Very strange here as I like horror films and such, but for some reason I am just not a big fan of killing people in war situations in games.
Another thing I cannot explain.So, it was not an entirely bad game, it had some good points and I certainly see why so many enjoy this game and the series even.
This just is not for me is all and I have to rank it according to my enjoyment.
It was fun for awhile, but it did not last and thus why I never have and most likely never will play any of the newer games.
That and they rely more on online play which I am also not a big fan of.
I prefer doing games solo and the game providing me entertainment with its story and missions, not ones I and a group of strangers has to create.
I prefer the old school classic games these days to most of the newer stuff being produced, once again just an opinion and a sign I am getting old...now I am sad, but this game is not.
If you like FPS games then give it a try, if not steer clear..
Ace Game.
This game is brilliant not just for the single player mission, but also for the online play.
an easy 10/10.
some of the war missions are very realistic.
The single player mission starts off with a tutorial that then gives the player a baptism of fire when a German attack is undergone on the Russian city.
After fighting through the streets, (most of which are heavily defended with German turret guns and panzer tanks.
The Russian campaign ends with an all out assault by German soldiers on a Russian held building.
On repelling the soldiers, the British campaign is able to be started.
The British campaign is with the Desert Rats against the Afrika Corps.
The mission is in trenches and bunkers.
The climax of the first British mission is a rush by Germans and your character has to aim British artillery using binoculars and flares.
The American mission is available after this..
Whats Up with That.
Its a great game.
Its a great game.
And check out the Graphic's.
The only thing that I find weird is, that the tanks in call of duty 1 look more real then in two.
Despite that this is the greatest game of all time.
I think it will be remembered for decades.
If not forever.
I hope they will soon make another part to these games.
Keep rocking in the game world.
Or the video game whatever.
Other great games are Gun, KinkKong, Red Dead Revolver, God of war, Medal of honor,Well I thing you get the point.
So go out and rent, or buy whatever you wish to do it.
Just get home.
Ps2, Xbox, Xbox 360, PSP.
don't WAIT.
I'm A GEEK AM I not don't lie be truthful----------------------------------------------------- |
tt0051492 | Count Five and Die | In 1944 London, Major Julien Howard (Nigel Patrick), a British MI6 intelligence agent, meets Captain Bill Ranson (Jeffrey Hunter), his new American security officer. As Howard was previously picked up by German counter-intelligence, Ranson soon realizes that their assignment is to feed misinformation to the Germans about the location of the D-Day landings; they are to make it look like it will be in Holland. Howard tells him the rest of the unit must not know the truth.
One night, while on a date with Rolande Hertog, the unit's radio operator, Ranson becomes concerned and returns to the offices. He is shot at and wounds an intruder. He leaves the unconscious man with Hertog to search further, but the man's accomplice gets away. Hertog kills the captive, claiming he tried to grab her gun. A romance quickly develops between Ranson and Hertog the same night. When Ranson gets back to the office, Howard criticises his actions; MI5 had tipped him off that the Germans were planning to search his offices, so he made it easy for them to get the planted misinformation, until Ranson intervened. Further, he suspects that Hertog is a German agent; Jan Guldt, their liaison with the Dutch underground, had been sent back to Holland, only to be captured immediately. Ranson does not believe it.
Howard sends Piet van Wijt to Holland, supposedly to evaluate the effects of a bombing raid, but actually to test Hertog. They do not hear from van Wijt again. Meanwhile, Howard receives news that the Germans are redeploying troops into the country.
Howard orders Ranson to keep seeing Hertog so she will not become suspicious, but Ranson is an unconvincing actor. Now suspicious, Hertog goes to her sector commander, Hauptman Hans Faber, who is posing as a dentist. Faber is not fully convinced by her claim that it is all a fraud, but needs to make sure. He arranges for the young son of Dr. Mulder, Howard's psychological warfare expert, to be kidnapped. Mulder is forced to reveal the supposed invasion location to save his boy's life. However, he later confides to Hertog that he does not believe Holland is the place. The two men who were sent behind enemy lines were not given poisonous cyanide capsules to avoid capture. If they had, they could have taken them; then they could "count five and die." She tells Muller to go home, that she will alert Ranson. Instead, she tries once more to persuade Faber to change his mind, but without success.
Howard and Ranson speak to Muller and realize the situation. They manage to capture Faber and free Muller's boy, though Martins gets away and Faber takes his poison pill. Meanwhile, Ranson tracks down Hertog, but not before she sends a radio message unmasking the deception. Ranson takes a big gamble, telling her that she did exactly what they wanted her to do and that it was all a "double bluff", then lets her grab a pistol and forces her to shoot him by advancing on her. She transmits a second message, then leaves, believing Ranson to be dead. He is still alive, however. Martins then shoots Hertog.
The epilogue states that on D-Day, "ten German divisions were not in the line. They were north in Holland, waiting for an invasion that never came." | tragedy, murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0092112 | Trick or Treat | The film opens with the song "Trick or Treat for Halloween", the lyrics of which tell the film's moral – one must be generous on Halloween or face trouble.
One Halloween night, Witch Hazel observes Huey, Duey, and Louie trick-or-treating. When the trio go to their uncle Donald Duck's house, Donald decides to prank the boys (giving them a "trick" instead of a treat). So instead of giving them candy, he intentionally puts firecrackers in their bags, then pulls a string that dumps a bucket of water on their heads. After Donald bids farewell to the boys, the discouraged nephews go and sit on the curb.
But Hazel, who was watching the drama unfold, approaches the boys and tries to encourage them. When she discovers that they believe in witches, she offers to help them get their treats from Donald after all. At first, she tries to convince Donald herself, but he skeptically retorts, pulls and releases her stretchy nose, and pranks her as well with a bucket of water, not believing she is a real witch. Realizing that the job may be harder than she anticipated, Hazel tells the boys she will use her magic for this situation. In another location, a scene paying homage to Shakespeare's Macbeth shows Hazel and the nephews concocting a magic potion, adding somewhat more whimsical ingredients than the Three Witches in Macbeth. After testing the potion, Hazel fills an insecticide duster (similar in appearance to a Flit gun) with the potion and returns to Donald's house with the nephews.
Upon arriving back at Donald's house, Hazel sprays the potion at an assortment of objects, causing them to become animated or anthropomorphic. Donald, stunned at the magic being displayed before him, immediately gives in and agrees to treat his nephews, but when Hazel refers to him as a pushover, he changes his mind. Donald then locks his pantry and swallows the key. Hazel then uses the potion on Donald's feet to give her control of their maneuverability, and commands them to kick out the key, causing Donald to perform a crazy dance. But when the key is kicked out, Donald throws it under the pantry door. Hazel sprays Donald's feet again and orders them to smash the door down with Donald. This is initially unsuccessful, so Hazel commands him to take a longer start ('bout a MILE OR TWO!), and he literally runs that far before he breaks down the pantry door and is left unconscious on the floor in defeat.
In the end, Huey, Duey, and Louie collect their treats and Hazel departs. A final shot shows an enchanted Jack-o'-lantern suddenly pop onto the screen saying "Boo!" to the viewers before smiling. | good versus evil, revenge, cult, violence | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0100594 | The Sheltering Sky | Three Americans from New York arrive in Tangier in 1947. Port Moresby (John Malkovich) and his wife Kit (Debra Winger) are accompanied by their friend George Tunner (Campbell Scott) on a trip that will take them deep into the Sahara Desert. Tunner observes "We're probably the first tourists they've had since the war," to which Kit replies "We're not tourists. We're travelers." While Tunner plans to return home in a few weeks, Port and Kit plan on staying for a year or two.
While awaiting transport to a hotel, the group meets a pair of English travelers, the Lyles – Mrs. Lyle (Jill Bennett), a travel writer, and her adult son Eric (Timothy Spall). Eric's mother keeps him constantly short of money so he is always asking for credit and loans. After arriving at the hotel, they sit in the hotel bar and are observed by an older man sitting alone at a table. This character is played by the story's author, Paul Bowles. The man narrates to himself an extract from the novel on which the film is based,
“Because neither Kit nor Port had ever lived a life of any kind of regularity, they had both made the fatal error of coming hazily to regard time as non-existent. One year was like another year. Eventually everything would happen.”
Port invites Kit to accompany him for a walk in the city. After she refuses and rebuffs his romantic advances, Port angrily leaves. During his walk he meets a pimp who introduces him to a prostitute (Amina Annabi) in a berber encampment. The two have sex and the prostitute attempts to steal his wallet. Port quickly leaves and is chased by a mob from the camp.
The next morning Tunner arrives at Kit's room to take her shopping. Not wanting Tunner to know that Port stayed out all night, she removes the covers from his bed to make it appear that he slept there. As Kit and Tunner are preparing to leave, a disheveled Port arrives. Seeing his bed, he assumes that Tunner spent the night with Kit.
Port and Kit once again encounter the Lyles and are offered a ride in their car to Boussif, their next destination, but are informed that there is no room for Tunner. Port accepts the ride with the Lyles while Kit takes the train with Tunner. Tunner and Kit drink champagne throughout the journey and awake the next morning, naked, in Kit's hotel room after a drunken tryst.
Suspicious of Kit's relationship with Tunner, Port arranges for Eric Lyle to provide Tunner with transportation to Messad on the pretext that Port and Kit will meet him later. Eric agrees but also steals Port's passport.
In Bounoura, Port discovers his passport missing. Even after being informed by local officials that the passport can be recovered in Messad, Port decides to proceed by bus to El Ga'a with Kit in order to avoid a meeting with Tunner. On the journey Port contracts typhoid. The hotel won't accommodate them from fear of infection. Kit transports the delirious Port to a French foreign legion post, but it has no doctor and she nurses him herself, becoming increasingly desperate at his condition. He eventually dies alongside her in their room. Kit leaves the body and sets off alone into the Sahara.
Kit wanders in the desert until she begs a ride from a camel caravan led by Belqassim (Eric Vu-An). After the caravan arrives at Belqassim's home far to the south in Niger, he disguises Kit as a boy and locks her in a guest house. Although held captive, Kit welcomes Belqassim's advances and the two begin an affair. Kit is soon discovered by Belqassim's wives, who order her to leave. Kit finds herself disoriented in the local marketplace and is set upon by a mob. She is eventually found, mute and almost insane, in a Catholic mission hospital by staff of the American embassy, who have been prompted to search for her by Tunner, who has found Port's grave. She is transported back to Tangier, where she began her journey, and is told that Tunner is waiting for her there. After arriving at the hotel, Kit flees into the city before Tunner can meet her.
The film ends with a quote from the novel spoken by Paul Bowles, the narrator, still sitting in the hotel bar,
“Death is always on the way, but the fact that you don't know when it will arrive seems to take away from the finiteness of life. It's that terrible precision that we hate so much. But because we don't know when we will die, we get to think of life as an inexhaustible well. Yet everything happens a certain number of times, and a very small number, really. How many more times will you remember a certain afternoon of your childhood, some afternoon that's so deeply a part of your being that you can't even conceive of your life without it? Perhaps four or five times more. Perhaps not even. How many more times will you watch the full moon rise? Perhaps twenty. And yet it all seems limitless.” | romantic, autobiographical, philosophical | train | wikipedia | So both works of art (since the book is most definitely a work of great art) tend to blend together in my mind.I started by watching the movie though, without any previous knowledge on the novel, nor on Paul Bowles.
The confusing weird relationships, often only partially depicted in the film heighten the sense of being adrift in life.Together with some of the best ever desert cinematography rivaling even Lawrence of Arabia, North African music, noises, characters and colors this film is a rich feast for the senses indeed.
Unlike so many films "created" today with lacklustre characters and inept and one dimensional acting - the sheltering sky is moving and funny and ingenious because it offers true artistic and moving portrayals of the ending of a long term relationship amidst the kind of locations the most adventurous backpacker might not know about.
Great films occur from time to time....but the Sheltering sky is neither of these two things....it is the most honest and beautiful and emotionally mature work of cinema that I have ever seen.
Their journey hides the gradual breakdown of their relationship - a fact that is only highlighted when Port visits an Arab prostitute and Kit sleeps with Tunner after a drunken train journey together.Before you sit down to see this film, you really need to have asked yourself what sort of mood you are in.
This is the main problem with the film - not so much the slow pace but the fact that it could be running but it wouldn't matter because it would still feel like it isn't actually going anywhere.
I enjoyed watching it as it forced me to think instead of just vegging out (like so many other films do) but at the end of the day I was left wondering if this was artistic posturing on a big scale or if it really did have an emotional core that I just couldn't reach..
Bernardo Bertolucci co-wrote and directed the film of the classic post WW2 novel by author, Paul Bowles, who also narrates.
Debra Winger is her most attractive as his young wife,'Kit.' They are accompanied by a randy travel companion, 'Tunner.'The "casbah" atmosphere of the Moslem city's narrow stone streets, flooded with Arab denizens, camels, livestock invites the viewer in.As soon as the odious "Mrs. Lyle" and her sweaty, overweight son came into the fly-ridden hotel lobby in the hot sultry desert nowhere, I knew I'd love to hate them.
We literally make the story ours; so when we watch the film version, we tend to judge the director's interpretation seriously.Bertolucci's vision was entertaining and realized well, especially the lead character: the vast Sahara Desert, and exotic ambiance; the cinematography was beautiful.
American couple Port (John Malkovich) and Kit Moresby (Debra Winger) see themselves as travelers looking for new experiences.
Not having read the book, it's too difficult to me to comment on its truthfulness, however we know that Paul Bowles was cooperating with the screenwriters, it is he who is narrating the film and even appears in a cameo role.
John Malkovich and Debra Winger are not the usual Hollywood-like physically attractive love couple 'a la Barbie and Ken' nevertheless it was beautifully exciting to watch them perpetually connect and disconnect mentally and physically.
I was wondering if he wrote this scenario as a sort of a metaphor reflecting on his own life and dismantling relationship.From the famous and truly extraordinary Italian cinematographer, Vittorio Storaro's view, this is a declaration of love to Morocco and its impressive and breathtaking landscapes, culture and nomadic life; a magnificent visual feast and one may even smell all the spices, swatting flies, feel the grit of sand between the teeth, start sweating and get one's blood boiling, not only due to the local heat but also to the carnal sultriness, whilst watching the screen!
The title alone should tell you you're in for rich cinematography and in my opinion this is absolutely necessary to the telling of the story, but the scenery does tend to overwhelm the story at times.Malkovich and Winger both give credible performances, but they seemed like strangers to me compared to the characters in the novel.
The Sheltering sky was considered a heavy book, heavy as importance, for the so called beat generation...so in my opinion, taking the story of Paul Bowles and adapting it to a movie was a real challenge...despite the simple storyline that everyone notices, the book/movie has deeper meanings...i watched the movie a lot of times and having read the book made me see better the B.Bertolucci hand...trying to create the place for actually an internal bleeding, a deep hurtful feeling, both Bowles and Bertolucci have to use the symbolism of the desert's vanity...and the inner searches go very well with the message of the traveler who refuses to be just a tourist, setting a line to separate the meaningful from the meaningless...READ the book and then be impressed by the adds that Bertolucci makes, just to give you a very personal approach...
Debra Winger and John Malkovich are fine as Kit and Port -- spoiled, bored, EMPTY Americans 'travelling' (NOT tourists) in Morocco just after WWII.
Bowles was consulted every step of the way -- a sign of the respect held for the author and his work by the director -- and he even appears in the film and supplies narration.A lot of people may find this type of film to be a bore, but you have to be consistent by watching it.
If you want to fully understand the movie, you have to read the book, for the film itself, omits a great deal of material that would have the made the film longer than that of "Gone with the Wind".I am amazed that a film of this scope, made by a director of Bertolucci's stature, with two of the most critically acclaimed actors of our time, has not appeared on DVD.
Debra Winger is superb as 'Kit' and John Malkovich portrays 'Port' with sensitivity, even though he is a man given to self-indulgence and is not above cheating on his wife.
For me, this movie made me think a lot about what am I doing with my life sometimes, even though the director probably didn't plan this kind of effect on the viewers:) Too many words saying nothing just take the movie and watch it in low dim light, on a BIG screen, and with loud sound, so you can recreate a beautiful world!.
The two artists: Port (John Malkovich) and Kit Moresby (Debra Winger), feel free and at ease in this world, under the sky that protects them from the unknown space beyond.
"The Sheltering Sky" tells of a married couple (Malkovich/Winger) whose post-WWII travels in Northern Africa become an odyssey of self discovery.
A good watch for those into North African cultures, many will find this film's story weak, ambiguous, and unsatisfying with its message buried somewhere in the sands of the Sahara.
No. One of the most visually beautiful movies I have ever seen, the Sheltering Sky really captures the awe and the occasional fear of travelling light in a completely alien land.Add to that a closing voice over that really said something new about life and you have a minor classic.
Bernardo Bertolucci's cinematographic career is little bit similar to that of Wim Wenders.Both these European directors have made some of the most outstanding world cinema films in their own countries using their native languages:Italian and German.However there are some bad spots on their illustrious careers.They both failed miserably whenever they have decided to make films in English.If given an opportunity to disown a film is provided,without any hesitation most of Bernardo Bertolucci's admirers would surely like to abandon "The Sheltering Sky".This film suffers from too many western prejudices against powerless people of various African ethnic groups.As far as this film's plot is concerned,it is just too superfluous.Apart from Malkovich and Winger none of the players have given any proof of their acting talent.The only reason plausible reason for which any sensible film admirer must watch this film is the film's photography.The next best possible reason for watching this film might be the promotion of tourism in Africa.The sheltering sky can be used as a tourist video for those unfortunate souls who have never been to some of the best spots in Africa..
This film is artistically beautiful, but, not for those who love a good story.
Watching the film, yes, it was easy to sit there and convincingly say, this is barely B-grade, self-indulgent with shifts in plot and story which move from the despairing to the bizarre, and an ending with the author narrating himself his philosophical underpinning to the whole journey, nay, the fly blown, turgid fan whirring meaning of life.
As photographed by the great Vittorio Storaro, Bernardo Bertolucci's "The Sheltering Sky" is one of the most visually beautiful films ever made, almost every frame a painting in light.
Of course, for a great deal of the time it is impossible to tell if they really love each other or if they simply need each other or if they need each other at all and again, thanks to Storaro, it has all the beauty of a travelogue even if the vast alien landscapes and the appalling conditions in which they find themselves are more likely to put you off visiting North Africa.
Director Bernardo Bertolucci includes several sequences of Port Moresby (John Malkovich), his wife Kit (Debra Winger), and their acquaintance George Tunner (Campbell Scott) packing and unpacking their massive trunks as they move from place to place; their cumbersome lifestyles contrasting starkly with those of the local inhabitants.
The film begins with Port insisting that he and his wife, unlike Tunner, are "travelers," not "tourists": whereas Tunner might be likely to return home after a period of time, Port and Kit are sufficiently au fait with African life to stay much longer - maybe even live there permanently.
Perhaps there is no solution - as a long-time resident of Tangier, as well as other places in Africa, Bowles was well-placed to understand precisely how westerners could (or could not) adapt to unfamiliar surroundings.THE SHELTERING SKY is not without its orientalist elements: the nomad men are portrayed as savage, enjoying the unexpected pleasure of a white woman in a plot-line that would not seem out of place in early twentieth century "White Sheik" romances that proved so popular with western audiences.
It tells the story about Port and Kit Moresby, an American couple whom without having made any plans and with the intention of working out their marriage, travels to North Africa with their single friend Tunner.
This atmospheric, psychological, at times humorous and internal journey where two travellers are heading in the same direction as their marriage, is set against the hot, dry and exhausting Sahara desert during the 1940s and is impelled and reinforced by it's cogent narrative structure, substantial character development, subtle continuity and editing by Italian film editor Gabriella Christiani and the fine acting performances by American actor, director and producer John Malkovich, American actress Debra Winger and supporting acting performances by American actor Campbell Scott in his second feature film role, English actor Timothy Spall and English actress Jill Bennett (1931-1990) in her last feature film role.
You'll end up lost in Africa, raped by Dervishes, and other bad things will happen too.The cinematography is beautiful and the colors and people come alive in this film.
I'm truly disappointed with this film, not in the sense of throwing something to the screen or cursing everybody involved, but in the sense of almost crying simply because when you heard the names Bertolucci-Winger-Malkovich altogether you want to buy the DVD, buy popcorn and more just to see how wonderful this is and the final result is a big empty in their lives and almost a waste of our time.
Again, here's a story of people from the high class world (played by John Malkovich, Debra Winger, Campbell Scott and others) that seems to find a beautiful and intriguing place to live in Morocco, Africa, to finally realize that life's not that easy in places like this.
If the main premise of the film was to show the difference between travelers and tourists then what I saw was that travelers are dumber than tourists who simply enjoy all the things of a foreign country and then they'll turn back home (as Winger explains in the beginning tourists go into a journey thinking of returning home right after they got in the new place).
The tourists will have bad luck, all kinds of disease, infidelity affairs and other bad things.It is a good film to look at it, its visual, locations, culture, you feel in a different place, but in terms of story it's very empty, with no profundity at all.
One senses Bertolucci should have pulled the plug earlier than he did, some time before we're left with hanging shots of the intense African desert and those that inhabit it; the likes of whom the lone central character still left in the film falls in with, someone who then somewhat oddly comes to find a degree of liberation once this has happened.
The film falls as a result; the performances take over, the thing becomes an acting piece more-so a directorial piece: the marriage has been studied, played out and depicted - what we're left with is not as interesting.The scenario of matrimony in question is shared between Americans Port and Kit Moresby, played respectively by John Malkovich and Debra Winger.
Set in North Africa shortly after WW2, not too distant in time frame from his masterpiece, it is not so much an epic without a plot or a love story as some have suggested, it's more a parable, but it needed deeper motivational elements for its' central characters to compel.The majestic dunes of the Sahara, stark beauty of a barren landscape, is beautifully captured, as is the slim sensuality of Debra Winger; she doesn't seem to mind too much about the sand and flies getting everywhere - in one scene, a fly surreptitiously wanders along her thigh and up her dress during love-making with her husband in the desert - an unpaid extra, who nevertheless, contributes to the realism.
The story is boiled down, probably more-so than was in the Bowles novel, about a husband and wife (Malkovich and Winger), and their friend (Scott), who go to "travel" in North Africa.
This all being said, The Sheltering Sky may possibly be Bertolucci's most astoundingly shot feature, with it coming right behind Goodfellas as the best cinematography of 1990 (via the great Vittorio Storaro).
"The Sheltering Sky" is a road movie and a love story
Its real subject is very simple: Is it possible for two people to share the same dream and to exist as a couple?
It's a simple story of two complicated people who love each other deeply, but can't be happy in love
So in the first part of the movie we see how the joy of life vanishes, and in the second part how the joy of death begins
Debra Winger identifies with lead "Kit" passionate and seductive character
She, at least, feels the need to communicate
At times she feels undesirable, even unwanted and unloved
But this isn't easy to do with Port
Malkovich has a completely different approach to Port
He simply falls into the character
In his dark eyes we can see clearly the suffering of the memory and the pain of remembrance
Port's illness is an unspeakable solitude
He doesn't need anybody or anything to face the challenge of life
He feels he's sufficient to the task but we clearly feel his strong attraction to nothingness
Kit and Port know that they dearly love each other, but they just feel condemned, condemned to be together forever
Bernardo Bertolucci planned the film in two sections: The solar part belongs to Port and the lunar connected to Kit. The Setting Were Gorgeous, The Film Was Unsettling.
Even though Bertolucci and his cinematographer Vittorio Storaro have physically made this film visual eye-candy, there are other traits that have an equally proportionate share of hits and misses.As it hurts me to say this, the biggest flaws lie in the balance of the two leads (John Malkovich and Debra Winger) who play the roles of Port and Kit Moresby, a duo of self-absorbed wealthy New Yorkers who travel to Tangiers, Morocco to spruce up some adventure to fix up their progressively crumbling marriage.
Malkovich is great at portraying macabre characters and brings that level with him in a lot of his performances, but Port is not at all like that.
Sure at first she looks authentic to the characters in the book, but once she and Port wander aimlessly in the desert, her physical and mental demeanor are more Winger than Kit as opposed to the other way around.The supporting characters like Campbell Scott, Timothy Spall and Jill Bennett are quite convincing in their respected roles and seems to upstage the leads at times.
If you want excellent acting, a wonderful script, real character development, and some of the most powerful use of natural landscapes as part of the dramatic structure on film, then this movie is for you.
A married American couple (John Malkovich and Debra Winger) travel through North Africa in search of themselves and the desert, and find their relationship threatened by the vastness of the strange landscapes - and by a lecherous companion.Director Bernardo Bertolucci captures the forbidding beauty of the Sahara quite stunningly, but while the film is utterly ravishing to look at, its characters are stiff, self-regarding and unlikable, their predicament is far from compelling, and the psychological drama of Paul Bowles's novel never quite surfaces..
We suffer with the Malkovich character for what seems like a long time.
I hated to see (Debra Winger), one of her generation's best actresses and beauties, in wasted time like this. |
tt0477065 | Pirates of the Great Salt Lake | Captain Kirk Redgrave and his first mate, Flint Weaver, are two pirates who set out to be the fiercest pirates on the Great Sea (the Great Salt Lake). The movie begins with a man in white using a metal detector on the beach. He happens upon a sleeping Kirk and begins to tell the audience the legend of a young man who wanted to find his fortune. On his journey, the young man meets a mapmaker and ends up at a cursed mountain cave filled with treasure. While taking the riches, he is attacked by the skeleton in the cave and killed, ripping the map in his attempt to escape.
Back at the Great Sea, after Flint and Kirk "raid" a boat, Kirk finds a map tucked into the inside of a shoe Flint fished out of the lake. The two can't help but plunder an unattended corn stall on their way to bike to the library to find the origin of the mysterious map. Once there, a librarian aids the boys by telling them "either it's real, or it's fake". She shows them a page in an encyclopedia containing the second half of the map. Unfortunately, the book is from "General Reference" and cannot be checked out, much to Kirk's irritation. While trying to tear the page out of the book, Kirk notices an unattended photo copying machine, which they use to photocopy the page and their faces. Later, Kirk becomes frustrated and throws away the map, complaining he can't decipher it because a "pirate map is only good to the pirate who made it". Flint saves the map.
While camping outside on the beach, Kirk recounts the story of how he became a pirate three weeks ago (Skulls & Crossbones in the Closet). His mother walks in on him dressed as a pirate, wearing makeup, watching pirate movies and fashioning his own sword, all while speaking in an English accent. She is disgusted and announces she is taking him to the doctor because this "perversity" is "not natural". After she says he's not a pirate, Kirk takes his leave, putting on his eyepatch and tucking in his sword. He steals a tandem bike and disappears off into the night. As he continues to talk with Flint, they come across the problem of their ship, Jolly Old St. Nick, which has a large hole in the bottom of it. Kirk maintains the ship is "hardly scratched" (Holy Ship).
The next day, while relaxing in the hot sun, Flint speaks more of the map, but he is cut off by Kirk, who notices an elderly woman and her father picnicking. They run across a large expanse of land before approaching the two picnickers, completely exhausted and out of breath. The woman congratulates Kirk and Flint on their good acting before giving them drinks and food. Kirk becomes irritated when the woman isn't intimidated by their pirate ways and walks off in exasperation. Flint explains how Captain Kirk can't eat any thing he doesn't steal, because "it's the pirate's way". While the old man complains how he hates Star Trek, the woman revokes her offer with a wink before handing Flint the food and watching him run off to tell Kirk how he stole the food while her back was turned. Kirk then complains about how pirates are no longer menacing because of "that damn Johnny Depp". He admits "maybe it's time to lower the flag". Flint again mentions the map and how it could solve all their problems; they could hire a menacing, bloodthirsty crew, buy a real ship and swords and girlfriends. Kirk then claims he's been thinking about the map, and he thinks it's time to start an expedition. They plunder a child's cookie and juice stand and are chased by a mother with a newspaper. While enjoying their rewards, Flint accidentally spills juice across the map, revealing a coincidental symbol. It is identical to the symbol on the Mount Crevice Real Estate sign Flint had fished out of the lake at the beginning of the movie. After calling the number and arguing about whether the Great Salt Lake is a sea or an inland lake, Flint realizes it's not Mount Crevice Real Estate they're after, it's Mount Crevice herself.
While walking back to the beach, they pass McGrath's Fish House, where Flint and Kirk first met (Eye for an Aye). Flint recounts how he met a girl named Ruby while having crab. He asks her out, but she turns him down because he's "too nice a guy". He steals her megaphone and leaves, meeting up with Kirk on his tandem bike. Kirk hands him his eyepatch as a symbol of friendship, and the two ride off together. In real time, Flint takes a moment to visit Ruby again, who comments on his sexy pirate outfit before leaving with her boyfriend.
The next day, Kirk breaks in to his own house, pretending to break a window by smashing a bottle on the ground. They raid the house, stealing everything from cold pizza to silverware to the pirate memorabilia in Kirk's room. They bring everything to a pawn shop, where they sell it for 155 dollars in store credit. While shopping, the pawn shop owner, Drake, offers to buy the treasure map for five hundred dollars cash. Just before setting off, Kirk drinks some old water that makes him sick. Flint pawns the bike for fifty dollars. After being provoked and called a fake, Flint announces the whereabouts of the boat. While shopping for food and medicine at the grocery store, Drake calls in someone to watch the store so he can go down to the lake and harass Kirk and Flint for the treasure. After receiving no answers about the whereabouts of the map, Drake shoots Kirk in the shoulder before threatening to kill him. Kirk asks to be killed by walking the plank, which Drake exasperatingly agrees to. Once entering the Great Sea, Kirk complains about the salt water entering his wound and wishes to choose a different form of death. Drake shoots him, and in a fit of rage, Flint cuts off Drake's hand, stabs his side and knocks Drake unconscious with a boot. Flint takes Kirk's dead body to the shore and begins to dig a grave.
The man in white from the beginning of the movie once again appears, to say a short proverb about death and its inevitableness. Flint sees and talks to Kirk's ghost, who convinces Flint to keep searching for the treasure. Drake, who appears to still be alive, sews back on his hand with a needle and rope. He also burns his side wound to temporarily seal it.
Later that night, Kirk and Flint talk about how they envisioned their death, and Kirk reveals his father was trampled to death by lions. Flint pulls out a letter from Kirk's mother, Catherine Lynn Redgrave, to Kirk and reads it to him. She apologizes to Kirk for her behavior and promises she will always love him, unless he becomes a convicted serial killer or a Democrat. She warns him there is no place in heaven for pirates. Kirk and Flint speak more about whether or not there's a place in heaven for pirates, and if that's why Kirk is a ghost instead of in heaven.
Continuing on further to Mount Crevice, Flint and Kirk happen upon an old mapmaker, who appeared in the story at the very beginning of the film. He is excited to see that Flint and Kirk, who have never seen this man before, have returned. The mapmaker prints out a picture, taken "before cameras existed", of two pirates who look identical to Flint and Kirk. In a flashback (Cutthroat's Debt), it is revealed that the pirate Cutthroat Dan, Flint's doppelganger, had a map made years ago, but the bill for the map was never repaid. Cutthroat stabs the mapmaker and kills his first mate, Kirk's doppelganger, before stalking off with his map. The mapmaker places a curse on the map, so that anyone who touches Cutthroat's treasure will die, and the curse can only be lifted if the debt is repaid. However, because of the rate of interest, the debt is almost four million dollars. Flint gives back the map and goes back home, where he gets rid of all his pirate paraphernalia. Flint delivers Kirk's dead body to Mrs. Redgrave before hanging up his pirate lifestyle for good. Flint goes back to the McGrath's Fish House and begins an innocent relationship with Ruby. The Fish House is visited by Detective Anderson, a detective working for Mrs. Redgrave and searching for Flint Weaver. Ruby lies and says she hasn't seen him around. Ruby goes to talk to Flint, calling him her "crab-loving bad boy", but he seems to have disappeared abruptly. Anderson also visit's Flint's grandmother, claiming Flint blew a man's brains out. This causes Flint to take "precautionary measures"; he begins wearing a fake beard and a robe.
During this time, Drake, too, happens upon the old mapmaker, where he tries to speak awful Spanish. He spies the map sticking out of a trunk with other maps, so he injures the old mapmaker and steals the map. He calls someone on the phone and talks about making a commercial. This commercial, which is advertising a treasure hunting expedition led by the Good Pirate Drake, is seen by Flint and Kirk, who are shocked that Drake is alive and has the map.
After an unsuccessful visit to Kirk's mother, Flint and Kirk are back at the old corn stand, where they are visited by the mapmaker, who can apparently see Kirk and enjoys sniffing corn. The mapmaker, now "run out of business", offers to drop the two pirates off somewhere, but they decline. After departing, the man in white appears again, with a horse, to provide an insight on how a man in search of a cursed treasure is liable to get stuck in limbo until the curse is broken. Kirk approaches the man, unaware of the audience, and asks who the man is speaking to. Flint has a revelation and takes off to the Redgrave house, where he kidnaps Mrs. Redgrave. He signs up for Drake's treasure hunting expedition under the alias Harold and Maude Hogan, and convinces Mrs. Redgrave to go along with the fiasco. Mrs. Redgrave has a flashback (Why She Hates Pirates So) of herself as a young girl on Halloween that explains why she hates pirates to much. In the flashback, she is harassed by a pirate waiter at McGarth's, attacked by teenagers in pirate costumes, and comes home to find her father dressed as a pirate and fashioning his own sword in her parents' room.
During the expedition, Drake is repeatedly injured. He is hit in the eye and has a trap caught on his leg, all while only twenty feet from his car. The only other person on the expedition, Lance, questions why Drake works in a pawn shop if he is so rich from the treasure hunting expeditions. As he realises it's all a sham, Lance accidentally rips off Drake's hand again and runs off into the forest by himself. Finally, they arrive at the treasure, and Cutthroat is discovered to also be a ghost, but a ghost only visible to Kirk. Cutthroat reveals not all of his treasure was cursed (Nosebeard's Blunder). Cutthroat's first mate, Nosebeard, bought a weak boat in an attempt to keep money for himself, which only succeeded in a box of six hundred pounds of gold bars sinking to the bottom of the Great Sea. Mrs. Redgrave also enters the cave, but she falls prey to the siren's call of the treasure, and she, too, dies. Drake reveals he has known Flint's true identity the whole time, and he was using Flint to lead him to the treasure. Flint stabs Drake once more, leaving Drake injured in the cave. Flint steals Drake's car and drives to McGarth's, where he picks up Ruby before driving down to the lake.
Detective Anderson, who is searching for Mrs. Redgrave, also known as the Redgrave Hostage, begins searching for them. He is at the corn stand when Flint drives by, and he follows them. Anderson confiscates a blow-up raft from a man in order to follow Flint across the lake. Once they have arrived at the opposite shore, Cutthroat's ghost and the man in white's metal detector lead Flint to the same spot he had begun to dig Kirk's grave. The man in white appears for the last time to recite a proverb about looking for what we already have. Flint digs up the gold and pulls out a few gold bars, just enough to pay the debt. Ruby begins to beat Flint with a shovel until Detective Anderson appears just in time to arrest her. While Anderson tries to arrest Flint, he is knocked out by a bar of gold. Flint delivers the rest of the gold to the mapmaker, who lifts the curse. Of course, just as the curse is lifted, Lance discovers the cave and all its treasure.
The mapmaker, after being injured by Drake, had been helped by the man in white. He also placed a curse on Drake, so Drake will forever be a pitiful pirate (The Final Curse). After this was revealed in a short flashback, Drake is seen to still be working as a pawn shop owner. He is visited by Lance, who is now extremely rich and wants to pawn off Drake's hand.
In the last scenes of the movie, Flint is walking along the beach, where he gives his eyepatch to a man watching the sea. This is a repeat of how Flint and Kirk's friendship began. The man, also played by Kirby Heyborne, follows Flint onto a real ship. Flint takes Kirk's ashes from the cabinet in the hull of the ship and spreads them to the waves. At the same time, Kirk and his mother are in heaven, walking together. They come upon St. Peter. Mrs. Redgrave is led to the Pearly Gates, and Kirk is led to Pirate Heaven, which is to the left. | plot twist | train | wikipedia | Pirates on the Great Salt Lake like other great off beat comedies.
Pirates on the Great Salt Lake, what a novel idea.
The film was clever--an evil pawn broker, two pirates, a worried mother, a gypsy, a detective, and a girl seeking a bad boy.
The pirates are of course looking for buried treasure; their dialogue and comic relief was hilarious and they take you to the end of the journey effortlessly.
The pawn broker makes an excellent villain.
The cinematography was amazing, I never realized the Great Salt Lake was so beautiful, it is breathtaking.
The film has a good message and the soundtrack is very well done.
I would recommend this film to anyone that liked Office Space, Oh Brother Where Art Thou, or My Name is Earl (TV show)..
Great independent movie, a must see for film buffs..
This film recently won Festival Choice at the 2006 Phoenix Film Festival.
I was partially skeptical when I entered the theater, preparing to find the film demeaning to those who love pirates.
I was pleasantly surprised to be drawn into the movie and found myself caring for the success of the characters.E.R. Nelson should be commended for tackling a "water movie" as his first feature film and being successful with the story line.
Those of you familiar with the Great Salt Lake may find some of the scenes especially funny, including the natural aspects of the environment.If you ask why I gave this movie and 9 out of 10, the reason is at the end and I don't want to give away the ending.
This is hands down one of the craziest movies I have seen in a long time.
I totally didn't see this coming.The plot is too far out there to describe, but it's basically a modern version of the Don Quixote story...
though still very original.
though still very original.
The idea is masterful, and the timing seems perfect.
Well written (highly quotable!) and well paced, and the score is surprisingly epic for a low-budget indy.
I would say The Big Lebowski, Monty Python and the Holy Grail, Napoleon Dynamite (it stars Trish!)...
and it's all so funny.If there is any justice in this world, this film will find distribution.
Two lovable pirates go in search of buried treasure..
This film is a must see!
I recently saw this film at the Newport Beach film festival and found it to be sweetly surprising.
The acting was great, especially Kirby Heyborne in the lead role, who is lovable, enthusiastic and endearing all in one.
Heyborne and Trenton James, who plays Flint Weaver, are a gem to see.
Their respective characters play well off one another, which adds a measured balance to the film.
Director E.R. Nelson must also be given kudos for his first feature film.
I also find it quite amazing, to say the least, that this "Napolean-esque" comedy was made in only three weeks time.
You can't tell by watching the film.To all of those who love to laugh, or just like to laugh, this film must be seen.
To any distributors out there, this one is a hit that will keep on giving!.
About as good as a pirate movie should be.
In short: This is a great indie flick, and if I said anything more I'd give it away, so watch it yourselves ye scurvy dogs!In long: It's really hard for me to believe that a movie this good took six months to make from idea to post-production, it was really great.
I loved the excellent characters and plot presented in the movie.
The story is honestly funny with very few cheap gags, and the actors go over the top in a way that makes them genuinely believable.
The film work was excellently done, and the locations that were chosen perfectly set the mood of the film.
The whole movie just embodies the classic pirate feeling that pirate fanatics have come to cherish; it has cursed treasure, romance, thrills, conflict, and plenty of laughs throughout.
I hate to compare it to something like Napoleon Dynamite, but there are definite similarities between the two, strictly in the sense that both are highly quotable and are destined to become cult classics.
Really though, if you like pirates, you'll love this movie..
A great movie experience!.
This movie lived up to all that I had heard about it.
I took many members of my extended family to a special screening in Salt Lake.
I did not tell any of them about the movie they would be screening in order to keep from influencing them with any hype.
The movie came as a wonderful surprise to them all.
I enjoyed hearing them laugh out loud throughout the whole movie.
We had the pleasure also of meeting one of the stars Trent James, who graciously answered many questions we threw at him.
I do hope a distribution deal will be struck soon so it will be released nationwide.
I have no doubts that it will be a sleeper hit.
You would have thought that Hollywood would have taken the hint from the success of Napoleon Dynamite as to the kinds of movies that American families are craving.
This movie will appeal to even a wider audience than N.D..
Okay, first off, I LOVE pirates, pirate movies, stories, books, shows, most anything pirate-related, such is why I rented this from Netflix.
This movie was entertaining about the first 20-30 minutes, then the story became drab and poorly put together.
There was little to no sense throughout the remainder of the film, and despite what has been written in many reviews above, you can tell this was filmed in three weeks, and the script seemed to be written in a lot less time than that.
Kirby Heyborne who I've never heard of or seen before, did an excellent job with his performance, even though he had little to work with, and was about the only good thing about this movie.
Trenton James gave a more than decent performance as well.
As for the rest of the cast, appeared more like friends and family, than actual talented or trained actors.
The description is that of "Two Teenagers," but yet neither of the main characters looks even close enough to play a Senior in college, so either the casting was bad, or the description should have been changed.
I have a feeling that the majority of the positive comments hailing this film as great, are from people associated with the film, and/or members of the "Free The Pirate" fan club.
The "Idea" is good, and I can get past the quality of filming with low-to-no budget films, when the quality of the story is prevalent, this, however, is not one of those cases.
As with any opinion on a movie or anything at all, it is just that, an opinion.
I still however support filmmakers who want to get their stuff out there, but as well, I support the honesty and criticism of people close to me, and would've hoped those close to the makers of this film, had told them to spend much more time during pre-production before diving in..
No. Entertaining and Original?
I thoroughly enjoyed the movie, I wanted to see it again, and in the end that's what matters.
It is a typical low-budget indie film in that some of the acting was average at best but the two leads had a wonderful chemistry and played interesting characters.
I wanted to spend time with them and see what happens.
The director was good, and while definitely not perfect, you can tell he had a vision and was telling a story he wanted to tell.
There is an authenticity which was refreshing, despite the odd premise.
There are times it drags and feels like it's lost but no matter where you think it's headed, you'll be wrong.
At its heart it is amusing and there are parts where it's laugh-out-loud funny.
If you do NOT enjoy odd characters and quirky comedies, (a la "Lars And the Real Girl", "Napoleon Dynamite", maybe "A Mighty Wind") skip this one.
If you like character-driven, unique movie experiences, give it a try..
I saw this film when it premiered in LA.
I think I laughed 2 or three times.
The rest of the time I was in shock at how ridiculous/poorly shot and poorly written it was.
Kirby is in fact the only saving grace in the film.
I was disappointed at the performance of Larry Bagby , whom I usually find entertaining.
If you enjoy watching your friend's crappy homemade short films that they shot on their mom's 8mm video camera then there's a slight chance you might enjoy this film.
Then again part of what makes those movies enjoyable is that it's your buddies playing all the parts.
You don't know these people so you'll probably find it as dull and stupid as I did.
Dear Mr. Nelson, go back to film school, intern for a while as a PA or a grip or some low level job so you can see how things are properly done in film .
Then look for as long as you must to find a Director of Photography who knows what f.
Repeat as many times as needed..
Who thinks this is funny?.
I have to admit I only made it through the first 37 minutes of this movie before I realized it wasn't going to get any better.
I probably could have watched the next 49 minutes, but I couldn't think of even one reason why I'd want to see any more of it.
I don't like to review movies I haven't seen all the way through, but I felt a moral obligation to warn as many people as possible about this piece of junk.Please, do not watch this movie.
The whole thing is only 86 minutes long, but it felt like it would go on forever.
The script is terrible - I can't believe anyone even spent five minutes writing it.
I'm sure I've seen worse acting someplace, but I can't remember where.
The plot was horrible, and though it was supposed to be a comedy, I didn't laugh at anything because nothing was funny.
This is an independent film, but don't be fooled.
This is no Napoleon Dynamite.
That movie was actually funny.
Pirates of the Great Salt Lake should have been buried at sea before it was ever committed to film..
The longest 86 minutes of my life .........
Pretty lame excuse for a treasure hunt movie.
Childish nonsense gives way to total nonsense, in this supposed comedy.
The simple minded plot, or lack thereof, is two guys dressed as pirates cavorting all around the "Great Salt Lake".
The scenery is far more interesting than the story, and even that eventually wears thin.
Watching two nitwits play out their pirate fantasy for almost an hour and a half with nothing more than a couple of chuckles, is not my idea of entertainment.
Go back and watch "Dumb and Dumber" if you suddenly get the urge to see a great dumb buddy movie, and avoid "Pirates of the Great Salt Lake" entirely.
"Damn that Johnny Depp".
I'd hate to think that living near the Great Salt Lake can make one totally lose perspective, but apparently that's what has happened to Kirby Heyborne.
Heyborne who is an LDS version of Martin Short stars in Pirates Of The Great Salt Lake during which he damns Johnny Depp for making pirates lovable because he's not taken seriously.Heyborne and his new found friend Trenton James have decided to become pirates and their sea is the Great Salt Lake.
Of course this whole thing is most disturbing to his mother Joyce Cohen.
Still it's amazing how many even if they don't take him seriously kind of go with the flow.When an actual pirate map is discovered and take my use 'actual' with a grain of salt all kinds of things start happening.
We even delve into the supernatural.Pirates Of The Great Salt Lake is a film that tries hard to be in the tradition of Harvey and Arsenic And Old Lace.
It gets a little too weird for my taste, but Heyborne is a talented guy and if you look at some of his other work you'll come to that conclusion..
Napoleon Dynamite With Pirates.
I finally got the opportunity to rent this movie on Netflix.
I'd been wanting to see it for a while.
I'm a big Kirby Heyborne fan so this was on my list.
It felt like they were trying to go for Napoleon Dynamite with pirates.
Now, if you liked Napoleon Dynamite, this movie will be right up your alley.
I hated Napoleon Dynamite, so the stupidness just didn't do it for me.
There were a few clever lines scattered throughout the movie, but not enough to keep my interest going.
I actually fell asleep during a 7-minute stretch.
Kirby Heyborne does do a great job as Kirk and so does Trenton James as Flint.
However, Larry Bagby's stuffed-up-nose portrayal of the pawn shop guy was just irritating.If you're looking for something Napoleon Dynamiteesque, this is your movie.
This Film is a true Pirate's Treasure!.
On Sunday Feb 5th I flew down to SanFrancisco to attend the San Francisco Independent Film Festival and the second showing of Pirates of The Great Salt Lake.
I arrived at the theater an hour early in order to meet up with ER Nelson, the director of the film, Kirby Heybourne (who plays Kirk) the star of the film and several of the producers.I was told by the SF Indie film fest organizers that the much awaited Friday night World Premiere of PotGSL received a standing ovation from a sold out crowd.
I was getting so excited to see it, and hoping I wouldn't let down.
Independent films are a tricky business, often it is the director's first film ( as in this case) , often the actors are less experienced "unknowns", and in almost all cases the production budget puts extreme limitations on everything.
Despite these factors or because of them , Pirates of the Great Salt Lake is like finding that elusive buried treasure.
This film is a real gem!
It is original and refreshing, and dare I say....
OK, so I hate the comment "it's a Feel Good movie".
just not the kind of comment Pirates should make.
I smiled all the way through the screening Dammit!
I hope I wasn't being watched or there goes my Pirate rep..
A very well thought out script ,co-written by Eric Nelson who also skillfully directs, and solid comedic performances by the principle actors had me laughing out loud within the first few seconds.
It has everything that a good Pirate film should, Pirates (duh), ships (er, boats) , the plank, weapons, maps and cursed treasure, ghosts, skirmishes, thievery, back stabbing, murder, wenches ( and not all in that order) It's campy, it's tongue in cheek, it pokes fun at the current pirate culture, and stereotypes.
It even pays backhanded homage to Johnny Depp.
And I loved this film for it.
The music perfectly underscores that our two heroes are living their Grand Pirate Dream.
they are truly Pirates!
Like when Kirk and Flint meet for the first timeSpread the word and keep a weather eye open for this Treasure, and keep our cutlasses crossed that this film gets picked up and distributed.
It deserves it and we all NEED it!Synopsis: Kirk Redgrave and Flint Weaver are two young, 20- something loners in Utah who live near the Great Salt "Sea".
Each with their own issues, they meet through chance and set out together to become the best Pirates the world has ever seen.
As in real life, Piracy is a tough go for our heroes, filled with much failure and disappointment, it is a hard life ( well, three weeks anyway) and then they come across a long lost treasure map.
They must battle a ruthless rival and contend a curse in order to collect the treasure and fulfill their dream.
good stuff, lots of fun.
PotGSL is a wonderful and creative comedic adventure on the low sea that rests on the outskirts of suburbia.
Many of the reviews that I read before seeing the film compared it with Napolean Dynamite and thus similarly praised or criticized both.
I recently saw it at the Indianapolis International Film Festival and I have to admit that the humor is comparable, but PotGSL extends the identity crises of the characters beyond the high school world of Napolean.
In early adulthood, many of us find ourselves with jobs that don't give our lives meaning.
Sometimes we can even feel like we've lost ourselves to the conventional measures of success.
Upon realizing that we are called to a different way of life (like to fulfill childhood dreams of becoming a pirate or a princess), we still might have to deal with how we are perceived if we choose to follow our dreams.
But wouldn't it be great if we stumbled on to a treasure map to get us there?
The pirate journey in PotGSL is not just about finding a buried treasure, but living life in spite of the mistakes of the past, whether they involve imposed curses or unfinished responsibilities.
As a viewer, I was less interested in figuring out what would happen next in the movie than keeping up with the journey of the characters as they learned more about themselves and recognized the impact of the past on their future.
Rather than merely living up to some conventional standards indifferent to our individual passions in life, PotGSL seems to be more about becoming the kind of people we want to be in the face of socially acceptable ways to live.
And it advocates this with a great deal of humor.
I loved this movie, and I hope that you will, too. |
tt0390418 | The Raspberry Reich | The core plot begins with the kidnapping of Patrick, the son of a wealthy industrialist. Sexual and romantic engtanglements push the drama forward. At the film's climax, Gudrun delivers a soliloquy on the importance of personal life in revolution. She puts particular emphasis on the breaking of heterosexual and possessive sexual norms, urging her comrades to join "The Homosexual Intifada".
The pressure of Gudrun's controlling personality causes the group to break up. Most of the urban guerrillas escape into the night. In the dénouement, the characters are visited some time later. Several have found happiness in the homosexual relationships established during their revolutionary activities. Che has become a terrorist trainer in the Middle East. Patrick escapes with Clyde, where they embark on a spree of bank robberies. This action is reminiscent of Patty Hearst's actions with the SLA. Gudrun and Holger settle down and have a child named Ulrike (after Ulrike Meinhof), whom Gudrun believes could embody the next generation of the Red Army Faction. | psychedelic, avant garde, satire, flashback | train | wikipedia | Political commentary or gay porn?.
I saw this at a film festival in Philly where it was aptly introduced as "...either political commentary disguised as hard core gay porn, or gay porn disguised as political commentary." As porn...wow.
I wasn't quite expecting the explicitness--so if that's what you're looking for, then enjoy.
There definitely was comedy, and perhaps even food for thought, in the political statements made by the over-the-top revolutionary characters.
Those who are able to view hard core fare from an artistic and/or intellectual point of view will probably be better able to appreciate the film's artsy elements as well..
Sex, Satire, Politics, Comedy, Music, Graphics.
I don't believe I've ever seen such a montage of music, pornography, political satire, and humor presented in such fashion as in this bold and astonishing piece of film-making.I know the average moviegoer would turn away from this movie because of its pounding and raw sexuality, especially homosexual scenes that rival the best of this "art form." But if you have a yearning for experimental film-making, for stunning and shocking action, for a satiric look at terrorism --then you will be rewarded by this astounding work.Get ready to be annoyed, agitated, repulsed --that's one of the goals of this movie.
But I think the film ought to be on the syllabus of every film school because of its utter creativity and audacity.
It's been a while since I saw this film, so I'll talk about as much as I can remember.
I happened to catch this film at the Sundance Film Festival.
I heard from others at the festival that this film was straight up gay porn, which caught my interest.
Being gay I'm always interested in seeing films with gay themes.
Almost...The film was hilarious, glamourizing the idea of "terrorist chic." In the film a group young of virile young men under the leadership of a woman (Gunfrun) kidnap the son of a wealthy man.
This was part of "the revolution." One of those idea's was heterosexuality.
That's where all the talk of gay sex came into the picture.
Some of the most erotic gay sex scene's I've ever seen!
Partially due to the fact that these men were heterosexual and also due to the fact that I did not expect actual gay sex with penetration and ejaculation.
The film began with images of a young man in his room playing with a shot gun, only to eventually end up deep throating it when he hears a straight couple having rough sex next door.
while images of the couple having sex were spliced into the scene at the same time.
It was this time when I realized that I was in for a totally different but very hot film.
Maybe the film had deep theme's and agenda's, but that just went right out the door due to the amount of gay sex in the film.
I do remember gay sex in the trunk of a car, Gunfrun making her hetero boyfriend have sex with another straight man, more gay sex in a room and a scene that takes place in a terrorist camp with a hilarious dark training session involving an an innocent family.
When one of her beautiful gang members asks for clarification if certain things (to which I cannot remember which) were part of the revolution.
Then as one last thing he asks if corn flakes are part of the revolution.
In a stern commanding voice she replies, "CORN FLAKES ARE NOT PART OF THE REVOLUTION!!!" This movie had some wild lines and idea's.
This film was not the best film I saw at the festival.
Everything about this film was over the top and wild.
If you love the theme's dealt with in most electroclash music, you'll love this film.
The hetero squeamish should avoid the film if graphic gay sex is not your cup of tea.
The film in short was a homo-erotic dark comedy involving revolution and change.
Simply do some research into who Bruce LaBruce is and you'll understand what your getting into.
Take the film for what it is.
To me, that was an entertaining good time..
I really enjoyed this LaBruce film.
I like his stuff anyway but I genuinely found this possibly his best work.It felt like I was watching a mixture of Andy Warhol/Paul Morrissey and Jean Luc Godard mixed in with hardcore porn -with extras laughs.Yes, it's not perfect (nothing is) but it moves along very quickly (90mins seems a long film for LaBruce I believe).
Also, watch the film right to the end of the titles!.
Horray for artsy porn!.
The Raspberry Reich is about a dominatrix terrorist, Gudrun, her sexual revolution, and her clan, Raspberry Reich.
Pornographic sexual revolution ensues.The film was, essentially, porn.
However, it was porn with a plot, a message, and really awesome music, all captured by a true artist, Bruce LaBruce, rather than some pornographer or big studio blah.
the porn was well done.
I happened to be counter-revolutionary, myself, (if you know what I mean) while watching the movie.It was funny with lines like, "the revolution is my boyfriend," "cornflakes are counter-revolutionary," that guy who kept jumping and clapping his hands: "shoplifting!
pornography!" and a sequence in which two boyfriends made out with each other right after robbing a bank, like, right outside of the bank...
oh, and the sex in the elevator.I found it ironic and interesting that while Gudrun spoke against oppression, she was, in turn, oppressing her own followers.The acting was soooooo bad.
If only the acting was at least okay, I would have liked it more.All in all, it was a good movie, if only for the artistic aspect of explicit sex.
I think I want to be Bruce LaBruce when I grow up..
Bad boy porn.
Oh boy - didactic, revolutionary agit-prop, gay porn and underground anarchic 'chic' of Berlin collide in this ultimately dull and, quite frankly, annoying film.
The plot, for what it is, is centred round the plans of the revolutionary bore, Gudrun(a cliché-driven political activist who, throughout, makes proclaimations of, to her, the heroic deeds of the Bader-Meinhof Gang)and her belief that there needs to be a sexual revolution prior to any successful social revolution.
But the sexual revolution is for all heterosexuals to experience and accept the 'homosexualist' within.Cue director/writer Bruce LaBruce's previous experience in gay porn movies.
We are 'treated' to a whole series of absurd gay porn encounters (and even worse acting) involving macho terrorists 'forced' (yeah right)into explicit gay sex with colleagues (and their captive - the son of one of the wealthiest capitalists in Germany is kidnapped to further the cause), all in the name of the revolution.
The director has self-censored,in part, the more explicit scenes (occasionally humorously, using photographs of world leaders - this certainly adds new meaning to 'giving head').Use of strobe, abstract patterns, political banners and statements writ large on screen and the constant proclaiming by Gudrun in a monotonous rant attempt to explore socio-political underground themes and create an 'art-house' movie.
It also fails as a hard-edged porn film for the same reasons!.
People left cinema smiling and in a good mood.
"Raspberry Reich" was very much advertised G e r m a n m o v i e prior to and upon a world-reputable international film festival, and packed viewing venues in full with folks from various walks of life.
I do not know whether co-viewers were already prepared to a degree of a male nudity and simply screening a sexual revolution in making to a couple of hundreds cinema-goers in the heart of a multi-million-dweller town, but I was personally much confused with outbursts of laughing and females' comments following any squeeze of a l i t t l e b r o t h e r on a screen, not speaking more.
This work is a perfect parody on communist (leftist as more usable in modern time writings) propaganda where explicit stupidity of leaders cheating own followers while clinching to a political power and financial gains has grotesquely been disclosed with sex and orgies at any preference available a low budget movie allowed.
Of course, same gender sex is the most powerful tool to allegorize a "revolutionary struggle", where lust for empowering and power over the human being are very similar psychological constituents of actually different activities.
People left cinema smiling and in a good mood, which is the best outcome masterpieces present..
The Revolution.
Bruce LaBruce's satirical swipe at terrorist chic is a gleefully irreverent swipe at, well, just about everything.
The film combines a porn sensibility (complete with badly dubbed voices) with a high camp transgressiveness that reminded me of early John Waters.
Indeed Raspberry Reich seems unsure as to whether it wants to be John Waters or a parody of Marxist Jean Luc Godard.Like John Waters early work this film has got plenty to offend everyone, but its also pacily directed and witty and boasts a terrific over the top character in Gudrun, the sexual and political revolutionary with ways too many causes..
It's really sad that the gay community comes to the defense of such an appalling bad movie as Raspberry Reich.
This film has no redeeming features.
It does have non-event actors; a rubbish script and a truly irritating habit of superimposing quotes from George W and Blair over scenes of graphic intercourse.
That doesn't make it a cutting-edge alternative movie.
It is quite the worst movie you will see this (and any ) year.
And now IMDb want me to write 10 lines minimum about a film which deserves a two word summary.
This is definitely one of the oddest movies I've ever seen, and I loved it!
It's certainly not for everyone, but this movie definitely appealed to my rather dark sense of humor.
And being gay, the cast was definitely easy on the eyes.
Anyway, I recommend this movie to anyone wanting to see something that is completely different from most everything else out there.
Although the movie was pretty satirical, I also saw a little Fight Club angle to it as well.
On a side note, I have to say that I'm definitely interested in checking out other works by this director now..
The Revolution is my Boyfriend.
No spoilers, i thinkI have to say that I had a good time watching this movie.
I saw it on my birthday, it was playing at the University's Doc Films theater.
Wednesday was "history of porn" night, so my friends and I decided to go watch.
I think you should see the movie as a comedy (with gay sex) and not a funny porno?
I cracked up when the phrases would scroll across the screen: "Heterosexuality is the opiate of the masses", "There can't be revolution without a homosexual revolution", and my personal fave "The revolution is my boyfriend." I actually want a t-shirt like the one in the movie.
I saw this film at the Toronto International Film Festival, under the impression that it was something else.
Having said that, as soon as I stopped being grossed out by the straight, and homosexual sex I found the movie quirky, and funny.Its zesty comments on the German political scene, and almost avant-guard style add hilarity, to what the Director proclaimed as "soft porn." Apparently if you've seen the director's other work, this film will come as no surprise.
The film also has these amazing titles that pulsated a vivid red on the screen.
Saving the best for last, this film has these amazing mantras.THE REVOLUTION IS MY BOYFRIEND!!!!!.
Marginally less boring than Godard's political pictures.
Of all the movies that made up what came to be known as New Queer Cinema Bruce LaBruce's "The Raspberry Reich" is considered to be amongst the most radical.
The sex is certainly explicit and it's nicely shot by James Carman though LaBruce's mixture of guns, sex, revolution and extreme left-wing politics is still a difficult pill to swallow.
It might have helped if the acting or the script were any good, (they're terrible), but this is just a porn film with better camera-work and editing than most and what LaBruce assumes is a political agenda that will appeal to intellectuals.
You could view it as a comedy in bad taste though I doubt if it will make you smile.
On the plus side it's marginally less boring than Godard's political pictures which might have benefited from a dose of explicit sex but don't take that as a recommendation..
This Is Happen When Gay Porn Enter Politic.
I really enjoy almost every Bruce La Bruce film, including this one.
He always have different way to tell hidden meaning of chosen themes in his film.Honestly, I don't really understand what kind of politic was telling here (It's like socialism or communism?
I have to say that combine politic with gay explicit film somehow really bizarre.
But, I found it perfectly matched.Just other Bruce La Bruce film, "The Raspberry Reich" have gorgeous actors.
I really enjoy the sex scenes.
Looking hot and I love the teasing part a mask man played with gun while he was masturbating.
The only lack just bad acting.
Well, I think almost the actors are porn star and amateur artist.
But, if the acting was great, this film would be perfect..
I thought Raspberries Used to Taste Good....
I'll admit my ignorance on The Raspberry Reich.
I couldn't tell if it was supposed to be a comedy, spoof or serious drama.
And I couldn't tell if it was an erotic film or just simple porn.What I do know is, The Raspberry Reich is a hilariously bad movie.
I can absolutely see this movie as a perfect drinking game or movie to watch for a night of laughing at the horror it was.The five-minute plot stretched incredibly to 90 minutes involves a woman who spews out quotes from various sources in order to develop some kind of "revolution" that (spoiler!) never comes to pass.
Yeah, I'll ruin that because, other than a binge night of drinking, there is absolutely no reason to see this porn-disguised-as-propaganda movie.Part of her (ha ha ha ha) master plan to take over whatever (yeah, that's another aspect that flew past me – the main character, Gudrun's adversary, who whoever that was) is to get her minions – all male comrades, to have sex with each other by stating they shouldn't worry about their anti-revolutionary heterosexuality and make the revolution their boyfriend.
– if they were straight (another ha ha ha ha) then wouldn't that be girlfriend?) So
we're to believe these guys are truly straight and I believe it was the director/writer Bruce La Bruce's vision was for us to believe they were not gay, yet they give VERY little resistance to having sex with each other.
On the flip side, it's like believing the women in straight porn never "actually want it" and their consistent battle to avoid penetration is "real." Honestly, this movie is a joke, a waste of time.
UNLESS
of course, you just want to see porn.
My advice is to head over to the adult shoppe because, though there are many explicit sexual scenes (definitively no holds barred) and full frontal male/female scenes, they are interlocked with rancid acting, laughable dialogue, molestation of guns and a whole bunch of the script scrolling on the screen.
Yeah, I heard them, and making me read it makes little difference in my opinion on their comical beliefs.Oh, and switching from color to black & white is about as an art form these days as drawing a circle and teaching a 64-week college course on the depths of the object.
SKIP THIS MOVIE.* * - Again, unless you have some kind of party with (either gay or VERY OPEN-MINDED) buddies who want a good laugh..
The actors are so bad (except the actress who played the hysterical Godrun, the only one who seems to have understand the level of acting required to make this comedy works and be at least a little bit funny); the actors from "Plan 9 from outer space" seem to deserve an Oscar in comparison...well, maybe thats what the director wanted to make them look funny, so the movie could be considered as a comedy.
The only good comic scene is at the beginning when Godrun and her boyfriend f*** in the elevator...but again, we got the point, it was funny for the first seconds, but after 5 minutes, it just ruins the idea and gets just plain boring.As a political satire, well, doesn't work either.
The ideas are exposed in such a superficial way, nothing is developed, just a bunch of revolutionary ideas or historical facts thrown in our face, and then repeated on screen, always with the same boring manners: Godrun shouts them with the same voice tone from the beginning to the end, then we see the text in red letters, pink letters, whatever color on screen.
Great editing, but the processes get so overused through the whole movie...ZZZzzzz!
And the link between homosexuality and revolution is so thin, the director seems to think that writing slogans on screen while the actors s*** and f*** is enough to explain the idea...it unfortunately never goes further.
We could have had a nice reflexion about it, we get nothing except porn, which is far from being bad in itself, but even as a porn flick its deceiving.The scenes are so ordinary, so short, just regular porn, far from being as hardcore as it wants us to think it is.
Maybe LaBruce thought that as a gay man, i would be turned on by the idea of seeing straight characters make it together, but the actors are so weak, their characters have then no credibility at all, how can i believe for just one second that they are supposedly straight???
LOL In conclusion, great editing, some great music too, but ends up being a badly played wannabe-pseudo-political-porn-comedy. |
tt0841027 | Magicians | Harry Kane and Karl Allen are best friends who work together in a successful and popular magic double act, with Harry's wife Carol working as their assistant. After one show, however, Harry discovers Karl and Carol backstage in a magic box having sex (during an agreement between Harry and the theatre owner about letting the act go on for 4 more weeks and letting them do an act on a cruise ship). During the next show, Carol is locked into a guillotine as part of a climatic trick, only for the blade to decapitate her; it is not immediately clear whether Harry, despite his protestations of innocence, has murdered her or whether she was the victim of a freak accident. Four years later, the act has broken up and the two friends – now bitter rivals – have gone their separate ways; Harry, having given up professional magic, is working in a Wilkinson hardware store, only to be fired after a customer complains when he creates an illusion of him cutting his arm severely with a knife blade during a sales pitch, whilst Karl is attempting to reinvent himself as a Derren Brown-esque magician called the Mindmonger, with limited success. During an unsuccessful impromptu-pitch at a television corporation, the only person he manages to impress is Dani, the tea girl, who Karl immediately gets a crush on much to the jealousy of his incompetent agent Otto, who nurses an unsubtle homosexual crush on him.
After numerous failed attempts at raising money, Harry sees a poster for the "Magic shield" competition held in Jersey, with a prize of £20,000, and decides to enter. Trying to find a new assistant, Harry is forced to recruit the only applicant, Linda, an old work friend whose only entertainment skill is a poor dancing routine. Harry swallows his pride and contacts Karl, who agrees to enter the competition with him; although their reputation in the magic community is still strong enough to get them into the tournament without an audition, the tensions between them ultimately prove too strong and they decide to go solo from that point on. As Harry and Linda rehearse their magic act, they begin to grow closer, but whilst Linda is open about her interest in Harry, he is too uptight and insecure to fully express his reciprocation. Much to his discomfort, Linda discovers the guillotine amongst his magic props and convinces him to use it as the centrepiece of the finale. Karl, meanwhile, is delighted to learn that Dani has come down from London to see him perform, but is slightly alarmed to discover that she believes him to be a genuine psychic. He nevertheless goes along with her belief, particularly as the interest in the competition has seen him approached by a television producer who wants to make him the centrepiece of a psychic show. Karl agrees to make his act for the finale a medium display, but begins to suffer a crisis of conscience. Karl tries a trick where he is buried in sand for a day.
Upon learning that Harry has not told Linda of what happened to his wife, Karl informs her. Harry panics when he discovers that her hotel room is vacant, believing she has returned to London. He conquers his fear of flying to immediately fly back to London, only to discover as soon as he gets there that she has merely switched rooms and forgotten to inform him. Managing to return to Jersey in time to compete by telling Linda to make one of the judges delay the act, both Harry and Karl make it through to the final; Linda claims that she is okay with hearing about what happened to Carol, but tensions between both begin to grow as she struggles to trust him. The night of the finale, Harry is heartbroken to learn that Linda has apparently slept with another magician, the sleazy and unethical Tony White; although Linda confirms it, she is lying in an attempt to force Harry to open up about his feelings, which he is still unable to do. Karl, meanwhile, finally prepares to consummate his relationship with Dani, but admits that he is not a true psychic after she thinks he is contacting her dead father, and betrayed, she shuns him.
That night, Karl and Harry have a confrontation backstage, in which Karl accuses Harry of murdering Carol; Harry angrily rejects the accusation and challenges that Karl merely finds it easier to believe that rather than accept the guilt of betraying his best friend. On stage, Karl begins to pioneer his psychic act, but the stooge he has hired in the crowd which he had chosen with a fake random ball toss, accidentally trips and concusses himself on the stage. Upon hearing the sad story of another selected audience member, he decides that he cannot perpetuate the fraud, admitting to the audience that he is not able to contact the dead. As a result, Dani forgives him. Harry, as 'The Black Widower', starts his guillotine act, but at the moment of truth Linda's nerve fails her and she flees the stage. Although Harry’s act would appear to be ruined when he asks if anybody else wants to try, Karl steps forward and announces that he will face the guillotine instead. Karl allows himself to be locked in the guillotine, explaining that Carol was frequently unfaithful and forced Karl to have sex with her. Harry appears to decapitate Karl – although it is merely an illusion, and Karl appears unharmed, the trick having worked perfectly. Harry wins the competition, and in his acceptance speech both forgives Karl and admits that he loves Linda, who joins him on stage and the two kiss. Their friendship mended, Karl and Harry embark on a reunion tour, incorporating Dani and Linda into the act as their assistants. | comedy, entertaining | train | wikipedia | Mitchell and Webb were great (as ever), Jessica Stevenson, Darren Boyd and Peter Capaldi were also great (as ever)...but there was just something about it.
Now having said that, there were plenty of great jokes, nuances, the odd subversion, and so forth - not to mention magic tricks.
There has been a sudden stream of movies revolving around magic, of course there's the obvious fantasy stuff with Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, but what I am really on about is movie revolving around stage magicians.
You see Magicians is a comedy, its not a period piece like the last two, and this movie in all honesty couldn't give a toss about magic.
Magicians is the first movie outing for Mitchell and Webb, stars of cult TV Show Peep Show.
I personally have never seen Peep Show, but from what I've seen of the pair on chat shows I can tell that they are very funny people, and thankfully aren't as one note comedically like the Little Britain duo are.
This was proved specifically with last years dire Alien Autopsy starring Ant and Dec. I was looking forward to Magicians, but was also aware it was probably not going to be that good.
However, what a nice surprise it is to say that Magicians is a very funny movie.
The lead duo of the movie, David Mitchell and Robert Webb are what make this movie great.
Jessica Stevenson is a joy to watch as the dippy assistant, and she gets some of the best scenes in the movie.
My personal favourite is a dance scene that is actually funny to watch (yes Spiderman take note, we want dance sequence in comedies, not superhero movie!).
Peter Capaldi runs over the hills with the movie as the compère of the magic show, a role that was so brilliantly written.
Darren Boyd also has a great role as Webb's agent.The comedy rate of the movie is pretty high, yet there is still a lot of misses dotted about the movie.
But the movies comedy really sparks when Mitchell and Webb are on screen together.
The pair have such great sequences together, that when they're taken apart it seems like the movie is desperately filling in a large gap with other characters.
Sometimes these characters manage to distract the audience, but it is noticeable at times, and some of the jokes fail quite miserably to hit the right note.
I had a good time while watching the movie, but by the end I became aware that I couldn't remember a lot of it.
The comedy never reaches great heights, its a movie full of small laughs and the occasional bigger laugh.
In this respect this movie never really suits the talents of Mitchell and Webb as its always noticeable that the actors are funnier than the movie they're in.Magicians in the long run is a good, solid piece of fun.
Many years go by and Karl is still working as a magician but is trying to break into the TV niche held by David Blaine, Derrel Brown and others of that ilk.
However barely minutes into it, old tensions resurface and the pair split again to go head-to-head.It is a little concerning to watch the progress of the career or Mitchell and Webb.
However it must be said that these moments are not frequent enough and mostly the film is just not that funny.The rather British "awkward" humour is OK but not as well done as those used to it will have seen it done other places.
Mitchell and Webb are both pretty good when the material is given to them but again, this is not often enough for what they have shown they are able to do.
Credit to Mitchell and Webb for trying to show that they are much more than just Peep Show actors, but Magicians is not the vehicle that will do that for them..
I'm a big fan of Mitchell and Webb and thought this film was really going to make me laugh...it didn't.
There are some funny moments but nothing special, and i agree that it falls very short of Peep Show and definitely thought that Armstrong and Bain could have come up with something a lot more exciting and funny.
The plot is boring and a few gags enable it to just keep going but the writers have a long way to go until they reach Pegg and Wright, in the British Comedy Films department...Stick to T.V.I'd say it's a film to rent or go round your mates house and watch if they end up buying it.
Mitchell & Webb have done some very funny material in the past.
This film is, at best, mildly amusing.The premise is amusing, in a black comedy way.The characters are amusing, occasionally.The script is amusing, in places.Individually all of the contributors are capable of so much more and it is disappointing to end up with a film that aspires to be funny but falls short in so many ways.
Much of the humour is hackneyed and its predictability takes away so much of the punch that you find yourself hunting for humour that ultimately is not there to find.Overall the best I can bring myself to recommend is if this comes round on TV and you have little else to do on a rainy day give it a try..
You won't laugh every seconds, but the over whole of the movie is funny.
While I have been very disappointed with brits-com like "Love actually", one of the worst movie i have even seen in my life, the little budget "Magicians" manages far better.
Which means that some good cause somewhere has had to go without funding so that Mitchell and Webb can not be funny in this crappy film.And that really sucks..
I've just got back from seeing Mithcell and Webb's new 'out of this world, hilarious' movie and I have to say I'm more than disappointed.Firstly, the format is very tepid, with the old 'two mates fall out and then compete against each other before coming together to succeed in the end'...reminds me quite of a Will Ferrell film.
Sums it up really....Sure, Mitchell and Webb work well together and give the film a little extra (god help us if they hadn't been in it) but overall, considering this was written by the same team as the great Peep Show, this is very poor with very little to shout about.....Stick to telly guys!.
For me, Peter Capaldi absolutely steals every scene he's in; he can do more comedy with one facial expression than many comedians can pull off in an entire stand-up act, and he's perfect for the role of the bureaucratic petty tyrant in charge of the magic contest.
However, that doesn't mean it doesn't have a certain kind of charm.Yes, it's the 'Peep Show' film.
It just has the two main stars from the (hilarious) cult TV show, David Mitchell and Robert Webb in the lead roles.
Just.Despite Mitchell and Webb basically playing the same characters from Peep Show, but with different names, Magicians falls short on laugh out loud moments.
Yes, it doesn't come anywhere close to Peep Show and falls even further afield from what it could achieve, based on the talent linked with the film.What you get is an adult comedy which has a few laughs along the way and is a bit predictable.
If you've got nothing else to watch and this happens to be on the telly (and you're a fan of Mitchell and Webb) then give it a go.
My wife decided to rent this film as she is a fan of "Peek show" and "Mitchel and Webb".Neither of us completed the film, we were bored from start to finish (or in our case the middle), the attempts at humour were obvious, there were jokes which were just crude and not funny (this comes from someone who watches South Park!) Wouldn't recommend this film to anyone unless they are hardcore Mitchell and Webb fans.It is a shame to see the British market produce such a low grade comedy, this film really dropped my opinion of the two main cast members, and i feel ashamed as people in other countries will just think it is British awkward humour, lets get another Simon Pegg comedy out there quick to make up for this pap.Uwe Boll could of done a better job!.
Mitchell & Webb fail to capture the Peep Show magic.
STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday Morning David Mitchell and Robert Webb, who became cult favourites with the TV classic Peep Show, failed to re-capture that magic with this hugely disappointing big screen outing.
Taking aim at the world of stage act magicians, this has them as one time best friends in the same profession, who fall out when the one has an affair with the other's wife and subsequently he accidentally kills her.
It all plays basically like Peep Show The Movie but somewhere towards the beginning you lose interest, the laughs fail to flow and you find it a huge slog to the end.
The reason I watched this movie is because of the actors, Robert Webb and David Mitchell.
I heard of many rave reviews about these two actors in their show, Peep Show, so I gave this movie a try.Man, I was so disappointed.
Well, I haven't seen Peep Show and I don't know how great Mitchell and Webb are in that production, but evaluating on the basis what I saw on Magicians - I have only one message to those guys: "Don't quit your day job!" Script wasn't good - jokes were boring and dumb, characters stereotypical and obnoxious.
I had two or three laughs when watching this movie - and I'm grateful for those, but everything else was just clumsy and predictable.David Mitchell's character(Harry) was just silly and irritating.
:) Karl (Robert Webb) was a little bit more likable character - but still quite boring.There are two kinds of people - those who like British comedies and those who don't.
The problem with Magicians, the movie in which David Mitchell and Robert Webb make their attempt to transfer from TV to big screen success (and like so many British comedy duos, fail to do so) is that it feels like no more than an over-glorified sketch from their TV show.That in itself isn't necessarily a criticism - it rolls amiably along, with sufficient in the way of plot and subplot interest to hold the interest - but the scale of its ambition seems to fall short somehow.
Films don't have to be big to work as cinema movies, but they do have to have an awareness that the medium isn't quite the same.
Here, Mitchell and Webb play more or less exactly the same characters they play in Peepshow and, more to the point, one is aware that they are "TV acting" from the very start.But the story is OK, with uncertainty as to whether the beheading which starts the film is accidental or deliberate until the very end, and there are some pleasing supporting characters (Karl's manager, Jessica Hynes(Stephenson)'s glamorous assistant and Andrea Riseborough's office girl are all people whose company I enjoyed.All in all, a failure in its attempt to transfer Mitchell and Webb to cinema (in which they are, at least, in good company), but a noble failure which is not without merit..
I thought that it was mostly really funny, with Mitchell and Webb playing variations on their familiar "Peep Show" persona's.It's very British.
Basically Harry (David Mitchell) and Karl (Robert Webb) used to be two of the most successful magicians on stage, but it was after Harry discovered Karl and his wife (the act's assistant) having an affair, and then accidentally cutting off her head in a guillotine trick they fell apart.
4 years later, they have split and do not speak to each other, Harry is trying to get a job (possibly that could involve his magic skills), and Karl has reinvented himself as a Derren Brown type act, using thought suggestion and medium.
Harry has found a new assistant in the ambitious Linda (Spaced star Jessica Hynes/Stevenson), and Karl has attracted a new naive, almost thick and easy-to-fool Danni (Andrea Riseborough).
Both acts progress to the finals, but Harry still has his doubts of bringing back his guillotine act (and he still thinks of what happened last time), soon, Linda will feel the same, and Karl is struggling to keep convincing people he can do his thing.
The magic tricks are interesting and impressive, there are even some real magicians in the background, there are some good small giggles, but I can see why the critics give it two stars out of five.
Peep show isn't laugh out loud funny and neither is this, yet it puts a smile on your face and perhaps an inside chuckle but hey, it was obviously no blockbuster comedy, but something to see on a quite date or with a couple of friends for those who have already seen Pirates of the Caribbean, Spiderman 3 or any other major movie.I found it enjoyable, especially the who concept of him having chopped his wife's head off (A little morbid yes, but a good idea.) The gay manager, and the whole 'medium' thing were original 'peep show' humour ideas, and it was good the fact that it was not totally about sex.
(About 10 % wasn't) and we had a nice view of arse.So all in all, a good movie for a rainy day..
Yes I know I'm solely basing that on the fact the two main leads (Robert Webb and David Mitchell) are the two leads from that show but any British person who's familiar with the show knows what I mean.Right its a comedy, lets just get that out there for everyone, its a black comedy based on the relationship between two reasonably famous magicians (Harry and Karl) based in the UK.
Lets think of these characters as the Torvill and Dean of the British magic world (in the film), they are a household name in the UK and pretty well known elsewhere, but mainly they are a home-grown success story that are loved by their fellow countrymen (and women and kids).
because Karl is having an affair with Harry's wife.
This also leads to the accidental death (or was it?) of Harry's wife during a show, which of course virtually destroys their act.
This naturally leads to the pair losing touch and going their own separate ways, until a major magic competition comes along and the pair both enter.OK so, as I've already mentioned this does feel very much like an extended episode of 'Peep Show'.
Aside from the fact you have Webb and Michell, you also have at least three other people that have also starred in the show, this really does make it hard not to look upon the film as an extended special or whatever.
Of course a lot of the appeal here is down to whether or not you actually like the comedy duo of Mitchell and Webb, luckily I do like the duo and have enjoyed all their work thus far.
Again though this does of course cause problems because the comedy feels very familiar, very predictable and like you've seen it all before.
Harry and Karl are more traditional magicians at the start, using the more old fashioned well known tricks, but later Karl moves into mind games mixed with the supernatural trying to elevate his appeal.
This does of course lead to conscious issues for him as he is of course a fake (more of a con artist than Harry), and he cannot bring himself to fool people around when it comes to their actual dead family members.
His struggle is compelling and amusing as deep down he really doesn't want to but he finds himself getting sucked into these situations...mainly because of his fame seeking agent who also fancies him and is actually quite funny.So Webb's character is the stronger of the two, I think, as Mitchell's Harry really does feel exactly the same as Mark Corrigan from 'Peep Show'.
Yes you could say exactly the same about Webb's character of Karl but I feel he displays more of a genuine story arc, he actually conveys some emotion.
Its the other characters that are actually a bit more fun truth be told, Peter Capaldi is solid as the gruff and rude magic competition organiser, where as Steve Edge is easily the best as a controversial magician who simply doesn't think twice about speaking his mind, be it sexist or racist.I guess what I'm trying to say overall is, this film is OK, but it could of been so much better.
I really wanted to like this film so much, I like Mitchell and Webb, their brand of humour is solid, cheeky and at times close to the bar, but this is lacking something.
Mitchell & Webb have tried to take that final step from TV to movie fame like Simon Pegg, Ali G and Steve Coogan before them.But they failed miserably.
Having seen the trailer for this I thought it looked like a really good film but quite frankly your better off sticking with the trailer as the film is extremely dull.The only real highlight for me was Jessica Stephenson playing the assistant (and looking fabulous too!).Mitchell & Webb are funny in sketch format but they couldn't manage to translate that into a movie length format here.The magic looks OK, some of the side characters are mildly amusing but the film falls far of being even semi-funny.Die hard fans of the duo may enjoy this as may fans of Spaced but I really didn't like it. |
tt0109303 | Blown Away | After her mother dies in a mysterious car accident, 17-year-old Megan (Nicole Eggert), daughter of a wealthy businessman, lives a reckless lifestyle. A year later, she is almost killed by a horse who has lost control, though she is rescued by Rich (Corey Haim), a young man who works at the ski resort owned by her father Cy (Jean LeClerc). Grateful, she invites him to her party, where she thanks him again by being intimate with him in her father's bed. The next morning, Cy comes home and almost catches them. Even though he does not, he angers Megan by forbidding her to see any guys. Unlike Cy, Rich's girlfriend Darla (Kathleen Robertson) does find out about the affair, and dumps him. Rich wastes no time and enters into a passionate relationship with Megan. She soon introduces him to her father, but he disapproves of him, and Megan tells Rich that they cannot see each other any longer.
Devastated, Rich turns to his womanizing half-brother Wes (Corey Feldman) for comfort, who encourages him to do everything to get Megan back. He follows her to a bar, where she is seen giving a large sum of money to a criminal-looking man. Rich catches her getting intimate with the guy, and knocks him down as a response. Megan then apologizes to Rich, and claims that she did not think that he really loved her and was only testing him in order to see how much he would be willing to do for her. He immediately takes her back, and they accompany each other to a bar, where Wes always hangs out with his friends. While Rich is arguing with Darla, who accuses him of going out with her only because of her money, Megan is seen talking with Wes. As they go to their home together, they run into Cy, who calls his daughter a slut for bringing a boy home, resulting in a huge fight between them.
Rich decides to go home, where he finds Wes sleeping with Darla. Enraged, he tries to beat up Wes, but Darla stops them by informing Rich that he does not own her; later, Rich apologizes to Wes, saying that he should not have taken his feelings of anger out on him, and Wes accepts (while remarking that it had been a while since they "had a few rounds"), and then apologizes for what he did. Rich decides to return to Megan's place, where she — fed up with fighting with her father — convinces him that her father killed her mother and that they should kill him, and run off with the money. However, Rich, blinded by the potently sexual relationship, is in two minds about what to do.
The next day, Rich and Wes are shocked to find out that Darla has been killed in a horse riding accident. Meanwhile, Megan turns out hospitalized and claims to Rich that her father is to blame. Rich, seeing how severely beaten up she is, fears losing her someday to Cy's abuse, and promises her to help her. As they return home, Megan tells Rich that she has placed a bomb in his bike, and that 'it will all be over soon'. The next morning, Rich is invited by Cy to accompany him on a bike ride, causing Rich to witness the explosion that throws him almost off a cliff. As Cy falls to his death, he tells Rich that he did not kill his wife. Rich starts to suspect that Megan may not be who he thinks she is, and meanwhile, he becomes the prime suspect in Cy's death in the investigation of Detective Anderson (Gary Farmer). Despite Anderson's attempts to make him turn in Megan, Rich denies any involvement in the entire ordeal, though evidence points against him. Wes is shocked that his brother would have killed anyone, and is mad at him for not having killed their own abusive father.
Shortly later, Megan bails out Rich, and gives him her car to skip town with. She promises him that she will follow him soon after collecting her father's money. Rich drives off. However, now distrustful of Megan, he checks the car and finds a bomb in it. He is able to get away just in time for the explosion and immediately rushes to her house.
There, it is revealed that Megan and Wes were lovers all along and planned the murders and schemes together in order to be together. Rich confronts his half-brother, and Wes informs him that he tried to frame him because he has always hated him. As Wes is about to shoot Rich, Megan kills Wes. She tries to put the entire blame on Wes, but Rich does not believe her, prompting her to reveal that she was the mastermind behind it all. As she tries to shoot Rich, the police arrive, killing Megan immediately in self-defense. Rich was wired throughout the final scene, which clears him from all charges (although he has nobody important in his life anymore, leaving him empty inside). | suspenseful, violence, cult, flashback, good versus evil, action, revenge | train | wikipedia | Whilst De Bont's runaway bus is certainly good, "Blown Away" is by far the better bomb movie as it relies on suspense driven thrills rather than big budget stunts to deliver the kicks.
Jones menaces away as his usual psychotic prankster (think Two-Face with an Irish accent) and J Bridges is good but never truly called on to do anything special.
I found the acting to be great, Jeff Bridges did a great job, he really put everything he had into this.This movie is really intense, and I've found myself in similar situations which just kept me gripped to my seat when I saw it in theaters and many times again on DVD.
However, the accents might have been overdone as none of the stars - Jeff Bridges,Tommy Lee Jones, Forest Whitaker, Suzy Amis and Lloyd Bridges - sounded like a true Bostonian.
The film's best asset is the suspense it builds for the two hours and the fact it keeps you interested the entire way, right from the opening scene.The negatives are too much profanity and a contrived story in spots, particularly at the end when the fight between Bridges and Jones goes on forever as does the scene with Jones trying to save his wife.
I found Jeff Bridges desire to resume a normal life in Boston after his questionable "IRA-like" activities back home in Ireland appealing and his lovely fiancee played by Suzy Amis very likeable.
Tommy Lee Jones has a great Irish accent and the lunatic he plays is great fun to watch.
Mad bomber formerly associated the IRA escapes from prison and appears in Boston to exact revenge to the man who put him there in the first place - bomb expert Jimmy Dove, a loving family man, with a dark past...If this plot seems easy to predict, it is.
but it is defended by the superb action sequences filmed, the excellent explosions and also by the great acting by Jeff Bridges and Tommy Lee Jones.
Tommy Lee Jones wants Jeff Bridges and anybody he knows "Blown Away" in this 1994 film, also starring Suzy Amis, Forest Whitaker and Lloyd Bridges.
Bridges, caught up in the Irish trying to get the English out of Ireland, worked with Jones in Ireland, but when one of the bombings goes bad, he splits, and Jones gets arrested.
Jones escapes from an Irish prison and traces Bridges to Boston, where he plans on getting revenge on Bridges, his family, and the entire Boston Police Bomb Squad.This movie really needed to be seen on the big screen because of all of the special effects - huge, frequent explosions.The accents are all over the place, but the performances are good, with Lloyd Bridges on hand as a bearded character actor.
Tommy Lee Jones is quite convincing as a deranged bomber who goes after Jeff Bridges in revenge for betraying him 25 years earlier.Stephen Hopkins uses his fave cinematographer and composer Peter Levy and Alan Silvestri to bring some visual style and a powerful musical score to accompany the action and explosion scenes.
Boston's bomb squad expert Jimmy Dove (Jeff Bridges) is now at his most troubling work in his career.
Jimmy Dove (Jeff Bridges) is a member of the Boston PD bomb squad with a new wife, Kate (Suzy Amis).
Jeff Bridges has a perpetual furrow in his brow, as if trying to figure out what he is doing here, while Oscar-winning Jones is stuck with an Irish accent that could best be described as horrible.
Tommy Lee Jones is kind of one-note as the villain, and not very satisfying, but Jeff Bridges gives depth and credibility to his role, and the supporting cast is above-average.
If i had the option to give this 0/10, i would have.I found it completely stereotypical and insulting to the Irish race in relation to most of Tommy Lee Jones pathetic acting in the "movie".
Do the IRA put people out for bombing innocent people I think not
..hence the word `terrorist'.Jeff Bridges is OK but really just runs round with a furrowed brow all the time.
On at the same time as Speed, in the good ol year of 94, here's another exciting actioner, better for the fact, (although we can't deny Speed was an adrenaline pump filled ride of such electric intensity) we actually see with great insight, how these bomb disposal boys work.
Bridges, plays Jimmy Dove, head of the bomb squad, where we too share the good times away from work, but some tragic moments too (one involving his good friend- Jeff Bridges Senior who can't be diffused in times.
The climax in a near two hour film is intense, some sweat will be pouring of your brow, and when you two great actors like Bridges, me an avid fan of him, and Jones it's makes the experience even more enjoyable and absorbing, which this film is.
Tommy Lee Jones turns out a very sinister character, and conveys the look of who and what his character is supposed to be surprisingly well.A pretty smart film with good internal consistency, it's well worth watching.One minor negative is that there are actions that police characters take that are distinctly inconsistent with how a real PD would operate - those with EMT/law enforcement backgrounds especially may find it breaks suspension of disbelief.
With an all-star cast (Forrest Wittacker, Jeff Bridges, Tommy Lee Jones) you would expect at least a decent Boston accent to be thrown around here and there.
Superb cast in Jeff Bridges as a Boston demolition expert with a past and Tommy Lee Jones, his former colleague and recent prison escapee from Ireland aiming to settle an old score.The story is exciting and I liked the set up which covered a significant period of time; Tommy escaping prison and setting himself up in America, Bridges displaying his reckless on the job attitude then getting engaged, married and aiming to retire to teaching.
It was also excellent to see Lloyd Bridges here even if he does play a silly sort of character with a bad accent but nice father/son dynamic.On that note just about everyone in this has a terrible accent, Forest Whitaker is the new "hero" on the bomb squad trying to do a Boston accent, Tommy Lee Jones does a fantastic job as the bad guy but his Irish fades in and out, he seems to be relishing playing this character though, making bombs out of toys, dancing to U2, just maniacal and crazy enough to be super entertaining, funny bad guys are the best.I wouldn't so much call this an action movie as a thriller, there are lots of exciting moments with car ignitions, oven switches and light cords where you are meant to think the bomb is going to go off any second.
Anytime you have a Tommy Lee Jones, Jeff Bridges, Lloyd Bridges & Forrest Whitaker u are going to have a good product & be positively entertained.
This Holds True in This Bomb Disposal Thriller as Tommy Lee Jones has a Field Day as a Maniacal Sociopath with a Sense of Humor (that always helps the entertainment factor).There's a Whole Lot of Irish in This Movie.
It Takes Place in Boston and Both Protagonist (Jeff Bridges) and Antagonist Jones are Former IRA Type Best Friends, but the IRA is Too "Sane" to Contain the Likes of Our "Nutjob" as Lt. Bomb Squad Explains.There is Padding About Secret Identities and Such, but That's Only a Plot Convenience to Add a Bit of Mystery Because the Jist of These Things is Not Such Things in the Jist of These Things.
That Be Ticking Timers, Red and Blue Wires, and the Head to Head Physical and Mental Matchup of Our Two, You Know, Good and Bad Guys.The Movie is a Thrill Ride in the "Speed" (1994) Wave of Such Thrills, but Unlike its Inspirational Other, This One was a Commercial and Critical (please excuse) BOMB.But it's a Good Entertainment that is Helped by the Two Lead Actors, a Good Supporting Cast, Rousing Musical Score, and Explosive SFX.
Tommy Lee Jones and Jeff Bridges were very good.
Stephen Hopkins 1994 action-packed thriller 'Blown Away' easily ranks amongst the better films from that year.
SPOILERS AHEAD- but you don't WANT to watch this anyway.Let's see - Jeff Bridges realizes there is a bomb in the truck, hmm....There are only 75 police officers and 20 firemen around, instead of telling the person next to him - he keeps it ALL to himself, and makes a mad dash run to the truck.He does stop on the way though to way at some helicopters to 'get out of the way' - I'm sure at a distance of 1500 yards they can hear him fine.So, he runs right into the exploding truck.Now, he gets a phone call from Tommy Lee Jones, calling from his daughters bedroom.Now Bridges - again, surrounded by at LEAST 75 policemen - and 2 helicopters mind you - INSTEAD of saying "hey - some nutcase is in my family home in my daughters bedroom, get a car over there ASAP" - oh no.Jeff decides to hop on his motorcycle and TELL NO ONE - once again...
Jeff Bridges was OK in this movie, but Tommy Lee Jones took it way over the top in his role as an IRA terror bomber.
I can't look at Lloyd Bridges without thinking about Flying High.Just like every other role in this movie is only one step away from comic cliché.Only dis ain't funny,just an insult to intelligence.Seriously is there any room in the world for movies like this,cardboard cutout figures on a paint by numbers landscape,in this case Boston,peopled by hotshot bomb squad man Bridges,whose woman does'nt understand his driven past,and a bevy of poorly accented coppers after psycho Jones.I love the way Tommy Lee can masquerade as a cleaner at the bomb squad,wandering in as he feels like it.I'm all for suspension of disbelief in order to drive a plot,and there is nothing worse than listening to nerds enumerating errors throughout a film,but when a film is this facile it makes one feel less charitable..
Jeff Bridges is a bomb squad expert hoping to retire but returns to duty as he goes after an old friend (Tommy Lee Jones) who's on a revenge mission in Boston.
I wont delve into a complete movie commentary, only due to the few words needed to critique this movie.The only positive was the presence of Tommy Lee Jones (TLJ), ever the great villain in any film, i'm sure he'll be kicking himself for agreeing to take this role.
However, the performances by the 2 x Bridges, Whittaker & Amis were terrible.A movie with little or no thought put into its plot, The typical American stereotype of the bomb squad expert, complete with his harley and hawaiian shirt just insult the viewer.
Tommy Lee Jones is not much better, faking a fantastically rotten "Irish" accent that comes and goes as the story progresses.
I was really surprised to read a few other comments on this film praising Tommy Lee Jones' Irish accent - you have got to be kidding !!
Speaking of accents Bridges slips in an out of a rather good Kennedy impersonation throughout the film.The whole Irish bit is unimportant to the main story of a bomber targeting a bomb squad - a novel idea wasted.
Blown Away is a silly movie and Bridges and Jones were looking for easy paydays, Jones especially coming off his The Fugitive accolades.
The movie was senseless, a waste of time, bad music and both Jones and Bridges should be arrested for bad accents.
Terrorist Ryan Gaerity (Tommy Lee Jones) escapes from Castle Gleigh Prison in Northern Ireland and manages to get to Boston.
Lt. Jimmy Dove (Jeff Bridges) is a family man and a member of the Boston police bomb squad.
I like this movie it's fun to watch, great score,good music not bad special effects.
Jeff Bridges is the most underrated actor period and tommy lee jones did a good job again.
diffuser movie that plots Tommy Lee Jones as an eccentric Irish bomb expert(who's the bad guy) against Jeff Bridges as the innocent former comrade who now works for the Boston bomb squad(the good guy) as a diffusion expert.
The new kid on the block, played by Forest Whitaker(who's wasted in this movie), is trying to put all the pieces together because the Jeff Bridges character chooses not to reveal what's going on to his cohorts.
The problem as you can tell, with this movie, is they didn't take the time to tell the story behind the story until it's too late and what's left is just a bad guy killing people and a good guy trying to stop him.
It's one of those movies with too many unnecessary characters and scenes that should have been deleted.I have never seen Tommy Lee Jones, Forrest Whitaker, Lloyd Bridges or Jeff Bridges act as horribly as they do in this movie!
Jones plays a mad bomber and Bridges is a bomb squad member.
Some good scenes here and there, though for a movie called Blown Away there aren't as many explosions as one would think.
Some areas of this film are weak though like the scene where Bridge's wife walks through her house flipping switches and the screen flashes to these scenes where it shows what happens when you turn something on making you think there is a bomb somewhere.
*Jones was also nominated for MTV Movie Awards Best Villain for Blown Away and Batman Forever.The role seems to fit him like a glove.
"Blown Away" 1994 movie bout a bomb squads in Boston.
Then you've got Jeff Bridges with, I don't know, what was that a combo- Irish and Boston Southie accent.
I have to say, I watched this film a little while ago, and while it was a completly rubbish film, it was lent an air or humor by the fact that tommy lee jones and the bridges boys seem to have competition for who can do the worst irish accent in the world.
Terrific acting performances by Jeff Brigdes and Tommy Lee Jones in a contineously thrilling action flick.
Although "Blown Away" is not a masterpiece, it certainly is one of the better action movies around, which still stands strong after several decades since it was first released.Seen it many times now and I keep getting thrilled by ti.This thrilling action story is about a serial bomber (Tommy Lee Jones) who is out to to destroy a former partner in crime (Jeff Bridges).
We were perusing the On Demand list, and saw this title, with Jeff & Lloyd Bridges, Tommy Lee Jones, and Forest Whitaker, and thought it sounded like a great movie.
A minor movie with two seasoned actors, Jeff Bridges as an expert in the Boston Bomb Squad, and Tommy Lee Jones as the Irish bomb expert out for revenge.
2 out of 10Blown Away is a surprisingly awful action film; it never works as a thriller or a character drama, and it's insertion of both elements don't gel together well at all.
Jeff Bridges stars as a cop whose family and friends are threatened by a mad bomber played by Tommy Lee Jones.
Bridges is great as the tortured bomb disposal expert, who has a shady past, hanging around in a hot tub with an old 'Oirish' man and being the all American hero, Bridges is a man you can rely on, when a film isn't that great.Jones on the other hand was in the psycho business at this point in his career (Natural Born Killers, Under Siege), so who better to play the bad guy.
It's the worse depiction of the accent I have ever heard, makes Brad Pitt sound like on of the Corrs.And the fact that he dances around to U2 and drinks a funny looking Guinness, just adds insult.But given that, the story is pretty good, and the set pieces are astonishing, especially the destruction of the boat.Take away the bad stuff, the accents, and Lloyd Bridges who plays nothing more than a leprechaun, you have a very tight enjoyable action thriller that doesn't trouble the brain.Consider plausibility, and you will find a stinker of a movie..
* Terrible * * Below Par * * * Not Bad * * * * Good * * * * * BrilliantWARNING *POSSIBLE SPOILERS*James Dove(Jeff Bridges) works on one of Bostons finest Bomb squads.
With Australian director Stephen Hopkins onboard at the movies helm who had previously directed the dire fifth 'Nightmare on Elm street' flick and with Tommy Lee Jones as an Irish terrorist.
Blown Away starts at Castle Gleigh Prison in Nothern Ireland as convicted terrorist bomber Ryan Gaerity (Tommy Lee Jones) escapes using his explosive know how.
The plot is extremely predictable, routine & by the numbers as the clichéd tough guy hero with a dark past has to save the day on his own playing by his own rules, any number of better action films use this scenario & add that to a script that offers no surprises (good guy wins in the end, bad guy is stopped) & feels like little or no effort has gone into it.For a big budget action thriller Blown Away is really short on action or thrills, there's a decent explosion at the end, a truck is blown up & there's a speeding jeep & that's it.
The acting is poor from a good cast, father & son Jeff & Lloyd Bridges appear here together.Blown Away is a poor action thriller with virtually no action & some poor performances from a decent cast, this is just bad all round really & far too predictable..
Between the boring melodrama, the bad accents, and the goofy portrayal of the mad bomber by Tommy Lee Jones, the nonsensical thriller is poorly put together.
Or how the father (Lloyd Bridges) finds the bad guy (Tommy Lee Jones) plainly and illogically. |
tt0063557 | The Scalphunters | Joe Bass (Burt Lancaster), an American fur trapper, is making his way back home with a full cargo of hides when he encounters a group of Kiowa Indians led by Two Crows (Armando Silvestre), who insist on taking his furs. As "payment" they offer him a slave, Joseph Lee (Ossie Davis), who they had previously taken from a group of Comanches. Reluctantly, realising he cannot fight them, Bass agrees to the trade.
Bass is slightly bemused by his new companion, who is a well-educated and refined house slave, unused to the ways of the West. Bass orders him to help him recover the furs from the Kiowa. Lee only agrees to help if Bass agrees to take him to Mexico where slavery is outlawed. Bass is not amused, but the two strike up a friendly relationship, with Bass teaching Lee how to catch food in the West.
As Lee and Bass come upon the Kiowa, they watch them being ambushed by a group of scalphunters, white Americans and Mexicans who were offered a bounty by the government for each Native scalp they brought in. These scalphunters, led by Jim Howie (Telly Savalas), kill the Kiowa and also steal the furs which Bass had hoped to recover. He and Lee are forced to track the party, hoping to take back the furs.
Unfortunately, while spying on them, Lee tips over a cliff and is captured by the scalphunters, who decide they can sell him for $1500 in Galveston, Texas. As they travel southwards, Jim Howie's girlfriend, Kate (Shelley Winters), reveals to Lee that they are heading for Mexico. He begins to win her favor, by doing her hair and telling her fortune, hoping she will persuade Howie to take him with them across the border, rather than sell him.
Bass meanwhile has been following closely on their trail, and at one point he pins them down with sniper fire, forcing them to let loose the packhorse carrying the furs. He is ambushed, however, and the scalphunters recover the furs and proceed on their way. Approaching their camp at night, Bass tries to persuade Lee to help him, but the slave is now set on going to Mexico and refuses him assistance.
Bass kills several of the scalphunters, by intentionally starting a rock avalanche in the mountains near where they are situated. After again failing to secure the furs, Bass contaminates the water of a nearby creek with locoweed, a toxic plant that causes the scalphunters' horses to run and buck wildly as they drink the water. Now thoroughly fed up, and wanting to make it to Mexico in safety, they send Lee as a courier to Bass telling him he can keep the furs. A wary Bass comes down to collect the lone packhorse, and is ambushed by Howie who had always intended to break the deal. In an ensuing struggle Howie is shot dead by Lee.
The bickering Bass and Lee then break into a long fight, in which neither can defeat the other. Meanwhile, a group of Kiowa attack and overrun the scalphunters. Two Crows, who had survived an earlier massacre, has fetched reinforcements. He takes back the furs, per their earlier deal. The story ends with Bass and Lee, now friends, preparing to follow the Kiowa to take back the furs. | cult, satire, violence | train | wikipedia | The Scalphunters was the first of two films Sydney Pollack directed with Burt Lancaster.
In fact according to a recent biography of Lancaster, Burt was literally trying Pollack out on this western before giving him an opportunity to direct the very expensive Castle Keep for him the following year.
We all bow to old age at some point.Sydney Pollack actually started his association with Burt Lancaster on the set of The Young Savages where he was an acting coach to some of the street kids who were playing gang members.
It was his first introduction into motion pictures, he had previously directed and acted in a number of television productions.Burt is fur trapper Joe Bass who gets an offer from the Kiowa Indians he can't refuse.
Burt's Joe Bass is not exactly a boy scout, but this crowd truly nauseates him.The Scalphunters are headed by Telly Savalas and his cigar smoking refugee from a bordello of a woman, Shelley Winters.
And Savalas and his crowd are as mean a bunch as you'll ever see in a film, yet some of the funniest bits in the film involve Winters and Savalas.The Scalphunters is a really funny western that if you think about it teaches some good lessons we could all use..
I guess we have to look at these films from a generation view point in what the great Shirley Mclain has recently stated in that they should start to make films for the over 50s age groups.The film of today certainly seem to be targeted for a ' a different generation" as often I have to switch the box over to see if there is something wrong with the stereo settings as all I can hear is music and a very muffled speech.I find the older films, as in this case, to be irreplaceable and standing in support of the old saying "they don't make 'em like that anymore" With taking anything away from the modern ladies of the screen, were can you find another Shelly, warm, funny, voluptuous with a distinctive class she retained to the end.
Perhaps this movie should be titled "'The Crimson Pirate' meets 'Toostie'".If you've got a sense of humor and are able to suspend you disbelief for a couple of hours or so, "The Scalphunters" will give you a good evenings entertainment.
Ossie Davis is a perfect match for Lancaster as the extraordinarily wise & well-educated but highly wary escaped slave Joseph Lee, who must continually rein in his instinct to trump the cruder but highly canny in his own way Joe Bass.
The Scalphunters themselves are a group of lowlifes led by Telly Savalas as Jim Howie (in the best role I ever saw him play in a movie), a nasty but not unwise lout who spends most of the day & night in his baggy long johns.
And it's not just Burt who's full of enthusiasm, you got Ossie Davis giving him a run for his money, and Telly Savalas (as the baddie), who always appears to me to have been a bit bored in straight roles, completing a trio of guys having an absolute ball.
Incidentally I think that enthusiasm is why Lacaster's great transcendent role in "The Swimmer" (1968 - same year as this one) is so heart-breaking, because he's playing a bust enthusiast, and you can see it.The title "The Scalphunters" is severely misleading, makes it sound like the movie is about Indians killing folks.
This is the foundation for the story of Joe Bass, (Burt Lancaster) mountain man and fur trapper.
Reluctantly, Bass is stuck with a house slave named Joseph Lee (Ossie Davis) who possesses what few men have in 1860, an education.
In addition to trading his furs to the Indians, they in turn lose them to a marauding gang of murderous Scalphunters, led by their leader Jim Howie (Telly Savalas).
It fairly consistently, and regularly, reverses the stereotypes we have come to expect of films with titles like "The Scalphunters." Bass, the white man, is completely at home in the wilderness, "an ill-mannered, unlettered oaf" to be sure, but highly skilled and fearless.
Well, the Scalphunters has Burt Lancaster, Ossie Davis, Telly Savalas, and Shelly Winters.This is a memorable classic that addresses race relations, injustices against native Americans, the corrupting influences of property, and the drama of the West in an entertaining way.
Forced to trade his valuable furs for a well-educated escaped slave (Ossie Davis) , a rugged trapper (Burt Lancaster) vows to recover the pelts from the Indians and later the renegades that killed them .
Very good acting by the great Burt Lancaster as a fur trapper who sets out in pursuit the robbers .
Sympathetic Ossie Davis as Joseph Lee , a slave who helps Lancaster to fight enemies and retrieve the pelts .
Wildly entertaining western romp with the still athletic Lancaster (as a frontier trapper) and Davis (as runaway slave) reluctantly teamed against a band of bandits led by Savalas.
Burt Lancaster loses his furs to a party of Kiowa indians , who saddle him with unwanted runaway slave Ossie Davis in return.
In pursuit of his furs, Lancaster sees them taken over by Savalas' band of 'Scalphunters' and the story plays out until the end as a game of cat and mouse with Davis in the middle.
Sydney Pollack displayed to us an unusual picture getting together having two kind of different persons who clash along the entire picture their own idea of what place they really belong, the black slave running for a free life is plenty literate guy who knows that he is in the same level than anybody else, in other hand has a rough white guy raised in a wild western illiterate, what's seemed an easy interation slowly becames a personal struggle, that's the main subject implied wised by the director, the hard feelings will growing through the picture until a break point, interesting approach of human nature, in an humor mode, Ossie best picture ever and Burt makes what is expect of the great star!!!Resume:First watch: 2010 / How many: 2 / Source: DVD / Rating: 8.5.
Lancaster certainly fits the role well as Joe Bass the nemesis of Jim Howie, Telly Savalas, and the on and off again captive of Joseph Lee, Ozzie Davis.
It's also a civil rights western, with the central relationship being that between backwoods Burt and the over educated ex slave Ossie Davis.
So-So. Forced to trade his valuable furs for a well-educated escaped slave, a rugged trapper vows to recover the pelts from the Indians and later the renegades that killed them.Ossie Davis was nominated for a Golden Globe for Best Supporting Actor for his performance in the film.
One day he's accosted by Indians including the character Two Crows (Armando Silvestre), who force him to turn over his prized furs in exchange for a slave named Joseph (Ossie Davis).
Jim Howie (an amusing Telly Savalas) is the outlaw leader, Kate (Shelley Winters) his high strung wife.Filmed in glorious widescreen by Duke Callaghan and Richard Moore, the Western comedy "The Scalphunters" was written by William W.
Set in 1860 somewhere outside the territory of the United States, it might have been called "How the Runaway Slave Joseph Lee Got His Fists Back" or "The Furry Treasure of Sierra Madre." It's a Pollack picture, so it's genial, good-natured, entertaining, and only a little improbable, and the good guys endure to fight another day.
...it seems impossible to fail,and yet,Pollack's effort seems pussyfooting:is it a true western?or an allegory about the absurdity of slavery?His black man is hardly believable,I do not mean that a black man cannot be educated,far be it from me to think this!But in those conditions,definitely not.It makes me think of Candice Bergen's white woman character in "Soldier Blue"(1970) who seemed to come out of a draft dodgers students meeting.Lancaster's part is never very interesting,and not worthy of this great thespian .The same goes for Shelley Winters who is wasted .In this era when Sidney Pollack gave his most extraordinary works ("this property is condemned"(1966) his towering achievement in 1969 "they shoot horses don't they?" and "Jeremiah Johnson" (1972))"the scalphunters " is really no more than a curio.Note the analogy:in "scalphunters",Lancaster is given an educated slave,and in "Jeremiah Johnson" ,Redford gains a squaw..
A year before Sydney Pollack hit it big w/"They Shoot Horses Don't They" he made this comic western riffing on the phrase "now you have it, now you don't." Burt Lancaster & Ossie Davis are paired up as the strangest of bedfellows trying to get Lancaster's wares back from a marauding band of scalp hunters led by Telly Savalas & Shelley Winters.Alternately funny & sharply acted, this late 60's entry further pushed the envelope on what Western's were soon becoming.Like the other great American art form jazz, this Western upends many of the stalwart modes we had become used to & plays like an extended riff on a kid's game w/gunfights & a last minute calvary save (in the guise of a pack of Indians) thrown in for good measure..
"The Scalphunters" opens with an illiterate frontier fur trapper named Joe Bass (Burt Lancaster) refusing to trade his furs, with the Kiowa Indians, for a runaway field slave
But at the end, he is forced at gunpoint to do that and Bass finds himself, in one moment, the owner of Joseph Lee (Ossie Davis), an escapee from Louisiana, formerly of the Comanche tribe, until stolen by the Kiowas
Lee, an Africanslave by employment, black by colorresults one of the highest educated families in Louisiana, who can read and write
Lee's intention was to circle south, as far as Mexico, because the Mexicans have a law against the slavery trade
Bass' immediate plan was to catch up with the Kiowas and get back his pack horse and furs
But his plan soon failed when a band of scalphunters led by a dangerous double-crosser, Jim Howie (Telly Savalas) attack the poor Indians killing almost all of them and taking, by the way, Bass' property
Bass a man who moves mountains to get what he wants stampedes their wagons and makes the scalphunters' horses dangerous to ride
The sweetest, and in some ways the funniest moments come out when Bass talks to his horse
In one scene, he gets so excited, and turns back to his stallion saying: "By god, you have got an idea!" Telly Savalas makes Kojak a charmer, but in Pollack's film he is a psychopathic bounty hunter who slaughters a dozen Indians
Kate (Shelley Winters)a cigar-puffing doxy qualified to do things to any manis sick about her lover's wagon
She complains that she lives like a squaw
Kate's dream was to live like a lady in a fancy house with servants
Winters delivers the best line of the whole movie when she exclaimed at the end of the film: "What the hell?
They're all men."Ossie Davis comes out with a real sense of humor
In one scene he explains to Kate the benefits of the common cactus, known to the Comanches as Maguey
He makes her believe that this plant was used in the ancient times by the Queen of Sheba to restore the natural oils to her beautiful blond hair
It was nice to see Nick Cravat in a modest role as one of Savalas' men
As you remember, Cravat was ideally cast as Lancaster's sidekick, Piccolo, in the flamboyant "The Flame and the Arrow" in 1950, a spoof of the Robin Hood genre, set against the castle battlements and banquets halls of medieval Lombardy.
With a fine cast lead by the legendary Burt Lancaster, Ossie Davis, Telly Savalis and Shelly Winters and with a lot of memorable dialogue and scenes, this is a great comedy western (Minor spoilers).Joe Bass (Lancaster) is a fur trapper who has spent the whole winter collecting furs.
When a pack of Indians lead by Two Crows take Joe's furs and leave him with Joseph Lee (Davis), an educated slave, Bass pursues the Indians to get his furs back.
The two have a series of misadventures that also involves a party of Scalphunters lead by Jim Howie (Savalis), who take the furs from the Indians and also take Joseph Lee. Bass now has to get both his furs and his slave back.The film works on many levels beside comedy.
The end of the movie, when Lancaster and Davis become covered in mud and are indistinguishable has some symbolism; the white and black man, while of a different color, are the same people..
It stars Burt Lancaster, Ossie Davis, Telly Savalas and Shelley Winters.
A Panavision/De Luxe Colour production, music is by Elmer Bernstein and cinematography by Richard Moore and Duke Callaghan.Joe Bass (Lancaster) is a fur trapper making his way home with his latest haul when he is stopped by Kiowa Indians.
It's Joe Bass against the rest, and only Joseph knows what the Scalphunters are up against."Those furs and that man out there are the Scorpio satanic configuration of death for Jim Howie"Impressively mounted by Pollack, gorgeously shot at Durango, Mexico, The Scalphunters is an interesting blend of a Western action comedy with drama and Civil Rights morality.
Film is structured simply by thrusting Lancaster's ignorant and illiterate man of the wilderness together with Davis' literate but ostracised slave.
Once Joseph falls into the hands of the Scalphunters, film sees Joseph once more held captive, but by using his nous he may be able to finally gain his freedom should the group make it to Mexico.All the time Joe Bass is tracking the group, picking them off any chance he gets, this means the banter and lively group dynamic of the Scalphunters is pleasantly interrupted by an action scene of some standing.
In part, it is a slapstickish reluctant buddy comedy involving Burt Lancaster, as trapper Joe Bass, and escaped slave Joseph Lee(Ossie Davis), as well as the often caustic patter between complaining floozy Kate(Shelly Winters) and Jim Howie(Telly Savalas), boss of the fleeing outlaw gang.
The trade of Joseph Lee forced upon Bass by the Kiowas in exchange for his year's catch of furs and pack horse serves as a parody on the exchange of desirable lands or other property for much poorer or diminished lands or goods frequently forced on various Native American tribes.Joseph Lee hopes to get across the Mexican border, where slavery is outlawed and blacks welcomed.
However, in actuality, this well-written light-hearted film is a clever blend of both comedic and dramatic elements.The story is complicated, yet easy to follow: Joe Bass (Burt Lancaster) is a grizzled, Bible-reciting fur trapper with a monomaniacal attachment to his beaver pelts.
Held up by Indians, Bass is forced to exchange his pelts for the tethered Joseph Lee (Ossie Davis), an escaped slave who formerly served an educated family in Louisiana.
Bass and a reluctant Lee pursue the Indians but, through a twist of fate, Bass' furs fall into the hands of scalp hunters led by Jim Howie (the always engaging Telly Savalas), a burly ruffian henpecked by his prostitute-girlfriend Kate (a fussy, cigar-chewing Shelley Winters).It is the latter performances which is the key to the film's success.
And the best scenes are the humorous ones, such as when Savalas yells at Winters' to stop singing those damn Mormon songs or when Savalas defiantly tells Lancaster that he will kill him then steps on a cactus while returning to the wagon.Yet for all its amusing tomfoolery, the film has a message: The axis of that message revolves around the dyadic relationship between trapper Joe Bass and the slave Joseph Lee; their hopes and their prejudices.
Burt Lancaster is amusing as the very determined Joe Bass, a fur trader whose catch is swiped with runaway slave Ossie Davis given to him in exchange.
It seems like the theme of the movie expressed in my summary line, a quote from Joseph Winfield Lee (Ossie Davis) to Joe Bass (Burt Lancaster), was used again in 1982 with Stallone's "First Blood".
The analogy is apt, Joe Bass uses his tracking and hunting skills to avenge the theft of his winter stock of furs, first stolen by the Kiowas, and then again by Jim Howie's (Telly Savalas) 'Scalphunters'.
I guess it works either way, though nothing else in the story ever pointed to his having spent time with Indians.I had to laugh when Savalas's character called himself a curly haired, blue eyed angel, but you'd probably have to catch a film that came out a few years later to see him with hair.
The direction is excellent.Burt Lancaster, Ossie Davis, Telly Savalas and Shelley Winters all turn in excellent performances.
"Joe Bass" (Burt Lancaster) is a trapper who has just finished his winter occupation and is heading back east to trade in his furs.
Unfortunately, he encounters some semi-friendly Kiowa and they demand his furs in exchange for a black slave named "Joseph Lee" (Ossie Davis).
Additionally, I thought Shelley Winters (as "Kate") was miscast for her part and neither Burt Lancaster nor Telly Savalas (as "Jim Howie") seemed to fulfill their potential.
I think the recent success of comedy-Westerns such as CAT BALLOU and THE HALLELUJAH TRAIL impacted this film--but these other films were consistent in their style, while THE SCALPHUNTERS sure wasn't.Burt Lancaster plays one of the less sympathetic roles of his career.
Plus I liked seeing the relationship between Telly Savalas and Shelley Winters--their dialog was pretty funny at times and how Winters ended the film was rather satisfying.Unfortunately, all the scenes, when placed together, are a mess and just don't fit together well.
The acting is excellent, with nice performances by Burt Lancaster, Ossie Davis, Shelly Winters and Telly Savalas.Burt Lancaster seemed to particularly enjoy his role.
Because Ossie Davis' character is a slave, the movie must be set in the pre-Civil War period, when there were no repeating rifles. |
tt0049233 | Friendly Persuasion | The film is set in Jennings County, Indiana in 1862. Jess Birdwell (Gary Cooper) is a farmer and patriarch of the Birdwell family whose Quaker religion conflicts with his love for the worldly enjoyments of music and horse racing. Jess's wife Eliza, (Dorothy McGuire) a Quaker minister, is deeply religious and steadfast in her refusal to engage in violence. Jess's daughter Mattie (Phyllis Love) wants to remain a Quaker but has fallen in love with dashing cavalry officer Gard Jordan (Peter Mark Richman), a love that is against her mother's wishes. Jess's youngest child "Little" Jess (Richard Eyer) is a feisty child whose comical feud with his mother's pet goose causes her heartache. Jess's elder son Josh (Anthony Perkins) is torn between his hatred of violence and a conviction that to protect his family he must join the home guard and fight the invaders.
We are introduced to the family via its youngest member, "Little" Jess, who is forever at war with his mother's pet goose. The story begins as an easygoing and humorous tale of Quakers trying to maintain their faith as they go to meeting on First Day (Sunday); contrasted with the Birdwells' neighbor Sam Jordan (Robert Middleton) and other members of the nearby Methodist Church. The mood shifts dramatically when the meeting is interrupted by a Union officer who asks how the Quaker men can stand by when their houses will be looted and their families terrorized by approaching Confederate troops. When confronted with the question of his being afraid to fight, Josh Birdwell responds that it might be the case. His honesty provokes the wrath of Purdy, a Quaker elder who condemns people who don't believe as he does.
The film returns to its lighter tone as the Quakers try to maintain their ways, despite the temptations of amusements at a county fair, and a new organ (which Jess buys over Eliza's opposition), but one is always reminded that the Confederate Army is drawing closer. On a business trip, Jess acquires a new horse from the widow Hudspeth (Marjorie Main), and is finally able to defeat Sam in their weekly horse race. One day, Jess is cultivating his fields and notices an immense cloud of smoke on the horizon produced by the burning of buildings. Josh soon arrives and tells them the neighboring community has been reduced to ash and corpses. Josh believes that he must fight, a conviction that threatens to destroy the family. Eliza tells him that by turning his back to their religion he's turning his back on her, but Jess sees things a different way. Josh finds himself on the front line of the battle to stop the advance of the raiders, fires his gun, and is injured by the Confederates. Meanwhile, Jess is reluctant to fight, only picking up a rifle when the family horse gallops back to the farm riderless.
When Confederates arrive, they loot the farm for food when only Eliza and the younger children are present. Sam Jordan is bushwhacked by a "Reb" and Jess struggles with the Confederate soldier and takes away his gun, but ultimately lets him go free and unhurt. Each member of the family faces the question of whether it is ever right for a Christian to engage in violence. | comedy, murder, romantic | train | wikipedia | But the biggest and best film that little studio ever put out was this wonderful film by William Wyler.Gary Cooper by now had a whole lot of career roles, but this one as Jess Birdwell, Quaker farmer in Southern Indiana during the Civil War was probably his last really great performance.
She and Cooper work so well together that you think you are prying in on the family of Eliza and Jess Birdwell.The film is based on a novel by Jessamyn West and it's about the effects of the Civil War on the Birdwell family, the parents and the children, Anthony Perkins, Phyllis Love, and Richard Eyer.
He said he admired both Gary Cooper and Dorothy McGuire as thorough going professionals and it was a pleasure to be working with them and William Wyler and associated with Friendly Persuasion.In some of the lighter moments of Friendly Persuasion before the war hits home, Cooper and Perkins go on a trip to sell some of their farm produce.
Wyler's "Friendly Persuasion" and "The Big Country" entitle an authentic and significant theme which is somewhat expressed in stronger terms in "Friendly Persuasion" but which meet with the impressive "The Big Country." The story is simple, lovely and sensitive...Gary Cooper, head of a Quaker family, is a loving husband and a caring father who has to consider his position at the outbreak of the Civil War in Southern Indiana...
Perkins sees that he has to convince himself that he is not a coward, so he becomes a member of the Home Guard, ready to defend the community...Dorothy McGuire emits pleasant emotions as the Quaker mother, projecting inner beauty to her family...Sentimental and well done, "Friendly Persuasion" is superbly acted and directed, beautifully shot in color...
It has remained one of my favourite movies -and takes its place with such classics as "It's a wonderful Life" and "Casablanca" It was also the first time that I really noticed the music of Dimitri Tiomkin, who is now firmly established as my favourite film composer.
Though the story ultimately focuses on just a couple of the characters' concerns, along the way it provides an effective overview of their lives as a whole.Gary Cooper is surprisingly believable in a somewhat atypical role as a Quaker father.
The change of pace provided by the interweaving of the characters' different stories, the appropriate & beautiful music for the various scenes, the sense of getting to know interesting people, genuine married love between two strong characters as well as the awakening of young love in a setting which has not had sex thrust in their faces, real friendship, the respect paid to religious convictions along with gentle humor at personal foibles - everything adds up to a wonderful film which sticks in the memory and needs just the opening bars of the title song to be brought back gloriously to mind.
A beautiful and sensitive film of a Quaker family whose peaceful existence is disrupted by the Civil War. Beautifully photographed with superb performances by Cooper and McGuire.
It concerns about "Jess Birdwell" (Gary Cooper , he initially turned the film down because he didn't believe the American public would accept him as Quaker , and role was originally intended for Bing Crosby) is the patriarch of a family of Quakers , a Christian sect that refuses to take part in wars .
As Jess/Gary Cooper (before Cooper became involved Montgomery Clift was offered the role of Birdwell, but turned it down) along with his family attempt to remain to its ideals , despite the Civil War which touches their farm life .This enjoyable film packs comedy , religious and familiar life , sense of mood , spectacular battles and lots of reflection .
Gary Cooper as a devout Quaker father and Dorothy McGuire as his wife are very well as the parents ; furthermore , Anthony Perkins is nice as the son fearing being taken for a coward .
One thing is for sure -- FRIENDLY PERSUASION is one of the true gems of the cinema -- a warm and loving film that truly lives up to the promises of the ads: "It Will Pleasure You In A 100 Ways!".
Classic Hollywood film about family of southern Indiana Quakers who resist the call to arms during the civil war.
Gary Cooper and Dorothy McGuire are perfectly cast by William Wyler as father and mother, Jess and Eliza Birdwell who must guide their lives as well as their children's who face mounting obstacles from the civil war encroaching their southern Indiana home in 1862 in this beautifully made film.
Religiosity in Times of War. In 1862, in Southern Indiana, the Quakers Jess Birdwell (Gary Cooper), his wife and Minister Eliza (Dorothy McGuire), their teenage son Joshua (Anthony Perkins), their teenage daughter Mattie (Phyllis Love) and their young son Little Jess (Richard Eyer) live a peaceful life in their farm.
But when the rebel Southern troops threaten the Birdwell family and their friends and neighbors, Josh decides to go to the front to defend their lands and Jess has to take a position against the principles of the Quakers."Friendly Persuasion" is another masterpiece of William Wyler that tells the story of a Quaker family in Southern Indiana that is forced to fight to defend their lands.
A labor of love for director William Wyler, based upon the stories of Jessamyn West regarding the Birdwells, a peacemaking Quaker family in 1862 Indiana who are faced with changing times when Civil War unrest breaks out.
The children bristle under the strict guidance of their by-the-Good-Book mother (a retread performance from Dorothy McGuire), with eldest son Anthony Perkins questioning the family's refusal to become involved in potentially violent matters.
Either like peas in a pod or not amounting to a hill of beans, Wyler always knew how to draw individuals as family members, generally getting the best out of actors.But even by Wyler's standards, there's something too conventional in that bucolic portrayal of a Quaker homesteader's family: the Birdwells, starring Gary Cooper as the reassuring patriarch, Dorothy McGuire the straight-laced holier-than-thou mother who bans as much fun as possible it's a wonder she got such goofy kids: Little Jess with his love-and-hate relationship with a pet-goose, Phyllis Love as Mattie enamored with one of the neighbors' son and Anthony Perkins as the awkward-mannered son.
What we've got in the beginning is literally "Little Quaker House in the Prairie".The first act establishes the major conflict between the Quakers' pacifist philosophy and the ongoing Civil war threatening their peaceful life and calling for every man, old or young, to defend their properties, their lives.
But there's a reason why "High Noon" is a classic and why "Friendly Persuasions is only an acceptable finished product made in Hollywood.The major conflict set-up during a powerful church sequence is cancelled out by the sense of unshakable sitcom-like unity within the Birdwells' family and diluted in many debatable episodic moments involving the buying of an organ or a horse.
Even Phyllis Love as the girl in love made me expect some twist in her romantic subplot but the camera was unnecessarily enamored with Cooper and McGuire who bored the hell out of me as the eternal killjoy.So granted the film has its outdated charm, its postcard look of Indiana Valley, the cute rivalries between neighbors, the moments where you could see Quakers becoming outcasts from the rest of the fighting men, I wish Perkins could become a sort of outcast too, a black sheep or someone who'd confront Cooper like Dean confronted his fathers in "Rebel Without a Cause" or "East of Eden".
But "Friendly Persuasion" suffers from an uneven pacing and no specific direction, made by a William Wyler whose pair of Best Picture winners put him in a zone of commercial comfort, this film doesn't standout as one of his best, it's not even one of his memorable lesser movies.I'm glad Wyler could pull himself together and make his final masterpiece: "Ben-Hur" three years later, and Perkins would get a role that would fit his acting talent in "Psycho".
A sensitive portryal of the moral dilemma facing pacifistic Quakers as their farms are raided by Confederate troops, this is a movie that takes religion seriously as an important, adult, and consequential subject.The delicate balance of power in the household of a straitlaced woman Quaker minister whose very masculine husband and restless children are members of her congregation is portrayed with insight and humor.The acting is beautiful, especially Anthony Perkins as the agonized teenaged son who must decide whether to fight to protect his home, against his mother's will.
The film provides not only a lesson in the lifestyle of a Quaker family in Indiana, it reveals the personal impact and heartbreak of the American Civil War. It was hard for a young man to adhere to his family's pacifist beliefs when he knew his friends were going off to war to defend the very place he called home.
Perkins is very amusing here.Eventually he decides to enlist in the Civil War though his father tells him he must kill, which is against their religious upbringing.One of the charms of this film is it is not an overblown production.
Friendly Persuasion is just such a film....it is a film that transcends all ages with strong emotion, peace, love and understanding.....FP might possibly the greatest Hollywood film of all time...certainly there are arguments for it being so....first of all it has brilliant casting with Dorothy McGuire and Gary Cooper as mother and father Birdwell.....at the time they might have been the very best male and female actors of their time....
Anthony Perkins handles his role as Josh with temerity and rigidity and wonderful emotional battles...like the scene where he cries out loud after shooting at the river...Phyllis Love as Mattie is strong, caring, sweet and pushed to her emotional boundaries....little Jess played by that wonderful kid at the time was splendid, Richard Eyer...who could forget him as the genie in "Seventh Voyage of Sinbad"......every emotional string is pulled within the Birdwell family in order to avoid involvement with the Civil War encroaching their Indiana home.
Then there are other Quakers who try to force their beliefs on the Birdwell family....director William Wyler directs a brilliant, flawless movie....he knew when to inject comedy, action, fighting and personal involvement to a tee.....you will howl in delight as Jess and Josh Birdwell visit Dorothy Main and her three, hapless, love starved daughters......then there is the antics at the county fair filled with comedy and genuine pure laughs...also Professor Quigley the organ salesman will make you howl......for my money the scene near the end when the rebel soldier is pinned to the tree and thinks he is going to die - but suddenly he is let go by Cooper is very emotionally draining and worthy to see......the solider melts down in a very compelling and emotional way as he is allowed to live.....there are so many moments in FP to talk about.....the horse race between Cooper and his neighbor are a stitch and Doprothy McGuire provides her own antics like blowing dust off of her bible......another compelling scene when a union major is called to the Quaker church to warn the Quakers about the dangers of not fighting to save their lands.....Cooper with that famous statement, "If I am called to violence, I hope that I can be an instrument of the Lord"......there are so many memorable scenes to talk about...this is just a movie par excellence and you can watch it 20 times and not get bored.....to this day 45 years later I think about avoiding violence in my life and "being an instrument of the Lord"....watch this movie with your family and be delighted.......
I found 'Friendly Persuasion' to be not only charming and well-made, but a good representation of the problems of Quaker life during war time.
Being human, we Friends do not always live up to our self-set standards; but this movie does show a Quaker family trying its best to remain faithful to its creed.As to the previous reviewer who questioned the use of the Plain Speech during the Civil War period, this is not an anachronism.
Gary Cooper, (never better), is the peace-loving farmer, Dorothy McGuire, (equally good), is his wife and Anthony Perkins, (brilliant in only his second film and picking up an Oscar nomination), is the son who goes off to fight.Wyler, who himself served in the Second World War, was too canny a director to make an outright anti-war film though the message of the picture is clear.
Cooper kind of plays against type here since he was so often a man of movie action, but in reality his strength of character and belief allows him to maintain his image.Comedy relief is at hand given the youngest son's ongoing battle with Samantha the Goose, a family pet with devious attack modes.
I thought Gary Cooper and Dorothy McGuire made a great couple, and though she was so stuffy and prudish in the beginning (well, she is a Quaker, after all) you see some changes in her by the end of the picture, and she will grow on you.Friendly Persuasion has the perfect combination of humor, drama, love story, and action.
But still, I was expecting a cornball, wholesome family film and so was pleasantly surprised by what I got instead."Friendly Persuasion" garnered six Academy Award nominations but won none: Best Picture, Best Director (William Wyler), Best Supporting Actor (Anthony Perkins), Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Original Song (warbled by Pat Boone), and Best Sound Recording.Grade: A-.
This beautifully adapted film of Jessamyn West's novel is a treasure that I'm sure I'll watch again and again.The story of a Quaker family caught between their religious principals and the reality of the Civil War is both charming and compelling.
Gary Cooper breaks out of his usual roles as the father, Jess Birdwell, who isn't adverse to a bit of fun despite his strict Quaker beliefs, and Dorothy McGuire is perfectly cast as his somewhat fretful but tender minister wife.
Phyllis Love is captivating as their romantic teenage daughter, and Anthony Perkins, later unfortunately typecast in some rather oddball roles, puts in a splendid performance as their son Joshua, who is morally torn between his pacifist beliefs and his feeling of duty to protect his family from the invading southern army.While the backdrop of the story is the rural north and the horrible conflict of the Civil War and how the Birdwell family deals with it, there are so many warm and charming snapshots of family life and the love they have for one another.
"Ben Hur" too.But "Friendly persuasion" has a more interesting subject.A quaker family (Gary Cooper,Dorothy McGuire) who shall not kill,and know they will not,cannot ,for any reason,kill their brother.
Best thing about the movie: Dorothy McGuire was cast as Cooper's wife after Wyler's choice, Katharine Hepburn, declined.
Writer Michael Wilson told HUAC in 1951, "I feel that this committee might take the credit, or part of it at least, for the fact that 'The Friendly Persuasion' was not produced, in view of the fact that it dealt warmly, in my opinion, with a peace-loving people." Although it took a couple years, a slight name change, and Wilson's name removed, the film did still come out.There were some other changes: "What happened to Wilson's pacifist script after Capra dropped it," notes film historian Joseph McBride, "reflected the political climate of the Cold War. When William Wyler directed the film for Allied Artists in 1956 as Friendly Persuasion, he had the story changed to make the Quaker youth (played by Anthony Perkins) become a killer.
This movie also stands as a emotional look at the war between the states, what we call the Civil War. Many families and communities were torn apart by that war, and although we hear about those travails in books, capturing it on film is an entirely different story.
Splendid Americana: Gary Cooper/William Wyler Film.
William Wyler was the greatest director of his era: Jezebel, The Little Foxes, Wuthering Heights, The Letter, Mrs. Miniver, The Best Years Of Our Lives, The Heiress, Ben Hur, Funny Girl, and this movie Friendly Persuasion.
Bette Davis deemed Wyler the Great Love Of Her Life and Her Greatest Director: The Little Foxes, Jezebel and The LetterFriendly Persuasion is a beautiful film with a great co starring role for Dorothy McGuire.One of my favorite movies of all time.
Director William Wyler and many of the contemporary audience of FRIENDLY PERSUSION had seen the first hand horrors of war , whilst here the movie points out that the enemy are not brutal and everyone goes home to their family after a conflict .
"Friendly Persuasion" is the story about a Quaker family living along the Indiana border during the Civil War. Given that Quakers are pacifists, the family stays out of the action and tries to maintain their separatist ways.
The Quakers depicted in Jessamyn West's charming and well-plotted short stories, Jess Birdwell and his wife, played by Gary Cooper and Dorothy Mcguire, are trying to live by a set of rules that works miserably in the secular world and extremely well for them on their remote farm and in their food-selling business.
When I was going to watch this movie for the first time, my mother told me it's about a Quaker family during the civil war all i could think of was BORING.
With Gary Cooper in the cast, even portraying a Quaker, I thought there would be more in the way of conflict for the main character to face and persevere against.
Quakers in 1862 southern Indiana are caught up in the great Civil War. This is a film of emotional, psychological and religious conflict upon the members of Gary Cooper and Dorothy McGuire, both of whom give splendid performances. |
tt1405500 | For Colored Girls | Each woman is represented by a color: Jo Bradmore represents red, Tangie Adrose represents orange, Yasmine represents yellow, Juanita Sims represents green, Kelly Watkins represents blue, Nyla Adrose represents purple, and Crystal Wallace represents brown. Additionally, the characters of Alice Adrose, who represents white, and Gilda, who does not represent a color, were made specifically for the film.
The film opens with the nine main characters reciting a poem of their inner thoughts ("Dark Phrases"). Kelly arrives at Tangie's brownstone to see Crystal about the safety of her children. At that time, Juanita arrives to leave her lover, Frank, a potted plant and telling him that she is breaking off their affair ("No Assistance"). Kelly attempts to speak with Crystal's children on how they ended up in the hospital, but is unsuccessful when Crystal's alcoholic boyfriend, Beau Willie, kicks her out. Crystal's nosy neighbor and apartment manager, Gilda, informs Kelly of Crystal's situation ("A Night with Beau Willie Brown") and reveals she was the one who called her. Meanwhile, Alice, Tangie's mother, shows up to beseech Tangie for money, but gets rebuffed instead.
Alice goes out to raise money, and encounters Yasmine, who gives her a little money. Yasmine is boasting to the girls in her dance class about Bill, a man she met on the subway, and agrees to a date, despite her initial hesitance. One of Yasmine's dance students, Nyla, is talking with the girls about her graduation night and losing her virginity ("Graduation Nite"), and later begins to vomit.
Juanita is waiting in Jo's office at Robe Rouge, a fictional magazine company. Crystal shows up for work, having been running late and informs Jo that her 9 o'clock appointment has arrived, despite it already being 10 o'clock. Juanita is then allowed in to interest Jo in giving some money to a non-profit organization that specializes in women's health care, but is rudely rebuffed.
Kelly is with Donald, her partner, at the gynecologist, who informs Kelly that she cannot have children due to scarring in her fallopian tubes caused by an untreated STD. So, Kelly runs off without an explanation. Juanita is at the hospital giving advice on safe sex to women when Frank comes along to ask for forgiveness, but Juanita refuses to give in to his advances. Tangie, who works as a bartender, finds a married man on business and offers to show him a "good time." That same night, Crystal implores Beau Willie to stop drinking, while he only cares about marrying her to increase his welfare benefits. At a restaurant, Jo leaves a voice message on her husband's, Carl, phone, imploring him to call her.
At that same restaurant, Yasmine and Bill have a date night together, recalling a story about her love for Latin dances ("Now I Love Somebody More Than"). Alice comes home to her apartment and it's revealed that Nyla is Alice's daughter and Tangie's sister. Alice gives Nyla the feeble amount of money she made, under the belief that it's for Nyla's college application fees. Meanwhile, Yasmine is walking home from her date with Bill, explaining that she loved dance more than anything until she met Bill ("Now I Love Somebody More Than" cont.).
Tangie takes the married man home with her to sleep with him, but angrily kicks him out after she learns that he thought she was a prostitute. Nyla shows up to ask Tangie for money, explaining that she needs it for college, but Tangie is not fooled. She then deduces that Nyla is pregnant, but Nyla denies this. Tangie relishes in the fact that Nyla isn't so perfect after all and that Alice will hate her the way she hates Tangie. She then tells her about the time she got pregnant and reveals where to find a back-alley abortionist.
Jo waits impatiently for Carl to return home and it's then revealed that Carl was the man Donald had arrested earlier. The couple then get into an argument about Carl investing into a failed company with Jo's money, which Carl did because he felt emasculated as a man, who is not providing and forfeiting his right to do anything in favor of submitting to Jo's will. Donald returns to his and Kelly's apartment where Kelly then reveals how she got her STD. She explains that long before she was married, she and two of her friends had been seeing the same man and all contracted a disease from him ("Pyramid"). Despite this, Donald reveals that he still loves Kelly regardless of her condition. Juanita drives home to see Frank waiting for her on the stoop. He seduces her into letting him stay at her apartment.
The next day, Jo receives flowers from Carl and calls him to thank him. He reveals that he got tickets to the opera, which he hates, as an apology for last night's argument. During this conversation, he is clearly looking at other men desiringly. Yasmine also receives flowers, from Bill, and is visited by Tangie, who came by to pay the three hundred dollars for Nyla's college fees. She rudely informs Yasmine that Bill only wants to "fuck her," then offers to pay for Nyla's fees, but Yasmine reveals that the dance class is free.
Tangie realizes that Nyla went to see the abortionist, Rose (Macy Gray), who is terrifying, and probably drunk. Nyla's mind completely goes blank during the abortion as Rose tells her of a story about her life in Harlem ("I Used to Live in the World"). Yasmine excitedly invites Bill into her home for dinner. After some light flirting and some drinking, Bill removes his clothing and savagely rapes her. Jo and her husband are at the opera, watching a performance of La Donna in Viola (an Italian, operatic version of "Pyramid"). During the performance, Jo watches as her husband cruises another man.
The next day, Jo informs Crystal that she does not have her list of advertisers in her folder and has a very important meeting soon. Crystal offers to take the train to her building, but Jo tells her that'll waste time and offers to drive her there in her limo. Seeing the male driver in the car, Beau Willie believes Crystal is having an affair and the abuse begins, which can be heard in Gilda's house as she watches the kids. She tries to calm their fears by telling them a story about how she met her first husband ("Toussaint").
Beau Willie takes the children from Gilda's to show that he can be a good father and asks Crystal to marry him once again. After she refuses, Beau Willie becomes violent and dangles the children over the fifth-story window, giving Crystal an ultimatum. Gilda frantically runs out into the street and screams for help as Jo, Juanita and several on-lookers witness Beau Willie drop the children to their death ("A Night with Beau Willie Brown" cont.).
Donald interrogates Yasmine at the hospital on her rape, where he informs her that it'll be difficult to press charges as she tells him that women can be raped anywhere by anyone ("Latent Rapists"). At the same hospital, Alice frantically comes in search of Nyla, who passed out in the streets after her abortion. Nyla is being interrogated by Renee and Kelly, and gives them and Alice a vivid detail of her abortion ("Abortion Cycle #1"). Kelly leaves the room to find Crystal screaming in horror at the realization of her children's brutal murder as she is being comforted by Gilda, Jo and Juanita. After being informed of the situation and recognizing Crystal, Kelly becomes visibly upset.
Alice confronts Tangie in her apartment and after a physical altercation, they reveal to each other that Tangie was raped by her grandfather, Alice's father, causing Alice to take her to the abortionist where Alice supervised her, whereas Nyla was unsupervised. Alice reveals that her father took her virginity and was given to a white man at fifteen to have children. All these events explained why Tangie is the way she is ("One" cont.). After kicking Alice out of her apartment, Gilda comes into her house to put ice on the bruise on Tangie's face. She explains that Tangie and mother make a lot of sense before telling her a detailed account of Tangie's exploits ("One" cont.). Tangie believes that Gilda has been snooping again through the wall, but Gilda reveals that she was once like Tangie.
Juanita comes home to find Frank gone and assumes he has left again, but he soon comes home with Chinese food and sees that Juanita is upset, despite trying to appear to be happy and is asked to hold her. Carl comes home to find Jo distraught and reveals what happened with Crystal, stating that she never once knew she was abused and wondering what kind of person she was. Jo and Carl embrace as she sobs into his shoulder. Alice and Nyla return to their apartment where Alice tells her to pray for forgiveness. As Nyla prays, Alice attempts to exorcise her with ashes and hot oil, hurting Nyla. Nyla freaks out, fights off Alice and then runs away to Yasmine's apartment, hoping to find some comfort. However, Yasmine is too traumatized from her rape to answer the door, so Nyla leaves.
Kelly is waiting outside the brownstone as Crystal comes out with a pail and a brush to wash away the blood of her children. Kelly walks up to her and Crystal asks if she's awake, to which Kelly, who is speechless, nods her head. Crystal comments that she does not feel awake and thinks that this is what death must feel like. Nyla passes by and Kelly takes her into Crystal's apartment to wash her up. Hearing Tangie bring in yet another suitor to her apartment, Nyla confronts her. Tangie kicks her suitor out after he asks her to invite Nyla for a threesome. Tangie and Nyla hash out their problems, before Tangie reveals that her life is complicated and she's still learning from her mistakes ("No More Love Poems #4"). Afterwards, Tangie and Nyla reconcile.
Yasmine is practicing an interpretive dance ("Sechita") as Kelly discovers that Crystal has swallowed an entire bottle of pills. Crystal is taken to the hospital as Yasmine is visited by Donald, who has informed her that Bill has been murdered after attempting to rape another woman. She goes into the morgue to look at his body one last time, before slapping him and then leaving. Juanita informs Kelly, Nyla, Tangie and Gilda that the doctors pumped Crystal's stomach and can see visitors as soon as she stabilizes.
That night, Kelly is unable to sleep, feeling guilty for not taking Crystal's children away sooner because she had to see the doctor about her infertility. Donald reassures her that one thing has nothing to do with the other. Juanita comes home with a birthday cake for Frank, only to find that he is not home and his clothes are gone. Juanita vents her frustration to her women's health class ("Somebody Almost Walked Off Wid Alla My Stuff") as Crystal is released from the hospital and goes into therapy. Jo gives Juanita a check for her non-profit organization, Beau Willie is sent to jail, and Nyla returns to dance class with Yasmine.
Tangie knocks on Crystal's door to invite her to Nyla's going away party. Crystal initially declines, but says she'll go if she feels up to it. Tangie begrudgingly invites Gilda, both finally having an unspoken, mutual respect for each other. Juanita finally breaks things off with Frank for good ("No More Love Poems #1"). Gilda comes by Crystal's apartment to see if she's eaten, which she hasn't. Crystal is still wondering how Beau Willie could do such a thing, but Gilda tells her that she also needs to take responsibility for not leaving Beau Willie sooner, and tells her that she needs to get out of the apartment.
Jo confronts Carl on his homosexuality, which he angrily denies at first but Jo tells him that she was not oblivious to the way Carl looks at other men. After venting his frustrations over Jo's controlling nature, he then admits that he has been sleeping with other men and tells her that he's sorry. Jo, however, tells him that she is not accepting his apology, having heard him apologize many times before ("Sorry"). Jo then reveals that she is HIV-positive from Carl's exploits and tells Carl to leave when she gets back home.
At Nyla's going away party, all the women gather to celebrate. Alice arrives under Tangie's invitation to give Nyla a few presents and tells Nyla she's proud of her. She then leaves to let Nyla and Tangie enjoy their night together. Jo and Juanita have a conversation on the rooftop about HIV, where Juanita assures Jo that HIV is not a death sentence. The other women come out to join them, including Crystal, as the women talk about the value of their love ("My Love Is Too") and share their experiences with men's apologies ("Sorry" cont.).
Crystal tells everyone that she was missing something in her life and the women reveal the hurt and pain they've gone through in their lives, before coming together to embrace Crystal and each other ("A Laying on of Hands") and move forward with their lives. | romantic | train | wikipedia | Tyler Perry has performed a little miracle in transferring Ntozake Shange's exquisite play "For Colored Girls Who Have Considered Suicide When the Rainbow Is Enuf" into an opened up and expanded film.
The dialogue still is deeply embedded in Shange's poetry but the narrative Perry added makes the stage experience a flowing cinematic story: the result is a powerful film that happens to be populated by some of the finest actresses of today.
Whoopie Goldberg is the religiously inclined mother of Thandie Newton (a woman of physical needs that cannot be satisfied despite nightly change of partners) and Tessa Thompson (a high school girl with aspirations crushed by an unwanted pregnancy); Janet Jackson is a bitter, wealthy magazine editor married to the Down Low Omari Hardwick; Loretta Devine is a community service giver in a relationship with the undependable Richard Lawson; Kimberly Elise (breathtakingly magnificent!) is paired with the war-torn PTSD alcoholic and abusive Michael Ealy; Kerry Washington works for child services despite her infertility in her marriage to Hill Harper; Anika Noni Rose is a lovely innocent dance teacher brutally treated by Khalil Kain; Phylicia Rashad is the tenement house manager who is the central mother confessor to her tenants.
Sad because I can just think of all the people I know and women who are just like those in the movie living on no hope or false hope.
That being said, I am very disappointed that one poster decided to comment not about the movie but about their own personal prejudices about black women, and probably black people in general.
Let me start off by saying that I am NOT a fan of Tyler Perry's past movies, television shows, or plays.
I look forward to seeing this movie again.As for the acting...Rashad, Devine, Elise, Newton, and Rose were the standouts.
I have to say that i mostly disagree with the bad reviews, but I understand the issues with the movie.Lets start with the good: The acting was great.
I love Thandie Newton to death and she did a good job acting in this movie, but in some scenes, she overdid it.
(I am NOT a Tyler Perry Fan, although I have seen most of his melodramas)This film is clearly a departure from his usual style, and for the most part he gets it really right!!
All of the Women give Incredible Performances, save for Whoopi Goldberg, who is wonderful in the film BUT, I feel needed more takes than she was given to really dig deeper.
I feel like she thought, I'm in a Tyler Perry movie, this ain't Steven Spielberg directing me.
So they turn increasingly inward, and to each other, to survive.Director Tyler Perry has great material here--the Ntozake Shange play that wowed Broadway in 1975.
And so through all the tears comes a realization that this very artificially outrageous drama has deeply deeply serious intentions.If you like movies for how they are made--the editing, the filming, the set design--you'll be impressed.
Pieces that I understood in one way when I read them took on a different and more potent meaning when I saw them being performed in the context of the film.
The delivery of most (not all) of the poems and the character portrayals generally was excellent.There is some overacting (Kerry Washington in particular stood out as overdone to me), and some of Tyler Perry's typical caricatures (if you are a light-skinned man with a high paying job....you are a bastard!), but if I evaluated this movie based on whether my understanding and experience of the text was expanded by this film, I would say it was.
I loved the motif of the characters passing each other by in the beginning half which all culminated at the pivotal point in the movie with them beginning to band together to the aid of each other.I think it was a strong ensemble cast(including Janet) and should be nominated as such, much like they did with the movie "Crash".
I think even for Michael although I would guess the black community does not want to see another of our males nominated for something negative but he played that part really honestly and showed great turmoil.I feel that people are unjustly criticizing Janet.
They simply were able to transfer Michael Ealy's character having been in the Vietnam War to being in the present day Iraq War. Nobody used cell phones because nobody in the movie talked on telephones.I don't understand why critics praised "Precious" yet would bash this.
I mean there were scenes I was too afraid to watch, scenes I couldn't take my eyes off and scenes that were hilarious and serious all at the same time.I think this is a great piece of cinema by Tyler Perry, with great dialog, great actors and a great look and while it may not be perfect, no film is..
You should have let someone like Baz Luhrmann direct "For Colored Girls..." I've seen and read this play and I've always loved it!
people that don't know anything about movies whatsoever.don't write a review after reading the "expert critics" those journal critics are so lame they are full of sorrow, dreams that they didn't accomplish, its sad to see the beautiful work from Tyler Perry, getting so much hate.GREAT MOVIE!!!
So he must be doing something right.And another thing, if you just don't understand black films or the idea that they are successful black people in society with high paying jobs, then you need to watch more than the Andy Griffin Show and All In The Family.Basically, go see the movie and then review it.
There is nothing cliché about this film, the setting was perfectly altered to fit the current times, although I would have equally enjoyed it if the movie was set during the time the play was written.For a few of the actresses, this is the best performance I've ever seen of them.
But again, perhaps that is where the author meant to go with the piece.In sum, while there were major areas that could have been improved, I have to call foul on some of the critics' assault of this film, and their proclivity to compare it to other--admittedly weak--Tyler Perry works.
Just because someone is taking the initiative to point out such things and frown upon them, does not mean they are discrediting the entire black male race--because as I remember Kelly's (Kerry Washington) husband was quite supportive of her.Any woman of color who hasn't been "whitewashed" (not meant to be offensive; for lack of a better term) or thoroughly unexposed to adversity because of their color most likely will not get this film.
But whether you interpret the meaning behind the words of the women in this film, or whether you just brush it off as "pretentious" because Tyler Perry is coming into Hollywood as a force to be reckoned with (which is a fact, not an opinion), is entirely up to you..
Overall this was one of Tyler Perry's best films, that guy did an amazing job!.
You would already expect to see a wide range of acting but you will not be prepared for the great range he introduces in this film.Being a person that doesn't really read poetry this movie does great job in introducing all the poetry it does into acting parts.
The movie gives an insight into many different relationships that woman have, without giving the plot away just know it has everything from rape to promiscuity.It's definitely a must see for "colored girls everywhere" as well as "colored man" because it shows just how strong the black woman has to be not only as a woman but as a black woman, she is one of the strongest homosepians out there, lol.Men need to see just how strong woman are and how they hold the family structure together no matter, from generational curses that still haunt the black family today.You will have a great new respect for Mrs. Kimberly Elise, she should be nominated for an academy award after this, if not an Oscar!.
It took me a minute to get use to it, but I eventually appreciated the "differentness".While most involved did a wonderful job, the standout performances came from Kimberly Elise, Phylicia Rashad, Loretta Devine, Michael Ealy and Anika Noni Rose.
The movie made me thankful for my hard-working father who was always there, my brother-in-laws who treat my sisters well and for the many men I have been blessed to know who would not, could not rape, brutalize nor disrespect a woman.
I imagine that Janet Jackson's agent said that Ms. Jackson will be in this film if she gets a good crying scene, because the Motion Picture Academy looks favorably on actors and actresses who cry.
I've found that most people misinterpret the title "For Colored Girls." The movie is not necessarily about women of color...if you read the book you'd realize that the woman were nameless and only identified by a color, ie.
I appreciated the subtle, musical ques when the actor's were citing poetry lines; and, I appreciated the hysterical scenes, the look-away scenes, the intense scenes, and the sad scenes.I loved the way I was angry and felt sympathy for each character and that Tyler COMPLETELY left his normal deliver.
This is and will be a signature piece to Tyler Perry, however it's so boring i don't know if it's worth the full 15.75 to watch it..This movie is watchable and tolerable unlike his other rehashed, VERY cliché' flicks but it just falls down the tubes with the entertainment portion, i was bored to death, The movie is basically Waiting to Exhale, Whats love got to do with it and Precious all thrown together in a big Gumbo pot however i did enjoy Kimberly Elise acting which probably saved this entire movie from being thrown out a week into it's release.
put this women in more movies and give her bigger scripts!Obviously Tyler Perry doesn't need anyone to tell him he does or does not know how to direct but he does have a lot of work to do..
When I talk about fluidity, I mean the cohesion of scenes, but I definitely liked the way that Shange's actual poems were incorporated into the film.
(But that is expected, as she has a natural foreign accent.) I've noticed a lot of people criticize Kerry Washington's character as "overdone," but I really liked Kerry in this film and believed her completely.
I'm not going to lie---it certainly does label black men as "douches." All black men, with the exception of Kerry Washington's husband in the film, are portrayed as either emotionally, verbally, sexually, or physically abusive, selfish, and heartless---which as we all know is NOT true in real-life.
There are plenty of great black men in this world that are educated, good providers, loving, respectful, honest, and that know how to treat women like princesses.
I don't think was a man-bashing movie, but more-so a film that highlights many issues women experience that come hand-in-hand with broken families, absent fathers, violent men, rape/sexual abuse.
It's too "OK" for us to make "colored film" but you know every liberal would have a heart attack if we made a movie and labeled it "For White ____" or any title like that.
Tyler Perry (director) brought these stories together in a film that acknowledges life's difficulties while affirming our ability as people to rise above and find strength in each other..
Later she said Perry had done a fine job, but that the film wasn't quite "finished"."For Colored Girls (Who Have Considered Suicide When the Rainbow Is Enuf)" is just that.
The artistic palate full with some outstanding dramatic performances, dancing, opera, poetry, and heart.This movie is for the colored girls who have felt joy and despair, who have seen both sides of the moon.
Tyler Perry's filming of For Colored Girls was a pretty good adaptation of Ntozake Shange's play.
So I just watched Tyler Perry's adaptation of Ntozake Shange's play whose title is shortened here to For Colored Girls.
Each actress-Loretta Devine, Phylicia Rashad, Whoopi Goldberg, Kerry Washington, Anika Noni Rose, Kimberly Elise, Thandie Newton, Janet Jackson among them-brought their own dramatic talents to the fore which helped when it came time for the poetic monologues to be recited.
And as one reviewer already said, I'm certainly not a fan of Tyler Perry's "low art" films, and his depiction of the African American female in particular.
In For Colored Girls, I'd like to say Bravo to Perry, poetic dialog is so beautifully scripted and weaved into the progression of the story.
I think this movie is better than all of his other films.
I loved the show when I saw it on Broadway decades ago.I wondered why I hadn't seen the movie around much, and rented it on TV.I found a riveting series of great interlocking stories, moving and powerful performances, and updated perspectives on race and gender (we get behind some of the men's problems too, without excuses for the inexcusable).The job most commonly presented for women in movies these days is "princess." No kidding.
As some have said it started off slow and as it progressed you really got into all of the characters and aspects of the play I had seen more than 25 years ago stated to come back to me.All of the performances were great especially that of Kimberly Elise who as some have indicated probably deserves an Oscar nomination.
What this story does an excellent job of doing is illustrating how we make decisions about our lives based on situations- including considering suicide.I agree with other reviewers that there was some overacting, but overall this was a great movie.
I saw the movie last night and frankly is not that bad some people most of the time criticize without going to the movies and watch it Tyler Perry might have in the past made some corny movies but Four Colored girls is his BEST so far i'm not saying it's a perfect 8 or 10 but give the man some credits and stop being so racist some people even compare Perry with Miley Cyrus acting that is so Lame before commenting take on a movie take some time to go see it you will be amaze how people can be good at what they do there's plenty of "Non-Hollywood" actors out there who are better than a lot so Called Good Actors they might never have a chance to be and Big Budget movies but they definitely BETTER than some Movies Icons that you guys are crazy about, I really think Tyler Perry Deserve some credits for his work Stop Blaming the guy unless you can do better.
Colored Girls runs close to that but get a half a step up because its not a pure Perry Production.A few years ago I said that it was very likely that Perry would win an Oscar if he got a handle on his the fast and loose way he makes films.
One cannot help but wonder....what message is Tyler Perry is sending to our black women by throwing black men under the bus in every movie he makes.
I really wanted to find something in these characters to like, but other than a few of them, I really didn't find them likable enough to sympathize with their plights.The film has an amazing cast of black actresses, many of whom I have had the delight of seeing live on Broadway.
I think it was well intended to make a film version of this, but unfortunately, the movie doesn't come off as pro-women as much as man-hating and angry.
If I got date raped, beaten, aborted, a std, infected with HIV, cussed out, freaked myself to men or women , stalked, had my kids dropped from a 5 story window, pimped out because I was to black & ugly to have my own race want me, had babies blood and dirt put over my head (breathe), went psychotic scrapping the blood off the street, then held each other like waiting to exhale not encouraging counseling & a better life, then i'm not inspired.
So all I have to say is this is not a movie for anyone showing our race just loves to see themselves in a negative light because when positive films are done we skip them.
The musical score and cinematography were great and should've been nominated as well for the Oscar.This is a good and emotional movie if like Tyler Perry's movies than you'll like For Colored Girls.
I have only recently watched Tyler Perry films with the Why Did I Get Married?
And this line isn't alone as many of the speeches are poetesized (yes I made that word up.) I'm sure as poetry or even a play that its lovely but the translation to screen was poor at best.At first glance the performances from the cast in this film are powerful.
Kimberly Elise, Janet Jackson, Loretta Devine, Anika Noni Rose, Kerry Washington, Tessa Thompson, Phylicia Rashad, and Whoopi Goldberg all do well and they certainly have a strong clout for actors but they are all the same with different problems.
I LOVE Tyler Perry movies....I Hated this one!.
I have seen and own all of Tyler Perry movies.
It was Polar Opposite of the Movies I Love to see from Tyler Perry!
I would not say that this is a chick flick either, I think men could watch this movie and actually enjoy it as well as women.
They have their own prejudices against Black women, and they don't like Tyler Perry.
This immediately became his best film!What about the performers in this movie!
I was surprised when I saw the trailer for this movie and saw her in it: Phylicia Rashad working with Tyler Perry?!
These issues are universal, and I'm not sure I really see the need to label the whole movie "For Colored Girls" And as a black women, I would like to see black women portrayed in a more positive/influential light. |
tt4392770 | Always Shine | Beth (Caitlin FitzGerald) is an actress who is finally beginning to have commercial success appearing in cinematic thrillers and beer commercials which routinely require nudity. She plans a weekend getaway to Big Sur with her best friend Anna (Mackenzie Davis), a struggling actress who works for free in student films.
On the way to Big Sur, Beth is recognized by a fan. Anna soon discovers that Beth has been featured in the "Young Hollywood" edition of a popular magazine. Later that day, the two women have a conversation, during which Anna reveals that she broke up with her boyfriend after getting angry with him, and shoving him rather aggressively.
Anna and Beth go to a bar where Anna flirts with a man who quickly loses interest in her, as he finds her too aggressive. He instead asks out Beth, who accepts his dinner date despite having a boyfriend.
The next day, Anna helps Beth practice for an upcoming audition, after which the two go hiking in the woods, where they encounter Beth's director friend who has wanted to cast Anna in his upcoming short film. Anna is dismayed to learn that Beth was already aware of this offer but never mentioned it to her. Beth accuses Anna of looking at her with contempt, and scurries away.
While hiking alone to their rented cottage, Beth is offered a ride home by a kindly bartender. After returning to the cottage, Beth calls her boyfriend to tell him that Anna is jealous of her, even though Beth still feels insecure about the quality of her acting career. Overhearing the conversation, Anna physically attacks Beth, who flees into the woods with Anna in pursuit-- and the altercation continues there.
The next day, Anna begins to dress in Beth's clothes and acts demurely, much like Beth, who quickly notices Anna's odd behavior (not to mention the fact that she tends to follow Beth around). Anna (as Beth) returns to the bar where she encounters the kindly bartender. The two flirt, and have a tryst.
The following evening, while he and Anna are having dinner at the home of his friends, Anna sees Beth (now acting like Anna) approaching her and flees into the woods, where the two have yet another altercation. Beth attempts to choke Anna, who manages to turn the tables, fatally strangling Beth. Shortly afterward, Beth's body seems to vanish. The following morning, Anna awakens in the woods. As she returns to the house, Anna sees police officers wheeling away a body they found in the woods. | psychological | train | wikipedia | Our two characters, Anna and Beth, are both actresses.
Bashful Beth is a rising success, while bold Anna's career is struggling to take off.
However the trip seems burden by an overbearing sense of tension, that slowly builds between the two over their stay, leading to an unexpected yet unavoidable confrontation.The film is intriguing enough to hold interest until the end, mainly because of the two main characters and the actresses portraying them.
The film also has a lot of interesting themes on its mind regarding the role of women in the film business and in society as well, and it will surely hit close to home for many.
The two lead actresses are really good in their roles, particularly Mackenzie Davis who has the meatier role and who is able to knock it out of the park.
It takes a lot of clichéd elements like the rivalry between women, especially actresses, but puts a new spin on them.The film is about two best friends, Beth (Caitlin FitzGerald) and Anna (Mackenzie Davis).
Both are actresses but Beth is experiencing a sudden surge in her career as she begins to land dumb parts in big budget successful horror movies.
The women head up to a cabin for a vacation but tension about their careers is high and neither can find it within themselves to be kind, graceful or supportive of the other.
It's a bit of a psychological horror film, so while the gore isn't there, it's still pretty dynamic and a little scary..
The story looked promising, two girl- friends going for a weekend together, the one being a popular actress and having a steady relation.
This flick is going to hit a lot of festivals in the near future, I guess why because it's in no way a horror, some say a psychological thriller, I can agree in some way but still nothing really happens only verbal words....Gore 0/5 Nudity 0/5 Effects 0/5 Story 2,5/5 Comedy 0/5.
This movie is about two young, struggling actresses whose friendship is dying and they know it, so they plan a girls retreat in a remote cabin in Big Sur. One is beautiful, in a committed relationship, gets admiration where she goes, and has had some steady gigs.
The other is the better actress yet can't get cast, she is alone, has average looks and is very mentally unstable - we see this in the first few scenes and it builds from there.
I strongly recommend this movie if you are into psychological thrillers..
I was so disappointed with the ending that I considered rating it a 4 (due to the script not being very philosophical or interesting for an indie flick with a clear agenda), but Mackenzie Davis SAVED this.If you watch the movie knowing the ending is going to disappoint you, then you may just enjoy it that much more.
However, if you like films with a beginning, middle, and a proper end, then just pass this one up and save yourself the time..
With "Always Shine" Director Sophia Takal has fashioned a subtle/not so much so really treatise on the too frequently vicious dynamic among women consumed by envy-infested competition.
While this twisted story of two young actresses plays out in progressively amped-up stages, the soft impact denouement leaves one with the feeling of "So what the hell IS the thrust?" Mackenzie Davis (building on her impressive turn in 2015's quiet gem "A Country Called Home") is Anna and Caitlin Fitzgerald (Showtime's "Masters of Sex"), Beth, whose friendship is frayed as the latter's career has progressed more successfully than has her gal-pal's.
Takal creates and sustains a venomous vibe here, ratcheting it up by means of rapid fire subliminal suggestion editing from Zach Clark and a consistently discomforting music under bed supplied by Michael Montes, all coming together with wicked ferocity to inject intensely ominous pulsations of alarming foreshadowing.Lawrence Michael Levine (Takal's husband who also appears in the film) has composed a story heavy in it's apparent message that the fairer of the sex's is painfully complicit in consistently falling victim to the predatory machinations of men, particularly in the conform or be cast out world of Hollywood.
And to this end, you will no doubt note that Takal teasingly, and quite purposefully, tantalizes her audience with, yet never completely gives in for even a split second to, gratuitous nudity involving her comely co-stars.
Not in THIS chick's flick, buster.) Levine takes the driving theme to expressly existential places, such as in a scene where the anger-afflicted Anna aggressively challenges a guy who is participating in a "Men's Retreat", asking him if a similar event comprised of women would meet with a comparative degree of acceptance and embracement.
Don't we, most of us of reasonably pragmatic sensibility leastways, believe that women as a community of spirit and souls are far better, and one whole helluva lot STRONGER, than that?
Lord, let's hope so.I was looking for, and fully expecting, a more jarring conclusion than Takal opts to give us in the final moments of "Always Shine".
It's a pretty good film, Caitlin FitzGerald and Mackenzie Davis did an excellent job and hold interest for most of the film.
The whole thing is ruined by a poor ending which appears to be a patch to the whole film that doesn't belong there.
This movie was going along great until the last little bit.
The end leaves you with a few questions.
If you see Always Shine for any reason, see it for its two lead performances.
Mackenzie Davis and Caitlin Fitzgerald appear to be on verge of spontaneous combustion --- at each other but mostly at themselves --- for the hour-and-a-half run time of Sophia Takal's sophomore feature (penned by her fiancé Lawrence Michael Levine).Always Shine is one of the most compellingly shot and edited indie features I've seen recently, using jump-cuts and flash-forwards in consistent intriguing ways.
It opens with Beth (Fitzgerald) reciting a "please don't hurt me" slasher-film script into the lens for an audition and immediately follows with Anna (Davis) giving a polar-opposite speech that is more, well...
It's a clever set-up and tells you everything you need to know about these two young women in about eight minutes: Both are actresses.
Beth is confident with her looks and charm, but not much else, and Anna is so insecure that every twitch Davis delivers is almost too painful to study for long.
Both are grappling for a tow-hold on the Hollywood feature film success ladder but only Beth has achieved a moderate level of success even though it's obvious Anna is the more talented of the two.
And that's where Always Shine gets really interesting as the two head off for a weekend of "healing" at Anna's aunts house in (gorgeous as always) Big Sur. Watching Davis and Fitzgerald come *just shy* of ripping each other to shreds --- with paper cuts not razor blades is far more interesting than watching most actresses pull hair and scream.
A fierce layer of male complicity runs underneath each woman's self-loathing and that's a nice touch, carefully derailing the "crazy chicks" cliché the film could have collapsed into under less skillful hands.Audiences looking for an easy-out are going to be a bit put off by the last third of the film, which doesn't chart any new territory plot-wise and can be confusing for the more literal-minded, yet it strangely works for the most part.
The two leads give fine performances in this hopeless mess of a movie..
Always Shine combines elements of Persona, Single White Women, Mulholland Drive, and the trope of being in slim-populated woodlands.It does not succeed, especially in the 2nd half after a somewhat-promising first that builds up slowly after introducing us to the two main leads; a timid but rising young actress whose career is starting to trend upward, and a brash and fiery aspiring young actress whose career hasn't taken off.The timid Beth has a chance to reconnect w/ "old friend" Anna.
Very soon it's shown Beth has kept information from Anna which might have led to a role.This upsets Anna and she is further angered when Beth is hit on by a party-goer not far from the Big Sur home they spend time at "reconnecting," and this same chap had just backed off from the forceful Anna.Now at this point we're still not sure where exactly we're heading with all this tension and awkwardness.
So we assume the rapid flashbacks of violence that splash on the screen at random times will come to fruition in the form of violence.But soon the film degenerates into montages of reality blurring with fantasy; Beth races from the vacation house to be chased by Anna, following a frantic call from Beth to her boyfriend (who drives to Big Sur but disappears entirely near the end; none of the male characters here are important or shown to be competent or confident or necessary) and something bad takes places.Soon after Anna takes over Beth's looks and personality (to the point of mingling w/ Beth's new bartender friend, met at Big Sur after he gives Beth a lift back to the house; he doesn't notice the difference or perhaps this is a fantasy in Anna's head but I was too disinterested by this point to care.)Always Shine is mercifully short, not even 90 minutes.
Minutes that go by rather slowly after an intriguing beginning of close-up camera shots for the female leads, establishing their personalities.
The final shot comes sooner than expected, but it's rather confusing and not in a good way.
As I mention the two leads are the best reason to watch this; the males are rather bland and off-putting, much like the dialogue save for scenes between Anna/Beth.
Jane Adams appears briefly near the end; blink and you'll miss her.Not the best material, not very original or captivating.
Davis comes off best here in a somewhat meaty role.
Two women who are aspiring actresses and lifelong friends decide to take a retreat to a beautiful house overlooking the woods and the ocean in Northern California to reconnect after time has started to move them in different directions.
That the woman who is close to making it is also a passive woman, with little of interest to add to any conversation and little in the way of personality, who is prone to saying yes to any man asking her any thing (whether to take her clothes off or to go to dinner with a man her friend clearly likes even though she has a boyfriend she likes) and the other is stubborn, outspoken and "feminist" with a strong personality, is the real crux of the film though.
This is a movie about what it takes to make it in Hollywood, but also just as a woman in any walk of life.
The prevalent constant sexism under the hood of everyday expectations of being female.There's a naturalness to both performances that works well, and the tension mounts from meaningful dialogue exchanges and the actor's faces.
Then the twist happens and while it's interesting in theory, it also sort of halts the movie's progress and momentum.
the movie is engaging however questions remain.
there is a want to follow the characters to the end.
the performances by both main characters are satisfactory as the story builds.
but alas the ending leaves the viewer unsure as to what really happens..
When I started watching this film, I'll admit, I expected the Hollywood over-sexualized b-movie about girls in underwear and steamy showers...
It was, as they say, "a breath of fresh air" to be able to watch a female-led film without having to cringe and sigh at over-sexualized interactions, and pointless nudity.
Then, I turned to the internet to find out what the ending was supposed to mean (and you might too), and as it turns out, my (as mentioned) relief WAS the point- in a sense.I have watched a questionable amount of films in my lifetime (more so than my peers), however, I don't consider myself to be a film enthusiast.
I do feel this film might need to be watched at least a couple times before you're able to make sense of some scenes, and thus believe this film will be more appreciated by film enthusiasts, but nonetheless would recommend watching.
The themes of the film are refreshing, and I feel lucky to have lived in a time when a filmmaker could tell a story for what it is, and without the distractions (glamour, nudity, gore) needed to keep an audience's attention..
Beth and Anna are young actresses whose careers are going in opposite directions.
They grew up as friends, but have lost touch as Anna became jealous of Beth's success.
To reconnect they go on a retreat to Big Sur.The movie is supposed to be a thriller, but absolutely nothing thrilling happens.
The only thought crossing the viewer's mind is how unlikable Beth is.
At least Anna feels truer, having some emotion come out of her when needed.I'm not sure anything could have made this bore of a movie any better.
It got 2 out of 10 only because the production values were solid, and the actress who played Anna did a good job with the bad material she had..
The main thing which struck me about the movie is the brilliant acting by the 2 girls.
Its a very good movie about how dynamics of friendship change in face of competition and jealousy.
The movie was quite engaging even though it is simply about 2 characters on vacation.
The viewer is attracted to learn more and more about them which makes it good watch.
The girls come out as really charming and I was stunned by the acting skills.
Every Shot and Line of Dialog Smacks of Profundity and is as Obvious as it is Agenda Driven.Unshackled Minority Baggage left over from Less Enlightened Times Resides and Clings to the Film and is a Brightly Lit Magnifying Mirror that Reflects its Frustrated Female Angst and is Relentless in the Narrative Drive to the Point of We Get the Point...Moving On...Please.The Movie Arrives at a Conclusion that Many will Find Familiar in the Schizo Sub Genre of the Psychological Thriller with Directors like Hitchcock, DePalma, Lynch and Others Peppering Their Filmography with the Likes of this one.It's too Heavy Handed and Obvious from the First Act that these Two Characters, formerly Best Friends are Going to Split at some Point because the Tension is Telling Us that.
One Stares, Glares, and is Confrontational and the other Shrinks with Self-Deprecation Routinely.It's an Acting Showcase for Makenzie Davis and Caitlin Fitzgerald and both are Up to the Task and are Compelling.
The Writer (Lawrence Michael Divine) and the Director (Sophia Takal) are Gaming a Well Worn System of Cinematic Clichés and Camera, Editing, Film Flourishes that are Signature Stylistic Touchstones from the Toolbox of other Filmmakers.Influence is a Kind Description of what Goes On here.
It's a Good Try from just Getting Started Film Artists but while Their Creativity is Not in Doubt, Their Ability to Punctuate the Picture with a Period or an Exclamation Point leaves the Audience with a Frustrating Question Mark that makes for an Unsatisfying Conclusion for all the Hard Work..
This film is no more than a primary school show with no story , no playing.
With almost unknown actors , very simple settings and low budget , this relies entirely on the uniqueness of the story , appropriate performances of the cast and direction , analyzes the relationship of two best friends .
Meaning that because its leads are women, it's about women, and its director is a woman (Sophia Takal)...
it must, by default, be spectacular.Well, sorry to say, it most definitely is not!Not a single review here to-date touches on the fact that this film borrows — LIFTS — heavily (and poorly) from Ingmar Bergman's 'Persona'.
There are enough hints dropped to suggest these girls ARE split personalities of the one character, however...
And because this film is going out of its way to raise questions, but does it so illogically, I will not waste my time rifling thru the trash to unveil the hidden truths.
There also exists no intelligence in this script to neither do that sublimely nor tell a coherent story.At the end of the day, you have to ask yourself what the point was?
What a waste.See it only if you have an old TV you're looking to toss out, so you can throw things at the screen, then put your foot thru it at the end..
A psychological thriller with more going on under the surface than most.
Two actresses take a break from L.A. and travel to a house in the country, the isolation brings to the surface dark emotions such as jealousy and distrust.
The introductions to both characters taps into this right away where we have a close-up shot of the actress head on, the first woman is auditioning for a part in front of a group of men, while the second woman is engaging in a heated exchange with a man who is trying to rip her off.
The idea of these scenes I guess is to show that women exist essentially in a man's world and have to put up with things men generally do not.
So, one of the themes of the film is the pressures society puts on women.
In this scenario, these tensions result in two friends going to war with each other.
Professional jealousies intertwine with all other tensions leading to a dark place.Acting by both leads, Mackenzie Davis and Caitlin Fitzgerald, is very good, especially Davis whose character ultimately runs the gauntlet of emotional states including assertive, insecure, meek and aggressive.
You have interesting characters with differing motivations and huge amounts going on under the surface.
It's, on the whole, a very satisfying combination of a lot of disparate ideas that's comes together to create something really interesting.. |
tt0110706 | Oblivion | In 2077, sixty years after a war with extraterrestrials that devastated Earth in 2017, humanity has relocated to Saturn's moon Titan via a giant space station called the Tet. Gigantic offshore fusion energy generators drain Earth's oceans to power the colonies on Titan.
Led by mission controller Sally and guided by his housemate and communications partner Victoria "Vika" Olsen, "Tech-49" Jack Harper regularly leaves his tower post to repair downed combat drones that guard the regions and generators against the alien scavengers or "scavs." Although his memory has been wiped, he has had recurring dreams and visions of being on the observation deck of the Empire State Building with a dark-haired woman. He also collects the occasional artifact he finds from humanity's past. Vika is concerned about Jack's curiosity, questioning whether they are still “an effective team,” and encouraging him to do his job so they can join the others on Titan soon.
After scavs destroy a generator, Jack discovers the scavs have been using the Empire State Building's antenna to transmit coordinates to outer space. While taking a break at his secret lake house retreat, he watches a crash-landing module of a pre-war spacecraft called the Odyssey. Thinking the ship contains aliens, he investigates, only to find humans in stasis chambers. One of the humans is the woman from his dreams. Jack protects her chamber from a drone that destroys the others, and later revives the woman, Julia Rusakova, who makes Vika instinctively jealous. Jack and Julia return to recover her flight recorder but are captured by the scavs, who are revealed to be human survivors.
Their leader, Malcolm Beech, wants Jack to reprogram their captured drone to carry nuclear fuel cells to blow up the Tet; he has sensed Jack is different because the latter's hobby of collecting relics. Although Jack refuses, Beech releases them to seek the truth beyond the boundaries of the forbidden radiation zone. When they reach the Empire State Building, Julia reveals that she is his wife. Jack then remembers that he proposed to her there. Julia recalls she was on a mission to Titan when they were diverted to investigate an alien presence.
When the two return to Jack's tower, Vika refuses them entry and reports her findings to Sally, saying they are "no longer an effective team." Sally acknowledges this, but activates a drone that kills Vika before Julia shoots it down. Jack and Julia escape in his ship, but are shot down by other pursuing drones. The two eject into the radiation zone, which turns out to not be radioactive. Jack discovers another ship with a technician trying to fix a downed drone, and is shocked to see that the tech is a clone of himself who goes by "Tech-52". The clone also is shocked to see Julia. Jack fights and incapacitates his clone, but Julia is accidentally shot. After flying to Tech-52's tower, and discovering an inquisitive Vika clone, he returns to treat Julia at the lake house.
At the scav base, Beech reveals to Jack and Julia that the Tet was an alien artificial intelligence that destroyed the Moon, causing massive devastation to the planet, and invaded Earth with thousands of Jack clones and drones to wipe out the human race, extracting all of the planet's natural resources before moving on. As Jack repairs the captured drone, the base is attacked by other drones, gravely injuring Beech and ruining the captured drone except for its fuel cells. Jack agrees to deliver Julia to Sally through the stasis chamber. On the way to the Tet, Jack listens to the Odyssey's flight recorder, and learns that he was the mission commander, Vika was his co-pilot, and Sally was their mission controller from Earth. When the Tet started to draw in their ship, Jack jettisoned the pod of stasis chambers containing the crew members (including Julia) leaving himself and Vika to be captured.
Back in the present, Jack enters a large room full of capsules of Jack and Vika clones. He shows Tet the stasis chamber, but it carries Beech and the fuel cells, which they then detonate. On Earth, Julia awakens at the lake house. Three years later, she and her daughter meet the resistance members and "Tech-52" Jack, who has also recovered his memories. | cult | train | wikipedia | A Great Guilty Pleasure!.
Oblivion is a low-budget cheesy space-western with so many in-jokes and running gags and stereotypes that it has twice been the cornerstone of video parties at my place!The story is coherent-but-flimsy.
The real fun is in the bizarre special-effects, the character references, the costumes, etc.To enjoy this movie, make sure you know what the major players have done before.
Much like a Batman or Addam's Family movie (for several reasons, both), this movie is about look, feel, and fun.
Set in the year 3031 on a frontier planet light years away from Earth, a bizarre gang of desperadoes set on turning the tumbleweed town of Oblivion into their own private haven.Made nearly 20 years before the arguably pretentious Cowboys and Aliens, Oblivion is an obscure FullMoon nugget.
Although the costumes and sets appear cheap they're fitting enough in this outlandish western futuristic alien tale.
Despite the offbeat humour and pacing director Sam Irvin gives us forcefields, cyborgs, fistfights, spaceships, guns, gadgets and giant Harryhausen- like scorpions.
Oblivion is an 90s film with and 1980's b-feel and 70s stock soundtrack heart.
The 'Biff Tannen' villain Redeye played by Andrew Divoff makeup is effective.
There's an odd mix pop-culture cast including Batman's Julie Newmar, Star Treks George Takei, singing legend Isaac Hayes, Master of the Universe and They Live's Meg Foster to name a few.
There's also a leather-clad whip sporting Musetta Vander who looks particularly fetching.
If you like B-films and enjoy the unlikely list of genre crossovers Oblivion is the closest you'll get to a live action BraveStarr..
Like the Discovery Channel recently, only funny..
My passion for Western Movies lost out to Sci-Fi in the early 60s.Well, if you want to wallow in the goofiness and clichés of both highly abused genres without a speck of the po-faced seriosity that ruined Outland or Cowboys and Aliens, then saddle up!
GASP!...as giant claymation scorpions stalk our heroes!LUST!...as a damn fine Bettie Page look-a-like cracks her whip!
If you are one of the increasingly hard to find Fantasy movie fans with the ability to relax your sphincter, then I heartily recommend this, and it's follow-up, Oblivian: Backlash.If you are one of those sad little souls who think humor is just something used to spice up torture scenes, then watch this.
It might do you some good.But above all, if you ever spent an afternoon in front of a B+W TV watching bad Cowboy and Indian movies and rubber-suited monster flicks, this is for you!
Take a little trip to Oblivion...Where the YeeHaw!
Fun-tastic sf-western, full of gags, thanks to a sassy script from Peter David: the son of a great marshall of the law is forced against his will to take the star from the deceased father and fight against a bunch of criminals, lead by a lizardman call Red-Eye. I think this is the only movie where you may find a Wishmaster, a Catwoman, a Sulu, a Lurch....
Sci-fi western filmed in cheese-o-vision.
Boy, this movie is like a circus: a variety of bizarre and colorful characters and events spiced up with fun & cheesy special effects.
I think this movie might have created a total new subgenre on it's own by mixing sci-fi/western/comedy/horror/drama/revenge flicks all together.
This movie spawned from production company Full Moon, which was at it's best - in my opinion - during the late eighties and the first half of the nineties.
OBLIVION, though not their best movie, is a fine example of how crazy they can get.We've got: Spaceships, a 19th century western town with money-machines, a green alien lizard-man with an eye-patch, a cyborg-deputy, a faggot-mariachi, giant stop-motion scorpions, an S&M/Gothic-babe with a whip (Musetta Vander can lick my neck anytime), an over-friendly grim-looking undertaker, an Indian with too much brown make-up and a bad long-hair wig, a drunk Japanese dude (George Takei giving us silly STAR TREK inside jokes), midgets in a barfight, a coffin-shaped coroner's house, pyramids (huh?), an empath protagonist, a poisonous Manh-Ding, Bingo on Thursdays, Indian magic, a grande finale in the Badlands,...
ehr, I'm gonna stop now, 'cause the list's getting awful long here.This movie also has a cameo by Isaac Hayes (the man can't act, but is funny as hell), a double roll by Andrew"Djinn"Divoff as the lizard-man Redeye and a dumb hustler Einstein (slightly hilarious) and a delicious performance by hot-babe-dressed-in-leather Musetta Vander as the whippin' Lash.
(Musetta also stars in MANSQUITO, which is like a b-movie cross-over between THE FLY and MIMIC, so go see it, you pulpy movie-lovers!)What about the story of OBLIVION?
Now, somebody please give me the sequel, OBLIVION 2: BACKLASH.
They just don't make em like Oblivion anymore.
This movie is so bad that it's good.
It's like watching a movie that was supposed to be serious but halfway through they decided it should be a comedy.
There are some really great lines in here that should not be missed.
or maybe you're too much man, too much...
HU-man?" or the s**t a brick in your pants funny "associ-whats?" line.
And of course the best part is that it ends with "to be continued" and a hilarious preview of the sequel.
Anyways, if you want to see a really unintentionally funny movie with microphones and ads for other movies blatantly in several shots then see this now, i concur with the beer suggestion of these other guys too.
Oblivion, really great movie, watch it..
A fun movie.
For lovers of Cheese,this movie will satisfy.......The writer,Peter David, is master of not taking things too seriously, and that makes Oblivion a great film.
Uncomfortable blend of sci-fi and western, never really pulls it together.
Take away the stop action scorpions and you have a pretty dull western.
Take away the western and you have an amateurish sci-fi.
The characters are all cartoon like and some scenes are not only unnecessary, but go on far too long.
I realize this is not "Casablanca", but "Oblivion" really doesn't know what it wants to be.
Sci-fi fans are certain to be disappointed, and western fans will find the script boring.
This film contains no exploding golfcarts, no people falling over railings (two at a time), no diabolical laughter, and no stock footage from BATTLESTAR GALLACTICA.
Unlike SPACE MUTINY, which was just plain annoying, OBLIVION was an entertaining piece of cinematic garbage with enough cheesy dialog and one liners that enable it to stand on its own, even without the help of Mike and his MST3K robot friends.
Also, unlike SPACE MUTINY, it's a lot more fun than shoveling raw sewage.Give this one a chance.Rating: *** out of *****.
The original Cowboys & Aliens, and far, far better.
"It's high noon at the far end of the universe", the DVD poster of Oblivion states.
Years before the underrated Cowboys & Aliens came out, Oblivion came along, and it's definitely gives the concept a better, and quirkier run for its money.
Granted it's essentially a B movie, and it's meagre budget shows to the point where it looks like a grade school play.
It's got a cast of supremely wacky old west stereotypes played by some surprising, familiar genre faces who you'd never thought to be seen rough housing together in the same flick.
It also has some lovingly crafted, creaky stop motion animation that calls Harryhausen to mind and brings to life some super weird alien hybrid thingies that look almost Henson-esque as well.
He's a nasty, one eyed reptilian alien gunslinger named RedEye, played by the inimitable Andrew Divoff.
He growling, bad tempered son of a bitch, and his first order of business is to ruthlessly slay the town's sheriff, and claim it for himself.
What he doesn't count on is the Sheriff's son (Richard Joseph Paul), a prospector who soon returns to Oblivion looking for answers, along with his Native friend Buteo (the late great Jimmie F.
All kinds of townsfolk end up in the crossfire, including drunken Doc Valentine (a priceless George Takei), slinky brothel owner Miss Kitty (Julie Newmar), a cyborg police deputy (Meg Foster), a pawnbroker (Isaac Hayes) and the town's elegant undertaker, played by Carol Struckyen who some may remember as the giant from Twin Peaks.
RedEye has a smoking hot henchwoman and girlfriend named Lash, played by B movie scream queen Musetta Vander, who gets the vibe they're going for here and sinks her teeth into the material with admirable abandon.
The film sticks to its guns despite being obviously silly and somewhat falling apart in a climax that oddly is too darkly shot to make out properly.
Alien scorpions, cyborg deputies, leather clad babes are but a few of the genre mashing treats to be found here.
Oh and check out the sequel as well, called Oblivion 2: Backlash, it's a nice companion piece..
Oblivion doesn't take itself seriously and you shouldn't take it seriously either.
While it makes a virtue out of cliche and easily achieves its aim of being "so bad that it's good" it has a wagon load of in jokes, half a dozen cult actors and one very sexy woman known as Lash.
Daft but fun, once it gets going.
Oblivion is slow paced but that's OK at first when we are getting to know the characters and finding out about what's going on.
It's not so good in the middle of the film when there isn't much happening.
The pace eventually picks up, although the second half of the film is all very predictable.
If you can put that aside there are a few good scenes and some of it is quite enjoyable.Andrew Divoff and Musetta Vander are excellent as the bad guys and most of the supporting cast are good too.
George Takei doesn't really have much to do though, and I felt that his character could have been better..
5 writers and at least 5 movies in 1.
You get 5 writers together, have each write a different story with a different genre, and then you try to make one movie out of it.
It's action, it's adventure, it's sci-fi, it's western, it's a mess.
Sorry, but this movie absolutely stinks.
That said, it's movies like this that make me think I could write movies, and I can barely write..
Typical Full Moon sci-fi western mishmash.
After all, these are the people that brought you Jack Deth and the Trancers movies!
It's an occasionally slow-paced sci-fi western parody.
The acting is mostly dreadful, and the plot is telegraphed a mile away, but if you didn't expect that from the Full Moon folks, you deserve what you get.
A movie best experienced with friends and vast quantities of intoxicants.
Those of us who read comics in the 70s will get the "Man-Thing" reference, and it is a hoot to see George Takei telling a bottle of whiskey, "Jim Beam me up!" Meg Foster is totally wasted as a cyborg deputy, but she does what she can with a terrible role.
I loved Musetta Vander as the S&M fantasy gal Lash.
A good bad movie in spite of occasional slow bits and obvious plotting.
Yes, long boring stretches and the typical Full Moon incompetence abound, but that does not diminish the delight of Carel Struycken as a psychic undertaker or George Takei saying things like "Jim Beam me up" and "Great Scotty!" Be warned though- Julie Newmar is unbelievably bad as "Miss Kitty" (har har) and Isaac Hayes tried to do something different with his performance....
Bad acting at its best.
Why did someone ever take the trouble to make this movie??
The only thing good to see in this movie is the foxy bad girl Lash.., other than that it has it all to make this movie suck: bad story, special effects that even for 94' qualify as worse than the worst, jokes that make one laugh out of misery and last but definately not least, some serious bad acting!!Some aspects that give a good idea about this movie: out side of town you may encounter enormous clay scorpions that kill upon sight, apparently one can read the future in a cup of coffee if you look in a special way, playing bingo during a funeral is considered normal, all street lights have fans connected to them (dont ask why, its the future ok?), there are frogs about a feet high that kill you when ur scared, when u chop off a cyborgs hand it turns into a flame thrower, ah well, need i say more??when should anyone see this movie??
either when you're with a lot of friends who are all drunk (including yourself), or when u feel the time has come to see a bad movie that just stays in your head because its SO BAD!!!.
This is a seriously cheesy movie.
But I feel this fits the "So-bad-it's-good" moniker.
There is nothing here that is actually "good" (except the ceiling fans on the street lights).
But Hey, if you're going to watch a Full-Moon Entertainment movie with the Tagline of "it's cowboys and Aliens" you can't be expecting much.
An analogy to describe my feelings towards this film is this: You would hear a song that is so bad but you can't get it out of your head.
The same thing goes for this poorly-made movie; You just cannot forget how horrible it is!!!
4 years after seeing this film I can still remember the ill-conceived dialogue and the not-so-very special effects.
Save yourself while you can...do not watch this movie!!!!.
Cowboys and aliens?
This movie's plot line turns itself around in so many circles it ends up making no sense.
The writers of this film didn't even have a good idea..
I went in really hoping to like this B sci-fi, but it's just not very good.
A B-movie hybrid of sci-fi and Western.
It feels like the latest of all '80s movies, and it could have played nicely on USA Up All Night.
Unfortunately, it wouldn't be one of the better movies to play on that program.
It has no story and no energy, and after about a half an hour, it starts to feel interminable.
It has a few recognizable supporting actors, like George Takei, Julie Newmar and Isaac Hayes.
Takei and Newmar are just there to deliver awful jokes in the form of Star Trek and Batman references.
I did enjoy the costume and character design.
The bad guy in particular looks great.
Okay, very cheesy, but the film does know what it is.
And I loved the undertaker, named Gaunt (Carel Struycken), who is basically a reference to The Seventh Seal.
And, while not a good actress, Musetta Vander is gorgeous as the villain's henchwoman/girlfriend.
They made a sequel to this film which is a bit higher rated on IMDb. I won't be seeking it out, though..
Maybe Fun A Little.
Somewhere light years from Earth is a planet with a town called Oblivion, which is populated with cowboys and aliens.
Things are peaceful there until Redeye (Andrew Divoff) decides to take over.The film is poorly written, poorly shot, just plain poor.
The acting ranges from good to bad, and there are so many plot holes that do not make sense...
maybe they get cleared up in the second film, but one suspects that is extremely unlikely.The only reason to watch this film is for the cult cast: Isaac Hayes, Andrew Divoff, Julie Newmar and George Takei.
And yes, there are jokes about "Star Trek" and Catwoman.
Maybe other jokes I missed because I didn't get the references...
and the guy who plays Lurch from the Addams Family movies.Maybe rent this...
I have never laughed at a movie before.
This movie is so bad and the acting is beyond horrible that makes this film the best comedy of the decade.
A great movie, if you are having a really bad day.***.
I only rented this movie because Peter David's name is attached to it.
He wrote the screenplay, he's a good writer, the conclusion seemed obvious.
The story sucked, the dialogue was week, and the characters were pathetic.
I did like the funeral scene where the BINGO game upstairs kept interrupting the speeches, otherwise crap, crap, crap, crap, and a good looking woman in a tight fitting dominatrix/western costume..
The film takes place on another planet, but has a western theme.
There are bad guys who want to take over the town for a mineral while there are those that oppose them.
The film is very cheesy and campy and gets its humor from the era commercials and previous roles of the actors.
Julie Newmar who once played Catwoman was Miss Kitty.
George Takei has lines from STAR TREK such as "Great Scottie" and "Jim, Beam me up." Carel Struycken who played Lurch, plays an undertaker.
A couple of the actors were in the TV series SUPER FORCE where the main character was Zach Stone.
In this film the main character is Zack Stone.
It is a film you may need to watch twice to get all of the humor.Guide: No F-bombs, sex.
An orgy of bad special effects and terrible acting.
The special effects of this movie are, especially for its time, laughable and used in such an over-emphasized way that you can't deny their terrible existance.The acting redefines the term "terrible overacting" at the hands of Meg Foster and Richard Joseph Paul, where julie Newman and Andrew Divoff just redefine "bad".***spoilers***The charm in this movie can be found in two things: First is the excellent casting of Carel "Lurch" Struycken as the mysterious psychic Gaunt, who can sense where and when people will die and is always there.The second are original finds, the combination SF-Western is obviously original, if terrible, but other finds are more original, like the gunman Zack Stone being able to sense the pain of the people he shoots (though his acting falls short here).Overal...don't see this movie, except if you love that ol' hunk-o-brutal Carel Struycken, as any self-respecting Dutchman should. |
tt0043448 | Danger Zone | In the fictional African nation Zambeze, American mining engineer Rick Morgan is conned into an illegal operation involving toxic waste by his old friend, Jim Scott. Immediately after, the mine is attacked by a team of mercenaries, led by a rogue agent called Chang. Scott attempts to flee, but is supposedly killed by Chang. The mercenaries leave right as the army arrives. The government assumes Morgan is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of villagers, apparently caused by toxic waste. Due to the CIA, Morgan is allowed to return to America.
One year later, Morgan is approached by Maurice Dupont for a mission to clear his name and prevent further deaths. Morgan reluctantly agrees upon finding out that Scott is alive. Morgan is introduced to World Health Organization researcher Dr. Kim Woods. The two are teamed up. After searching a mine, Morgan and Kim are captured by rebel forces. Morgan and Kim are almost executed until Scott reveals himself to be their secret leader. Not long after, Chang's mercenaries attack and lay waste to the camp. Scott gives Morgan a code and the last clue he needs to find the barrels. Chang then murders Scott as Morgan and Kim escape.
Back at their hotel rooms, Kim is confronted by Dupont who reveals his duplicity. Morgan subdues Dupont, only for him to be rescued by Chang and another mercenary. Satisfied that he fulfilled his purpose, Chang shoots Dupont while Morgan and Kim make a run for it. Morgan reaches a contact who tells them the location of the barrels. Morgan recognizes the location as being an old hangout of his and Scott's. Chang arrives, kills the contact, forcing Morgan and Kim to flee.
The two finally reach the old hangout which is a cavern. Upon retrieving the uranium rod, Chang corners them and reveals he had been tracking them the whole time. Chang takes the uranium rod, kidnaps Kim and attempts to leave Morgan to die of radiation. Morgan survives due to a prototype protective powder developed by the WHO.
Morgan escaped the cavern and meets with Madumo, a rebel leader. Chang attempts to escape on a freight train headed to Point City. Morgan rallies the rebels to launch a massive assault against the train. The rebels are defeated by the government troops. Morgan and Madumo infiltrate the train. They are attacked by Chang's remaining mercenaries. After killing both of them, Morgan drops in, frees Kim and fights Chang. Morgan throws Chang off the train. Kim manages to detach the forward cars, leading them to a track in which the rebels sabotaged, killing all the soldiers. Scott's uncle, a CIA agent, arrives to provide extraction. However Morgan opts to save the uranium rod first. The second half of the train stops at a bridge where Chang reveals himself and attempts to drown Kim. Morgan arrives an sets Chang on fire, where he explodes along with the explosives on board the train. Morgan fishes Kim out of the water and drags her onto shore. Madumo arrives with the remaining rebels as Morgan and Kim kiss.
An African warrior is seen observing all that has transpired. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0103976 | City of Joy | The story revolves around the trials and tribulations of a young Polish priest, Father Stephan Kovalski, the hardships endured by a rickshaw puller, Hasari Pal in Calcutta (Kolkata), India and in the second half of the book, also the experiences of a young American doctor, Max Loeb.
Father Stephan joins a religious order whose vows put them in the most hellish places on earth. He chooses not only to serve the poorest of the poor in Calcutta but also to live with them, starve with them, and if God wills it, die with them. In the journey of Kovalski's acceptance as the Big Brother for the slum dwellers, he encounters moments of everyday miracles in the midst of appalling poverty and ignorance. The slum dwellers are ignored and exploited by wider society and the authorities of power but are not without their own prejudices. This becomes evident by their attitude towards the lepers and the continuation of the caste system.
The story also explores how a peasant farmer Hasari Pal arrives in Calcutta with his family after a drought wipes out the farming village where his family has lived for generations.
The third main character is that of a rich American doctor who has just finished med school and wants to do something with purpose before opening up his practice catering to the wealthy.
The book chronicles not only the separation of the wealthy from the poor but the separation of the different levels of poverty, caste divisions, and the differences of the many religions living side by side in the slums. It touches on Mother Teresa and her Missionaries of Charity as well. While the book has its ups and downs, both beautiful and horrific, an overall feeling of peace and well being is achieved by the story's end. Despite facing hunger, deplorable living conditions, illness, bone breaking work (or no work at all) and death, the people still hold on to the belief that life is precious and worth living, so much so that they named their slum "Anand Nagar", which translated into English means "City of Joy".
The author has stated that the stories of the characters in the book are true and he uses many of the real names in his book. However, the book is considered fictional since many conversations and actions are assumed or created.
The author and his wife traveled to India many times, sometimes staying with friends in the "City of Joy". Half of the royalties from the sale of the book goes towards the City of Joy Foundation that looks after slum children in Calcutta. | violence | train | wikipedia | However it is true to the spirit in which the book was written.Another interesting comparison with the book is that just like the movie, the book is as controversial, especially in India and among middle class Indians and Indians abroad.
The controversy is an indication that lot stuff in the movie is actually worth seeing.Also it is not unusual for a poor man in India to choose to die with dignity than live in shame, Indian girls do flirt even if it is 'untraditional' and there are people who try to live by exploiting the poor, people who most others will call cruel.
The movie could have done a better job capturing the fact that western ideas can affect the way some people in India behave just as Indian ideas make some westerners reformulate their ideas and concepts about life.
The script has drama and emotional depth.Although the plot certainly can't claim absolute originality, director Joffé's nuanced look at the cultural milieu and the care with which he portrays the characters' relationships and internal struggles make this a worthwhile, enjoyable film."Roadhouse" and "Dirty Dancing" were both lots of fun, but for me this is Patrick Swayze's best performance, and one of my favorite films of its kind..
Bizarre reviews of this film that fail to explain why they are against its excellence don't stand up in the face of critics like Jim Whalley of Cinema Showcase who called it "the best picture of the year" and Susan Granger of WICC who commented that Patrick Swayze gave "the performance of a lifetime".
This is the true story of a disillusioned American doctor who, like so many people, (the Beatles and Alanis Morisette, for example) travelled to India to find himself in a search for enlightenment.
At first, he is unwilling to help the locals stand up against the oppressive 'godfather' of the area because he feels that all he'd be doing is trying to "drill a hole in water".Having been to an English-speaking Third World country like India, myself, I found the reactions of the Swayze character extremely true to life.
Even the characters and their characteristics and reactions in the film matched many of the people I knew in that land!"City of Joy" was an excellent and faithful adaption of Dominique Lapierre's richly written masterpiece.
The strengths of American culture and Indian culture joined together - both races learned to accept one another's ways of life and borrowed virtues from one another's culture to breathe new life into the slums of Calcutta.
This movie is so deep that it touches your heart directly, specially the role played by om puri is inexpressible.
Even the role played by patrick swayze was good as he plays an disillusioned doctor.
This movie touches the way of poor people living in calcutta slum, I know because I myself is a bengali and belong to calcutta.
The smell of the Indian dust, The pain of the people, The discrepancy between even the poor, A story about a man running to provide the food for his family beside saving money to marry his daughter.
beside talking about the unjust of human beens in isolating a group of innocent people who their fault is that they are not born in complete bodies, the white man in the story who is a doctor failed in the medicine job in his country and ran to India where he found his real soul also show us how we sometimes see the world from one view while it can be seen from a better view, I don't understand why it wasn't dominated for an Oscar.
If you have visited India (where it has been primarily filmed) and especially Kolkotta city you would see the realistic nature of movie.
City of Joy is the story of an American Doctor (Patrick Swayze) who runs away from his life and unwittingly lands himself in an entirely different place.
City of Joy also contains a story of a farmer (Om Puri) who has lost his farm to the "money lenders" and brings his family to Calcutta to find work so that he can support his family.
The story touches your heart and holds your interest throughout the movie.Patrick Swayze is wonderful in this movie!
Dirty Dancing, Ghost and City of Joy should have mad Patrick Swayze a serious leading man in the category of Harrison Ford.
Nevertheless, Patrick Swayze is a handsome accomplished actor and this film is well worth the watch!.
The story and the characters in this movie are worthy and good, but in my opinion the true merit of this film is that it highlights how different situations and peoples of the world are in fact.
It should also be noted that a great deal of abject poverty in that part of the world is the result of too many people, too little food, and brutal cycles of weather that destroy all in the way.What this film makes me ponder is just how such desperate peoples can best be helped by outsiders.
Others can help the struggling to pull on their bootstraps, but others cannot wear the boots for them or do their work for them.This movie depicts a single set of unique events that resulted in people finally becoming determined to be masters of their own fate, come what may.
It has flaws, but I think it is noticeable to see that the only person from India writing here, actually points out the up-sides to it.By professional movie critics, it was very well received.
One can discuss how well it deals with them, but if you're open towards the movie, it might bring you a very good real-life experience.If this movie, has got you interested in more genuine Indian films, then movies such as Monsoon Wedding, and Lagaan, can be recommended..
The surgeon, Max Lowe (Patrick Swayze), abandons his practice after the fatality and travels to Calcutta, leaving painful memories behind him.
The story of the film is that of an impoverished community in Calcutta's backstreets, and how with Max Lowe's help the poor people learn to throw off the yoke of oppression.
Thirdly, the film arrogantly assumes that the people would turn against their own, with whom they have ancient bonds of blood and custom, in order to side with an American stranger who knows nothing of their way of life, and who is free to pack up and leave whenever he wishes.
To truly appreciate the characters of City of Joy, you have to read the book by the same name by Dominique Lapierre.
Disilusioned American heart surgeon named Max Lowe (Patrick Swayze who lacks some the emotional range) flees to India after losing a patient .
In the extremely poor city of Calcutta he is beaten by a street band (led by Art Malik) and being robbed his money and loses the passport but finds help from an ex-farmer named Hazari(Om Puri , excellent as poor but obstinate worker) who takes him to a nearby clinic in the City of Joy , one of Calcutta's poorest areas .
Hazari and his family have re-located to Calcutta with hopes of starting a new life , save some money and go back to their village , as well as get Amrita married .
Joffe had the good idea to use Academy Award-nominated writer Mark Medoff and the result was an emotional bullseye with a sensitive tale of unfortunate and poor peasant workers in poor city of Calcutta ; however , it was not a major box-office hit .
After a long career filming for television , he made his movie debut in a big way with ¨The killing fields¨ winner of three Oscar and dealing with madness and atrocities committed by humans , Joffe's usual theme.
It's been over a decade since I saw this movie, but despite a lot of criticism it seems to be receiving, I remember how much it touched me way back then.The story revolves around a disillusioned young American doctor, Max Lowe (played by Patrick Swayze), who goes to India to find himself.
To be honest, I hardly remember Patrick Swayze's role from this movie.
I recall the squalid living conditions worsened by the monsoons, but also the spirit of some of these so called untouchables.However, the most memorable aspect of the movie, which has remained with me all these years, is the absolutely endearing Indian farmer, Hasari Pal (played by Om Puri), who has lost his farm and come to Calcutta with his wife and children in order to seek work.
(No, not the more realistic arranged marriage, as another commented.) Hasari is truly an unforgettable character that came to embody for me the spirit of India's less fortunate.This is a movie that calls attention to some of the important truths in life, the overwhelming disparity between rich and poor, and especially the humanity common to us all.
this is an art movie it can enter international film festival competitions specially for Om pare acting in this movie ,to be nominated as best actor, photography Patrick Swazi acting was good though bit exaggerated in some scenes the tale really moved me and the weaving of the plot was well made the two kids did a very good acting, the supporting actors acted well,i wished the movie would last longer direction was excellent and in some parts it enabled the spectator to feel really involved in the action.
Patrick Swayze shines in this film.
Patrick Swayze,unusually for a Westerner, melts into Calcutta quite easily.
Typically Westerners act like they are away from home when they act in Indian films.
Patrick Swayze goes with the rhythm from the first beat in this wonderful movie.
Agreed there are poor and homeless in India, but why is there no representation of educated people if not the successful ones.I totally hated the idea of the movie portraying Patrick Swayze as another Mother Teressa.
Exactly the reason why people ask me, "When we go to India, can we hire an elephant right outside the airport so we do not have to walk on the roads so full of filth and snakes?"Those who want a second opinion on contemporary Indian society should watch "Monsoon Wedding"..
American non-practicing doctor Max Lowe (Patrick Swayze) gets beaten by thugs and everything stolen.
Max is taken to Joan Bethel (Pauline Collins) and her City of Joy. Hazari gets a rickshaw job from the Godfather whose son cruel Ashok Ghatak was the one that had his thugs beat up Max.This is one of the old fashion White Savior movies.
"City of Joy" has a lot going for it: A great director ("The Killing Fields," "The Mission (Two-Disc Special Edition)"), a great cast (Patrick Swayze, Om Puri) and outstanding locations/sets (Calcutta).
Because great films take you into the world of the characters to the point that you forget you're watching a movie.
While I think "City of joy" is a very worthwhile film, it failed to do this for me.
Having been born and brought up in 'the City of Joy' and living in the western world for the last 5 years, I have mixed feelings about this movie.
Trying to make people aware of hit them at weak points to arouse interest?) but it is a passable "entertainer", strictly due to the wonderful work by the Indian cast, especially the great Om Puri as Hazari.
Despite portraying the heinous life of a laborer in India and the atrocities flung on the poor, at a visual level, there is a message in the movie at a spiritual level - that no matter what we are, where we belong, we love the people we love, and we hope for our children, and that we have the power to do anything.
When it becomes fashionable to attempt to develop characters, and then cut away to a scene of fleeing people, this movie may become a masterpiece.
I do not understand how anyone could call his performance "realistic" or "brilliant" because it is neither of those things.While City of Joy may have a nice message, it does a poor job at developing and presenting it..
Once in the City of Joy, as the slum neighborhood is called, he quickly assumes the mantle of Great White Hope, not just saving lives by doctoring, but also in smashing caste barriers, and battling local mobsters.
City Of Joy: I am writing this now because no one seems to have made a review post Patrick Swayze's death.
When you Google Patrick Swayze's top films it does not make the cut....
I could see a whole 2 hour special taking place on NPR about the relationship between Indian middle-class society and the lepers.Also, I'm no expert on Indian culture, but it seems like City of Joy fails miserably at depicting life as it really is in Calcutta, what with the dowry and all.City of Joy is a very unmemorable movie that has lots of holes in its plot.
Patrick Swayze is lauded as delivering the best performance of his career in his role as a disillusioned doctor, Max Lowe, who "gets away from it all" in one of the large, over-populated cities of India.
Here he "bumps" into Hasari Pal (played by Om Puri), who has brought his wife and three children to the city in search of a new life after creditors seized their farm.
As Max tries to forget the past and Hasari works hard to build a future, they both discover that they can make a difference in the present.The whole film is very well-done, and realistic to the point of making you feel for the lepers and all those unfortunate enough to live in the state of extreme poverty that permeates the overcrowded country of India.
Patrick Swayze is well-cast in his role, even if it does begin to appear that he has two expressions for all his movies; tired, and angry.
I agree that on the face "City Of Joy" was a good movie, otherwise I wouldn't have rented it.
I expected to see more out of this film and by the time I was satisfied it was too late in the movie.
For what the premis was, "City Of Joy' only worked in the later stages of the movie.If the director could have some way started earlier with Patrick Swayze's character caring, it could have worked.
The only thing I found that was interesting was the devastation of the living conditions of the citizens had to live in: I thought the director did a good job of showing that.I do not recommend this film at all..
Based on Dominique LaPierre's book, Roland Joffé's 'City of Joy' may have received mixed responses as it's one of those films that one either connects with or not.
Yes, Calcutta is portrayed as being impoverished and one could argue that the film was made to cater to the Western audience who don't see India beyond poverty and slums, but that putting that aside, the film has heart and one doesn't have to be Western or Indian to relate to the issues that are brought forth, to the conflicts the characters come across and to their values.On the technical side, it's a very well made film.
If there were a movie to root for, it would be "City Of Joy," unfortunately it turns out the writing couldn't measure up to the performances.
If there were a movie to root for, it would be "City Of Joy," unfortunately it turns out the writing couldn't measure up to the performances.
I had to question Patrick Swayze's motivation for taking part in this film.
I had to question Patrick Swayze's motivation for taking part in this film.
I had to question Patrick Swayze's motivation for taking part in this film.
I agree that on the face "City Of Joy" was a good movie, but we all know that books cannot be judged by its cover.
I agree that on the face "City Of Joy" was a good movie, but we all know that books cannot be judged by its cover.
For what the premise was, "City Of Joy" only worked in the later stages of the movie.If the director could have some way started earlier with Patrick Swayze's character caring, it could have worked.
For what the premise was, "City Of Joy" only worked in the later stages of the movie.If the director could have some way started earlier with Patrick Swayze's character caring, it could have worked.
an enhancement of life" that occurs to find its relevance in joyous human development.As it appears to be the case with every film that has attempted to address certain spiritual content, CITY OF JOY also intrigued quite diverse viewpoints.
Some viewers, particularly American and European ones, consider CITY OF JOY a Patrick Swayze film.
Yes, to some extent it is a Patrick Swayze film but...not entirely.
Let me highlight certain aspects of his performance.Indeed, Mr Swayze's character of Max, whom Roger Ebert calls "a drifting hedonist" in his review, plays a decisive role in the film's theme as well as creates a wonderful insight into a development a man might undergo in certain circumstances.
Patrick Swayze delivers a tremendously powerful performance depicting a variety of emotions that might be at war within the heart and mind of a doctor who has experienced a tragic death of his patient and wants to "disappear in the sea of humanity" (Ebert).
Patrick Swayze's scenes are supplied with terrific emotions and a very appealing portrayal of an American in India facing the uniqueness of its culture and lifestyle.As a counterpart to his rebellious nature and desperate quest for transforming power comes Hasari played brilliantly by Om Puri.
In my opinion, it was as good as or better than other Western films with similar subject matter.
It was good to see Calcutta again, as well as the rain, and there are many touching moments in this movie. |
tt0042176 | 711 Ocean Drive | Knowing how much telephone repairman Mal Granger (Edmond O'Brien) likes to bet on the horses, small-time bookmaker Chippie Evans (Sammy White) proposes a scheme in which Granger's technical expertise would provide gangster Vince Walters (Barry Kelley) with race results in advance.
Granger accepts and also takes an interest in Walters' attractive assistant, Trudy (Dorothy Patrick), but she is arrested. Granger's new method of getting track information to the bookies makes him invaluable. He threatens to cut Walters off unless he is made a 20% partner. Walters gives in. When Walters tries to collect from a bookie who owes him, the bookie kills first Walters, then himself. Granger takes control of the wire service, making him a target for Lieutenant Wright (Howard St. John) of the Los Angeles Police.
East Coast mobster Larry Mason (Don Porter) is sent by boss Karl Stevens (Otto Kruger) to persuade Granger to join the Syndicate. He travels west with his wife Gail (Joanne Dru). Granger decides to accept a 50/50 split with his new partners. Some of the independent bookies do not like the new arrangement (and the extra 20% "protection" fee) and refuse to go along. They are roughed up by Syndicate goons.
Trudy returns to work for Granger; she finds out he is being shortchanged. When he complains, Granger is told that the shortfall is due to "necessary expenses." He vows to get his money.
Granger and Gail are strongly attracted to each other. Mason beats Gail, after which Granger hires a hitman named Gizzi (Robert Osterloh) to kill Mason with a rifle. Gizzi decides to blackmail Granger, who agrees to pay $25,000 at a rendezvous at the Malibu Pier, but there Gizzi announces he intends to become Granger's silent partner. Granger crushes him to death against the pier's railing with his car.
Using his telephone know-how, Granger places a call to Wright that makes it appear he is in Palm Springs and has an alibi. Wright tapes the call and hears a streetcar whistle; there are no streetcars in Palm Springs. The police eventually match the paint from Granger's damaged car to Gizzi's murder.
Granger decides to retire and escape to Guatemala, but first, he sets out to collect what is owed to him. With the help of Gail and Chippie, he taps into a phone line to a mob betting parlor in Las Vegas and pulls off a pass-post swindle. Intercepting and taping race results to be replayed after a two-minute delay, he gives Gail and Chippie time to place substantial bets. Chippie, however, is recognized by a man who bears a grudge against Granger. He tells Stevens, who has Chippie brought to him and learns where Granger can be found. Stevens passes the information along to Wright, content to let the police rid him of a troublesome colleague.
With the police closing in, Granger and Gail flee to Boulder Dam, trying to cross state lines to get out of Wright's jurisdiction, but encounter a roadblock there. They join a tour group and descend into the dam. Gail collapses from fatigue while running, then Granger is killed before he can find his way to the Arizona side. | murder | train | wikipedia | What A Little Know How Will Get You. 711 Ocean Drive finds Edmond O'Brien as just a working stiff, toiling away at a job for the telephone company and getting a bit behind in with his bookie.
He takes him to wire service operator Barry Kelley who controls the illegal gambling in Southern California and Kelley puts O'Brien to work, modernizing the business.That's the beginning of O'Brien's rise in the gambling rackets.
He's talented, but his reach exceeded his grasp, especially when he started reaching for Joanne Dru while she was still married to racketeer Don Porter.There's a lot of similarity between O'Brien and Humphrey Bogart in High Sierra.
Still that climax which takes place at Hoover Dam was definitely inspired by High Sierra.Besides those already mentioned look for good performances by Howard St. John as the honest cop on O'Brien's trail, Bert Freed as the syndicate's number one hit man, and Otto Kruger the very smooth syndicate boss who never gets his hands dirty with the details.711 Ocean Drive is a very nice noir film, made at the height of Edmond O'Brien's career as a B picture leading man..
Still, I found the film interesting and entertaining (although D.O.A. remains my all-time favorite O'Brien, and one of my top favorites, overall).
The character of Mal Granger really presented a sharp and unexpected contrast to that of Frank Bigelow in D.O.A. The real surprise in this film came early on when the personality of Granger, itself, did a 180-degree turnaround, from the benign, carefree and kindly telephone repairman (who insisted his co-worker accept a few bucks that he was in need of), to the ruthless, unscrupulous, and murderous "operator" for whom even a little power is seen to surely corrupt.
A better than routine, if not exceptional, noir crime drama, with O'Brien excellent in the lead, and good casting throughout.
Of particular interest are the wonderful filming locations in the L.A. area -- rich streetscapes--full of marvelous period detail, "Modern" architecture as seen in circular drive-ins, open plan houses, groovy bars ands nightclubs, and some flavor of Palm Springs weekending.
With the evolution of O'Brien's character from a telephone repairman into a major crime so well reflected in the improvements in his dress, along with the sartorial variety among the leads, one gets a nice sense of personal style in this period.
For phone lineman Eddie O'Brien, it's a success story, as opportunity, know-how, and drive propel him to the top of the bookie racket.
Then too, we meet some interesting people along the way, including smoothie Otto Kruger doing his best imitation of a smiling cobra, even as young marrieds Joanne Dru and Don Porter practice their 1950's version of open marriage.
This film stars Edmund O'Brien as a scheming and brilliant mobster--a far cry from the good guy roles in Film Noir films such as DOA and WHITE HEAT.
It seems that although at the beginning of the film he's a simple worker for the phone company, he is an expert with electronics and phone lines, so he's able to help a small California mob grow until it controlled the entire state's bookmaking operation.
Not content to be just a bit player, he works his way up to the top of this mob until the "big boys" back East recognize his worth and they want a piece of the action.
Eventually, O'Brien's greed and feelings of invulnerability take their toll--leading to a stirring finale at Hoover Dam. As expected, O'Brien did an excellent job and he was one terrific actor--particularly in his gangster films.
O'Brien's love interest is Joanne Dru, who plays a screwed up lady who wants to see O'Brien go straight but does nothing to actually change him and also does a lot to excuse his excesses.
Oddly, Howard St. John plays the honest and determined police detective bent on stopping O'Brien--since in most films St. John plays heavies or weak-willed jerks.Overall, it was a very engaging and original Noir film.
Overall, it's a very good film but a far cry from the greatness and excitement of the better examples of Noir due to its occasionally heavy-handed "crime does not pay" message.
"711 Ocean Drive" is an interesting '50s film noir set in Los Angeles.
Edmond O'Brien stars as Mal Granger, a nice telephone repairman who is into a bookie for some gambling debts.
The bookie makes a deal with him and, since he's a technician, has him do some modernization on the illegal gambling in the area that uses the wire service.
The O'Brien character turns out to be pretty ambitious and greedy and starts making his way up the ladder in the syndicate.
There are also very good performances from Howard St. John as a police officer, Bert Freed as a hit man, and Otto Kruger as a mob boss.
Joanne Dru is the object of Mal's affections, although she's married to someone else.Seeing Los Angeles in the '50s is one of the best parts of this film.
The address of Edmond O'Brien's posh Malibu digs -- 711 Ocean Drive -- lends the title to this semidocumentary noir about bookmaking.
O'Brien, always better supporting than, as here, in the lead, is a money-grubbing telephone technician who brings his electronic expertise to the illegal-betting circuit.
At the end, O'Brien's grasping ambitions are dwarfed by the enormity of Boulder Dam, and viewers are left with a sense of his brief notoriety being but a single cog in a vast, unstoppable crime machine.
Enjoyed this great 1950 film starring Edmond O'Brien, ( Mal Granger) who plays the role of a telephone repair man with great skills in communications and all kinds of ability to set up telephone lines anywhere he so desires.
Mal gets tired of his old routine job and meets up with his bookie who places his bets on the race track and offers him a very profitable job with the big time gambling bosses.
Mal gets very powerful with all the bookies and begins to disturb the big shot bosses from other states and that is when Carl Stephens, (Otto Kruger) decides he is going to cut in on Mal Granger's business.
There is many twists and turns in this film and you have some fantastic scenes all around Hoover Dam with non stop entertainment right to the very end.
Along with DOA, The Killers, White Heat, Shield for Murder, the Hitchhiker, this entry attests to the style of O'Brien, who may be the worlds best sweater.
The best moments are really not the climactic finale, but rather those where O'Brien banters with Otto Kruger (who is perfect) and Don Porter.
These Movies were not only for Entertainment but for a sort of Public Service.Technology was also a "new" element in Law Enforcement and the Fight against Communism and Films were want to display as much High Tech Stuff as possible.
We get quite a bit of that here with Electronic Whiz Kid, Edmond O'Brien strutting His Stuff and landing a Slot with the Local Mob. This is a less Personal Film then most Noir's and tends to paint with a wide brush with its Coast to Coast Crime Syndicate with tangled wires and many Locations.A good tightly wound Thriller, this has an Energy for sure and hardly ever settles down and the Interpersonal is disposed of quite Brutally at times.
Why not take a trip to 711 Ocean Drive and visit Edmond O'Brien?
In fact, O'Brien plays his villainous part so carefully and so smoothly that we almost cannot be sure he won't be redeemed by the time it all ends.Of course, the story has been written and filmed to denounce organized crime, so the outcome for O'Brien's character may seem obvious to viewers-- but it is to his credit that O'Brien gives us a few points to stop along the way, to hit the brakes and turn off the road at a junction where we can think and say 'what if--.'Fans of the actor may also want to check out D.O.A. and SHIELD FOR MURDER..
While Oscar winner, Edmond O'Brien, was never much of a leading man, he does a very good acting job in this 1950 film.
Here he plays a telephone installer whose knowledge of electronics soon gets him involved with the mob affairs in phone hookups and gambling.
By a quirk of fate, O'Brien moves up readily until he is put in charge of the western operations.The film, an interesting one, deals with mob relations, deceit, corruption and has plenty of violence.Watch for an interesting performance by Hardy Kruger as a gambling magnate.
Howard St. John appears as a police detective who is hot on the trail of O'Brien and there is a brief but memorable acting job by Don Porter, who later turned to comedy in the television show "Private Secretary" with Ann Sothern.The film admirably deals with the evils of gambling and its relation to organized crime.
Well worth watching as well to see the interesting performance of Joanne Dru, as Porter's wife and O'Brien's girlfriend..
(I suppose if the producer hired an off-duty policeman to stand guard for an hour, the film was made 'under police protection'.) The film stars Edmond O'Brien, who was in impressive form here as a bad guy, though it would not be until Ida Lupino chose him for the lead three years later in her remarkable film THE BIGAMIST (1953, see my review) that it would become clear to all what a truly fine and versatile actor he really was.
In this film he is a telephone communications expert who gets hired to create a wire network for race track bookies, but he takes it over and develops a serious case of ego inflation and goes mad with power and greed.
Reliable Edmund O'Brien stars in this fairly routine B-thriller as a phone company repairman who uses his electrical knowhow to set up a highly efficent bookie system for a local gangster.
O'Brien's reach extends his grasp when he sets up the murder of one of his new partners (Don Porter), because the hit man decides that he should also be getting a cut of the action.
The movie's best scene is its big finish at Boulder Dam (aka Hoover Dam), where O'Brien and Joann Dru take the tour down into the guts of the concrete beast to elude the cops.
Despite the 1950 charm of Los Angeles, a couple of ominous characters and the rapid changes in O'Brien's fortunes, "711 Ocean Drive" (possibly a reference to O'Brien's Malibu digs) never seems to work up a good head of steam until the very end..
Edmond O'Brien (as Mal Granger) is an ordinary telephone repairman who must supplement his measly salary by betting on a few horse races; he decides to use his electronics skills to help racetrack "bookies" illegally wire results to Bad Barry Kelley (as Vince Waters).
The first "job" he takes is difficulty to accept as illegal (obviously, they had no cell phones back then); but, later on, O'Brien gets in deeper.
This is a "flashback" film, describing the rise and fall of O'Brien's character Granger, accompanied by a dreadfully gooey sermon.
Newman ~ Edmond O'Brien, Joanne Dru, Otto Kruger.
Like Bogie in 'The Harder They Fall', here good egg Edmund O'Brien is seduced by degrees into lowlife violent crime -- main motivation: an honest working man can't make it, so if yer smart enough to work a con you'd best get to getting', especially if invited in by a big player.Barry Kelly repulses as a small-time crime boss bully who fancies himself a legitimate businessman.
Otto Kruger as the faux-elegant big-time crime boss nauseates, and Don Porter (Gidget's TV dad) as psycho wife-beater and wife-pimp, puts a bland smiley face on pure evil.
"711 Ocean Drive" falls into the gray area of Film Noir/Policer/Mob Movie.
"White Heat", only a year before and also with Edmond O'Brien?
And it's true noir; There are no good guys except the cops.Other commentors have not seized on the things that make this most interesting, in that if you were around at the time (or seeing it today as a fan of mob movies), you would recognize some startling characters portrayed at a time which was arguably the high point of the power of American organized crime.
When the ultimate lawman, John Edgar Hoover himself, swore before the country that "No national criminal conspiracy exists", which of course was the farthest thing from the truth, it was a pretty sweet time to be the Mafia.Faithful Otto Kruger, doing what he does best in playing a genteel killer, is a thinly fictionalized Meyer Lansky.
These things get better
Sammy White, who plays Chippie, looks for all the world like a young(er) Lee Strasburg, who played the Meyer Lansky character in "Godfather II".
But O'Brien carries it off nicely, given what he has to work with.There is one gigantic plot hole: There is no way on earth the syndicate would not suspect that O'Brien was responsible for Porters murder.
The film stars Edmond O'Brien, Joanne Dru, Otto Kruger, Barry Kelly, Sammy White, Dorothy Patrick, Howard St John, Don Porter and Robert Osterloh.
His bookie, Sammy White, says he can hook O'Brien up with his boss, Barry Kelly.
White is sure a guy with O'Brien's smarts with phones etc could be useful.
Sure enough, O'Brien has Kelly's wire service up and running at top speed in no time.
Kelly agrees because he needs O'Brien to run the new electronic set up.
They decide to invite themselves in as partners for a 50 percent cut.The mob boss, Otto Kruger, sends out his man, Don Porter to talk with O'Brien about the deal.
Porter takes his wife, Joanne Dru along to see the coast.
O'Brien does not like the mob move, but knows he should play along.
The mob is not pleased with the hit and question O'Brien, Dru etc.
By this time, the Police have become interested in O'Brien and the operation.
The Detective in charge, Howard St. John roots around looking for a reason to bust up O'Brien and the mob's racket.Now a further fly lands in the old ointment, Osterloh.
Of course matters now start to go to pieces for O'Brien and Dru. The mob has tumbled on their own to O'Brien's involvement with their man Porter's killing.
O'Brien, Dru and his man, Sammy White, are soon on the road to Vegas.
There, they use some of O'Brien's knowledge of the wire service to beat the mob out of 250 large.
That's the epilogue of this film noir set in the world of track betting where a hard working and struggling telephone repair man (Edmond O'Brien) gets a little too involved in the $2 bet and ends up as part of a very large racket that is expanding thanks to its suave secret head (Otto Kruger) who stays as clean as those who work for him get dirtier.
This is organized crime at its dirtiest, because as the cops reveal, they have nothing on the big boys (or even the ratting middle men), but need their help in getting their hands on O'Brien whose involvement in the gambling rackets goes from the $2 bet to murder!
It is well written and clever, but perhaps a bit too clever for its own good, as the opening narration indicates, having survived attempts to have the filming shut down by actual rackets who didn't want their secrets exposed.To get past the convoluted structure and really understand what is going on, you have to go into this clear minded, and once you get past the first opening reels of explanatory detail, you will see how the common man gets in over their head, manipulated by the smarter outsiders in this racket who utilize his talents but eventually he gets in over his head by becoming involved with Joanne Dru, the troubled wife of one of the main rackateers (Don Porter).
O'Brien gives an outstanding performance as you see his rise from struggling respectability to on the run felon, with Kruger malevolent as the big man.
The finale sequence is the epitome of suspense, taking O'Brien and Dru on the run to the Hoover Dam, going down 44 stories to the depths of the Colorado River in an attempt to cross state lines.
Having only flown over the dam several times over the years, I was amazed to see a bit of how it worked, and got spooked with the stair climbing sequence that I half expected to end with either cops or rackateers waiting for O'Brien at the other end by saying, "What too you so long?" This is a film I know I will re-visit before long because it is definitely one of the more fascinating film noirs to study, even if as a whole, the film is just good, not great, aided by those location sequences and stand-out performances..
Unfortunately this thing cheated the ending and the guy just gets shot down next to some cars, just in time for a sermony coda about the evils of gambling.
I'd like to give this film a better recommendation but there's nothing really special about it, nothing that lifts it above the average crime drama of the time, except perhaps the business about modern electronics to update the bookie business, and that's pretty much gotten over with in the first twenty minutes.Edmond O'Brien is an ambitious but honest telephone lineman who is hired by a local bookie manager -- is that the right term?
Instead, there is one of those pointless shoot outs, in which O'Brien is wounded and stumbles at a run across the dam, bullets whistling past him, firing back blindly, until he collapses on the asphalt.Joanne Dru is in it, looking good, as is what's her name, Dorothy Patrick as one of several blonds that O'Brien picks up and discards on his way to the top. |
tt0100637 | The Sleeping Car | This story begins with Mrs. Roberts, her baby son, and her Aunt Mary headed Westbound on the Boston and Albany Railroad. They are on their way to meet Mrs. Roberts' husband and brother in Boston. Mrs. Roberts has not seen her brother in twelve years, and is nervous about how he will react to seeing her. In the time since they last saw each other, she has married and birthed a child, and has heard little from her brother except for infrequent telegraphs. The porter informs Mrs. Roberts and her aunt that the berths are now ready for them to sleep in, but the conversation continues. Mrs. Roberts worries that her husband Edward will not receive Willis well, or vice versa, because Willis is a Californian and Edward has never encountered one before. Mrs. Roberts laments that her life would be a wreck if her husband and brother do not get along nicely, and states "I do hope they're sitting down to a hot supper."
A voice from an adjacent berth interjects and sarcastically tells Mrs. Roberts to be quiet. She acquiesces for a moment, but then reverts to conversation, stating how they must go to bed. Aunt Mary insists that Mrs. Roberts and the child take the bottom bunk, because she is afraid that the child will roll off of the top bunk and injure himself. She calls the porter over to help her into the upper berth, and after successfully entering the berth, exchanges "good-night" with Mrs. Roberts.
After a few minutes, Mrs. Roberts rekindles the conversation, and expresses her concern regarding the safety of the train on which they're riding. Her aunt reassures her that the road is safe, and that the train has implemented safety measures to prevent accidents. Mrs. Roberts then goes on to discuss where her Aunt left the drinking glass in their luggage, until she is interrupted by a man from the next berth. This man politely requests silence from Mrs. Roberts, citing that he has come straight through from San Francisco and would very much like some rest. Mrs. Roberts responds apologetically, but starts conversing with this man, inquiring about California, her brother Willis, and if he has ever met his acquaintance. Midway through their conversation, a man in the upper berth sarcastically interjects and asks for quiet. The Californian takes offense to the man's tone towards Mrs. Roberts, and the two get into a verbal argument over it. Eventually, the Californian gets the man in the upper berth to back down ("You beg that lady's pardon, or I'll have you out of there before you know yourself!"). Part I ends with the Californian and Mrs. Roberts finally going to bed, with only the sounds of Aunt Mary's snoring audible.
Part II begins with Edward boarding the train at Worcester. After confirming the train's identity with the porter, Mr. Roberts attempts to search for his wife. Of course, he does not know which berth houses his wife, and he tries to jog the porter's memory with details about his wife and her traveling companions. The conductor joins the conversation, and finally all decide to wait until morning to search for Mr. Roberts's wife, when all the passengers will be awake. Edward settles into a seat on the train, and noticies what appears to be his wife's bonnet hanging from a hook next to one of the berths. The porter says that a man is in that berth, but convinced by the bonnet, Edward decides to take a chance and enter the berth, bribing the porter to allow him to do so.
Of course, the berth that Edward enters is the berth of the Californian, who is not pleased that someone has again interrupted his slumber. The Californian confronts Mr. Roberts, who attempts to talk his way out of the situation. Mrs. Roberts wakes up from this noise, and comes to her husband's side. The conductor comes to see what all the fuss is about, and it is the Californian who confesses to making the noise. The conductor decides that his problem with the Californian is not worth a confrontation. ("[If I had a problem], I'd get the biggest brakeman to do it for me.") Mr. Edwards apologizes to the Californian for waking him, and invites him to call on them whenever he pleases.
The Californian returns to his berth, and Mrs. Roberts fills her husband in on the events of the sleeping car thus far. She realizes she has neglected the child during this brief kerfuffle, and dashes back to her berth to check on him. Mrs. Roberts selects the wrong berth, and again interrupts the Californian's sleep. She explains that she was looking for her child, and the Californian decides to help the Roberts' look for their baby son. The Californian finds Mrs. Roberts's berth on his first attempt, and Mrs. Roberts shrieks with excitement. Again, the Californian returns to his berth.
However, Mrs. Roberts remains awake. She comes to the sudden and unrelenting realization that the Californian is in fact her brother Willis. ("It accounts for his being so polite and kind to me through all [of this].") Obsessed and sincere in her conviction of this thought, she and her husband yet again interrupt the sleep of the Californian, pulling open he curtains and accusing him of being her brother. The Californian jokingly rejects this premise, and assures them that he most certainly is not Willis Campbell. Disappointed and deeply sorry for again interrupting his sleep, Mr. and Mrs. Roberts return to their berth. Thus ends Part II.
Part III begins with a passenger boarding the train the next day. The porter shows this gentleman to a seat across from where the Roberts' sit. Mrs. Roberts notices the name on the bag says "Willis Campbell, San Francisco." Although this evidence should be plenty for Mrs. Roberts to immediately confront this stranger about his identity, she hesitates, and is worried that she will further humiliate herself if this person is not her brother. Eventually, she gathers the courage to ask him, and the two discover that they are indeed brother and sister. Mrs. Roberts fills in her brother on the past antics of the journey in the sleeping car, and upon hearing the description of the Californian, is convinced that he is Tom Goodall, an old acquaintance of his. However, the Californian is named Abram Sawyer, and again he has woken up for frivolous purposes.
As the train is quickly approaching Boston, Mr. Roberts suggests that Aunt Mary be woken up so that she may prepare for arrival. Aunt Mary is informed that both Edward and Willis have boarded the sleeping car overnight, and meets the acquaintance of the Californian. Upon hearing his name, Aunt Mary is convinced that she knows him as the daughter of her old friend Kate Harris. Clearly, this accusation is ridiculous, and the voices of the other sleeping car passengers make some jokes about it. The play ends with Aunt Mary requesting for the porter to help her down from the upper berth. | psychedelic, murder, flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0050732 | Mucho Mouse | Madrid, Spain 1956
The camera slowly pans to the right and reveals a Spanish house, and goes inside to the sound of a flamenco guitar. As the camera reveals that Lightning is playing the guitar while leaning against a couch, Jerry, known in this cartoon as El Magnífico (Spanish for "The Magnificent"), comes dancing out of his hole and then brings back a small wedge of cheese. Meanwhile, the Spanish owner of the house (Joan) comes in the room, sees Jerry, and taps her foot impatiently at Lightning. In Spanish, Lightning compliments the señorita (Joan) about her good looks today, until he finally agrees to chase Jerry. He dives at the mouse eating his cheese on the carpet, and Jerry strategically raises the carpet and himself such that the cat goes underneath the carpet and runs into a table. Lightning is unfazed and returns the other way, but the mouse ties the cat's tail to another table and is drawn back into it, and then smashed by the top of the table. Lightning's legs, tail, and head pop out akin to a turtle.
Now, the cat dives at the mouse next to his El Magnífico hole, and the mouse lifts himself out of the way again, leaving the cat to pitch and jump directly into his guitar where he left it, on the couch. Jerry, having defeated Lightning, dances back into his hole. The poor cat, head poking through his guitar, proclaims it is no use. Joan responds by saying that is because he is lazy - the laziest cat, in fact, that she has ever seen! Lightning is hurt, and responds that nobody could catch "El Magnífico". Therefore, she commands him to read a telegram which says "Arriving today from U.S.A., Guarantee to catch mouse (El Magnífico)....Tom, Olympic, U.S. and World Champion Mouse Catcher."
Tom arrives at the door with numerous medals and trophies beside him. The cat, being from the United States, uses a guide book to help him speak Spanish. He tells the señorita: "How are you, ma'am?" in Spanish, obviously struggling with the language, particularly on the "señorita". However, she waves this off as good manners, and then leaves, reaffirming Tom's guarantee to catch the mouse. They bid goodbye in Spanish (Tom still speaking poorly), and the señorita then snubs Lightning in comparison to Tom. Lightning, whose guitar is repaired, pulls back and lets go of the strings on his instrument, which smack into Tom, making him angry. Lightning points to the mouse hole and sings "El Magnificooooooooooo...". Just then, Tom sees Jerry carrying a banana as he walks back into his hole.
Tom uses a stethoscope to detect Jerry in the wall, marks the spot (X), drills a hole in the spot (X), and then pulls the mouse out with a fireplace blower. The cat stuffs Jerry into a small cannon, lights it, and holds the door open for the mouse as he is thrown out of the house. Triumphant with no trouble at all, Tom claps his hands. However, Jerry pops right back in via a small door panel at the bottom of the door. Tom kicks him out a second time, and Jerry comes back in through one of the higher panels, which falls on Tom's head. Jerry does a different dance this time, in which he steps repeatedly on the board. As he is coming close to the El Magnífico hole, Tom begins to flamenco along with him and around the room. However, the tables are turned when Jerry directs the dance to a nearby window, which Tom falls through and out of, then down into a fountain. Tom is now incensed.
The camera cuts to the front door and Tom shunting the door out of the way. He stops next to Lightning and begins to transform into a bull as bullfight music plays, thus ramping up Lightning ("El Toro!"), and begins to play a guitar tune along with the music as El Magnífico comes out in a matador garb.
Tom makes a beeline for the mouse and misses as Jerry eggs him on by saying "Haha!, Toro!, C'mon!" The cat runs at him again, and Jerry, blindfolded, jumps in the air and the red cape swirls like a tutu in the air. The camera cuts to Lightning cheering "¡Ole!" with progressively higher emotion, until he sees Tom crash into a table and a small piece of pottery cracks over his head. So Jerry opens Tom's eye and waves the red cape in it, causing it to spin and the cat to wake up. Tom lunges, but he misses a third time and slides into Jerry's mouse hole, taking the mouse along on top of him.
Jerry revives the "bull" by smacking him in his rear with the cape. Now, the cat is angry, but the fourth lunge leads to the cat simply disappearing into the cape as Jerry holds it out. After showing there is nothing on either side of it, Jerry hurls Tom out of the cape, and then plays guitar on Tom's whiskers. This gets the cat to continue the chase, and he turns in all directions to attempt to corner the mouse against the wall. However, Jerry escapes this and makes circles around the floor, causing Tom to wrap himself up in a pretzel shape. The camera now cuts to Jerry victoriously carrying his trophy as Lightning and a recorded clip of a Spanish crowd acclaim "¡Ole!".
Joan returns to find both Lightning and Tom playing guitar, and demands to know what is going on. Lightning responds, "Señorita, I told you: Nadie, absolutely no one, can catch El Magnífico!", and asks Tom if this was true in Spanish. Tom replies in the positive with fluent Spanish and both continue their guitar playing, as Joan sees Jerry pushing some fruits into his hole. | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | 'El Magnifico' Too Tough To Catch.
We are in Madrid, Spain, where an orange housecoat is unable to get rid of the mouse in the house.
The cat is on the sofa one afternoon, playing flamenco music on his guitar.
The mouse hears it, and comes out of his hole (where it says, "El Magnifico" over the outside of it) and begins dancing.
The housewife comes out and is not happy.
She chastises the orange cat (it's not Tom) for not getting rid of the mouse and for being lazy.
The cat replies, "No one, absolutely no one can catch 'El Magnifico.'""Is that so,?
says the woman.
"Read this." She hands his a telegram that says, "Arriving today from the U.S.A. Guaranteed to catch El Magnifico.
Signed, Tom, Olympic and World Champion Mouse Catcher."Tom then arrives at the house, complete with trophy (with a flashing neon message on it!), string of medals and a translation book.
The woman is thrilled and leaves the house, confident Tom will solve the problem.Well, Tom is good but the mouse is, indeed, too tough as we see in this entertaining animated short.
Hilarious, no, but it's funny and it's a "cute" cartoon.
I liked the music, too.(Note: There is an inference here that this 'toon is done is Spanish.
That's not true; most of it is in English, at least on the DVD, "Whiskers Away," that I have where this is included.).
not one of the best.
One of the few disappointing Tom and Jerry cartoons of the Hanna Barbera era.This cartoon is notable for the fact that Tom and Jerry both speak - and in Spanish!Jerry is El Magnifico, the uncatchable mouse.
The local cat has given up and plays flamenco guitar while Jerry raids the larder.
Call for the world champion mouse catcher - you guessed it - Tom So far an interesting idea, but Jerry emerges from every attempt unscathed.
Part of the charm of Tom and Jerry is that you're never quite certain who will get the best of things, but this one is entirely too predictable.However even the worst of the Hanna Barbera cartoons are at least watchable and better than most of the later efforts..
Not so magnifico..
Madrid, Spain, and a local cat is outclassed by the brave, quick-witted, flamenco dancing mouse called El Magnifico (or Jerry, as we know him).
Exasperated, the lady of the house sends for Tom, the World Champion mouser from the U.S. of A.I've seen well over a hundred Tom and Jerry cartoons thus far and this is one of the weakest, the set-up nothing special and the antics old-hat.
It might be set in Madrid, but there isn't much to distinguish Mucho Mouse from your average, predictable house-bound T&J caper, save for a little Spanish guitar, one small scene where Jerry plays toreador to the bullish Tom, and the fact that both the cat and mouse speak..
Even with the predictable story, Mucho Mouse is very entertaining.
As people may already know, I am a fan of Tom and Jerry.
I personally wouldn't consider Mucho Mouse one of the best, the story is a little too predictable and the cartoon is a little too short so those brings it down a notch.
However, there are some great sight gags and writing and Jerry is a joy to behold, so the cartoon is never less than entertaining.Mucho Mouse also goes at a cracking pace, and the characters are delightful.
Tom is good, but it is actually Jerry who steals the show.
The animation is beautifully done, especially in the colours and backgrounds.
The music is also outstanding, I loved the flamenco-rhythms, which added to the cartoon's setting and authenticity.All in all, a very entertaining cartoon without being one of the best.
8/10 Bethany Cox. Jerry Gonzales.
"Mucho Mouse" is a 7-minute cartoon from 1957, so it has its 60th anniversary this year, and this is one of the later Hanna Barbera collaborations featuring the world's most famous cat&mouse duo.
And they tried to bring in new aspects to keep the series going.
Here we hear both Tom and Jerry as well as the other cat talk (adding to the animals' humanization here), the action is moved to Spain and the fat black cat owner is replaced by a thin lanky Spanish woman.
The cat in the house has given up pretty much on catching Jerry, who is also known as The Magnificent One here and only goes for it a bit when the owner's pressure becomes too much once again after Jerry empties the kitchen constantly.
So a new cat needs to come, but hey at least she seems to love her old red cat enough to not kick him out.
The new cat is Tom and God knows where he got all these awards and trophies from?
But after initial successes, he also quickly realizes that this mouse is out of his league and he basically turns into a second red cat, with other fur color obviously though.
So everybody's a winner as the cats are chill eventually and the mouse is happy because he still won't be stopped getting all these delicacies.
I mentioned the humanization earlier and the fact that the stereotypical reaction of cat killing or trying to kill mouse is never an option here, even if Tom manages to catch the magnificent, slightly boastful mouse early on.
Instead the cats applaud it and give in to its greatness.
Oh yeah, as for my title: I know Speedy is from Mexico and not Spain, but the Hispanic note here as well as all the flamenco guitar playing and dancing and, last but not least, Jerry's legendary reputation really reminded me of Speedy Gonzales here.
His first Oscar-winning cartoon is from 1955, so only 2 years older.
A coincidence?
I doubt it.
But this one here still succeeds in its own right.
It's worth seeing for cartoon lovers fore sure.
Not among T&J's most or least known overall, I give it a thumbs-up. |
tt0040507 | Kidnapped | The central character and narrator is 17-year-old David Balfour. (Balfour is Stevenson's mother's maiden name.) His parents have recently died, and he is out to make his way in the world. He is given a letter by the minister of Essendean, Mr. Campbell, to be delivered to the House of Shaws in Cramond, where David's uncle, Ebenezer Balfour, lives. On his journey, David asks many people where the House of Shaws is, and all of them speak of it darkly as a place of fear and evil.
David arrives at the ominous House of Shaws and is confronted by his paranoid Uncle Ebenezer, who is armed with a blunderbuss. His uncle is also miserly, living on "parritch" and small ale, and the House of Shaws itself is partially unfinished and somewhat ruinous. David is allowed to stay and soon discovers evidence that his father may have been older than his uncle, thus making David the rightful heir to the estate. Ebenezer asks David to get a chest from the top of a tower in the house but refuses to provide a lamp or candle. David is forced to scale the stairs in the dark and realises that not only is the tower unfinished in some places, but the steps simply end abruptly and fall into an abyss. David concludes that his uncle intended for him to have an "accident" so as not to have to give over his nephew's inheritance.
David confronts his uncle, who promises to tell David the whole story of his father the next morning. A ship's cabin boy, Ransome, arrives the next day and tells Ebenezer that Captain Hoseason of the brig Covenant needs to meet him to discuss business. Ebenezer takes David to a pier on the Firth of Forth, where Hoseason awaits, and David makes the mistake of leaving his uncle alone with the captain while he visits the shore with Ransome. Hoseason later offers to take them on board the brig briefly, and David complies, only to see his uncle returning to shore alone in a skiff. David is then immediately struck senseless.
David awakens, bound hand and foot, in the hold of the ship. He becomes weak and sick, and one of the Covenant's officers, Mr. Riach, convinces Hoseason to move David up to the forecastle. Mr. Shuan, a mate on the ship, finally takes his routine abuse of Ransome too far and murders the unfortunate youth. David is repulsed at the crew's behaviour and learns that the captain plans to sell him into slavery in the Carolinas.
David becomes the slain cabin boy's replacement, and the ship encounters contrary winds which drive her back toward Scotland. Fog-bound near the Hebrides, they strike a small boat. All of the small boat's crew are killed except one man, Alan Breck Stewart, who is brought on board and offers Hoseason a large sum of money to drop him off on the mainland. David later overhears the crew plotting to kill Alan and take all his money. David and Alan barricade themselves in the round house, where Alan kills the murderous Shuan, and David wounds Hoseason. Five of the crew members are killed outright, and the rest refuse to continue fighting.
Alan is a Jacobite who supports the claim of the House of Stuart to the throne of Scotland. He is initially suspicious of the pro-Whig David, who is also loyal to King George II. Still, the young man has given a good account of himself in the fighting and impresses the veteran soldier.
Hoseason has no choice but to give Alan and David passage back to the mainland. David tells his tale to Alan, who in turn states that his birthplace, Appin, is under the tyrannical administration of Colin Roy of Glenure, the King's factor and a Campbell. Alan vows that should he find the "Red Fox" he will kill him.
The Covenant tries to negotiate a difficult channel without a proper chart or pilot, and is soon driven aground on the notorious Torran Rocks. David and Alan are separated in the confusion, with David being washed ashore on the isle of Erraid, near Mull, while Alan and the surviving crew row to safety on that same island. David spends a few days alone in the wild before getting his bearings.
David learns that his new friend has survived, and David has two encounters with beggarly guides: one who attempts to stab him with a knife, and another who is blind but an excellent shot with a pistol. David soon reaches Torosay, where he is ferried across the river, receives further instructions from Alan's friend Neil Roy McRob, and later meets a catechist who takes the lad to the mainland.
As he continues his journey, David encounters none other than the Red Fox (Colin Roy) himself, who is accompanied by a lawyer, a servant, and a sheriff's officer. When David stops the Campbell man to ask him for directions, a hidden sniper kills the King's hated agent.
David is denounced as a conspirator and flees for his life, but by chance reunites with Alan. The youth believes Alan is the assassin, but Alan denies responsibility.
The pair flee from redcoat search parties until they reach James (Stewart) of the Glens, whose family has heard of the murder, is burying their hidden store of weapons, and is burning papers that could incriminate them. James tells the travellers he will have no choice but to "paper" them (distribute printed descriptions of the two with a reward listed), but provides them with weapons and food for their journey south, and David with a change of clothes (which the printed description will not match).
Alan and David then begin their flight through the heather, hiding from government soldiers by day. As the trek drains David's strength, his health rapidly deteriorates; by the time they are set upon by wild Highlanders who are sentries for Cluny Macpherson, an outlawed chief in hiding, the lad is barely conscious.
Alan convinces Cluny to give them shelter. The Highland chieftain is offended when David covenantly refuses to play cards but defers to the respected Alan's opinion of the lad. David is tended by a Highland doctor and soon recovers, though in the meantime Alan loses all of their money at cards with Cluny, only for Cluny to give it back when David practically begs for it.
When David and Alan resume their flight in cold and rainy weather, David becomes ill again and nurses a childish anger against Alan over the affront of having to beg for their money. Alan patiently tries to help the sulking David for several days, but he finally gives in to his own pride and begins taunting him. David forces a showdown with swords by insulting Alan's courage and loyalty, but Alan cannot bring himself to fight him. David, now sick in the extreme, at last feels contrition and realizes a plea for help can do what an apology will not: mend the rift between them. Alan carries David on his back down the burn to reach the nearest house, fortuitously that of a Maclaren, Duncan Dhu, who is both an ally of the Stewarts and a skilled piper.
David is bedridden and given a doctor's care, while Alan hides nearby, visiting after dark. During David's nearly month-long recuperation, he is visited by many curious but loyal neighbours in the region and by a foe of Alan's, Robin Oig, the son of Rob Roy MacGregor and a wanted outlaw. Alan and Robin nearly fight a duel, but Duncan persuades them to leave the contest to bagpipes. Both play brilliantly, but Alan admits Robin is the better piper, so the quarrel is resolved. Alan and David prepare to leave the Highlands and return to David's country.
In one of the most humorous passages in the book, Alan convinces an innkeeper's daughter from Limekilns (unnamed in Kidnapped but called "Alison Hastie" in its sequel) that David is a dying young Jacobite nobleman, despite David's objections, and she ferries them across the Firth of Forth. There, they meet a lawyer of David's uncle's, Mr. Rankeillor, who agrees to help David receive his inheritance. Rankeillor explains that David's father and uncle had once quarrelled over a woman, David's mother, and the older Balfour had married her, informally giving the estate to his brother while living as an impoverished schoolteacher with his wife. This agreement had lapsed with his death.
David and the lawyer hide in bushes outside Ebenezer's house while Alan speaks to him, claiming to be a man who found David nearly dead after the wreck of the Covenant and says he is representing folk holding him captive in the Hebrides. He asks David's uncle whether Alan should kill David or keep him. The uncle flatly denies Alan's statement that David had been kidnapped but eventually admits that he paid Hoseason "twenty pound" to take David to "Caroliny". David and Rankeillor then emerge from their hiding places, and speak with Ebenezer in the kitchen, eventually agreeing that David will be provided two-thirds of the estate's income for as long as his uncle lives.
The novel ends with David and Alan's parting ways; Alan returns to France, and David goes to a bank to settle his money. | action | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0096289 | Torch Song Trilogy | 1971: Arnold (Harvey Fierstein), a New York City female impersonator, meets Ed (Brian Kerwin), a bisexual schoolteacher, and they fall in love. Ed, however, is uncomfortable with his sexuality and he leaves Arnold for a girlfriend, Laurel.
1973-79: During Christmas, Arnold meets the love of his life, a male model named Alan (Matthew Broderick). They settle down together, later spending a weekend with Ed and Laurel in the country, where their relationship is tested but endures. Eventually, they apply to foster a child together with a view to adoption, and their application is eventually successful and so they move to a bigger apartment. However, on their first night at their new home, Alan is killed in a homophobic attack.
1980: Months later, in the spring of 1980, Arnold's mother (Anne Bancroft) comes to visit from Florida, but her visit leads to a long-overdue confrontation. Arnold's mother disapproves of Arnold's homosexuality and his planned adoption of a gay teenage son, David (Eddie Castrodad), as well as Arnold's use of their family burial plot for Alan. They have a series of arguments where Arnold demands that she accept him for who he is, insisting that if she can't then she has no place in his life. The following morning, before she returns to Florida, they have a conversation where, for the first time, they seem to understand each other. With both David and Ed (who is now more mature and settled) in his life, and a successful new career creating his own stage revue, Arnold's life is finally complete. | romantic, autobiographical | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0070842 | Turks fruit | Eric, a sculptor, wakes up recalling a disturbing dream followed by frantically picking up random women from the streets and taking them back to his studio for sex. However, he is clearly distressed about something, and it turns out that this is the aftermath of his breakup with Olga. The movie recounts his relationship with Olga.
Olga picks up Eric when he is hitchhiking, and immediately they hit it off together, both sexually and spiritually. They live together and marry. However, their relationship is strongly resisted by Olga's mother. She does not approve of this Bohemian sculptor, who lives poorly off his occasional commissions, as a suitable match for Olga. Nevertheless, Eric and Olga get married, and Olga's family accepts him.
After a number of adventures, Olga suddenly starts acting strangely. At a party organised by her family, she flirts with a businessman, and after some arguments with Eric, he slaps her and she leaves him. Eric trashes his studio, violently crushing anything that reminded him of Olga. This brings the movie to the point where it opened, ending the flashback.
Eric is still obsessed about Olga, but sees her only occasionally. She acts more and more outrageously, often in the presence of other men. Her family refuses to let Eric visit her, until he says he has come to arrange a divorce. After a short while Olga gets married to an American businessman, which soon goes wrong, and she returns to the Netherlands.
One day Eric meets Olga, who is flamboyantly dressed and acting almost completely incoherent. She collapses and is taken to the hospital, where she is diagnosed as having a brain tumor, but surgical intervention could not remove all of it. It becomes clear that she will die. Eric brings her Turkish delight, which is the only thing she will eat, as she is afraid that harder food will break her teeth. Soon after, she dies. | murder, flashback | train | wikipedia | I remember that the movie was Dutch, very erotic in the raw, brutal, twisted yet beautiful and passionate way.
Watching "Z Channel..." I was happy to instantly recognize "Turks fruit" (1973) aka "Turkish Delight" made by Paul Verhoeven in 1973.
My memory served me well - Verhoeven's early film is as naturalistic, earthy, brutal, erotic, humorous, poetic, poignant, and captivating as I remember it.
Based on the novel by Jan Wolker, "Turkish Delight" stars young, hot, very sexy (and I mean it - VERY SEXY) Rutger Hauer as a bohemian free spirited and often cruel sculptor Eric and even younger Monique van de Van as his wife Olga, child-like yet as sensual as Eric was, "the light of his life, the fire of his loins".
The film that describes their stormy relationship has become the most financially successful Holland's film that was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Foreign Language film and was proclaimed by Jan Wolker a "75% masterpiece".There are not very many directors in the world that can create the atmosphere of raw sensuality as well as Verhoeven (of his Dutch period, especially).
Joe Ezsterhaus who worked with Verhoeven on two films said about him: "The guy is like his movies: brilliant, mercurial, very daring, perverse, a wonderful series of paradoxes and contradictions..." "The Turkish Delight" is all that and I love it but I can understand how its graphic sexuality, more than one disgusting and revolting scenes (but they had to be in the movie) and crude behavior may put off a lot of viewers.
"Turks fruit" has been voted best Dutch movie recently.
I can see why, "Turks fruit" is a delicious treat and perfectly mixes an heavy love story with dramatic and realistic moments life is filled with."Turks fruit" is fine example of good storytelling.
Paul Verhoeven shows with this movie that he also is a great actor director.
This movie marked the first real big movie-role breakthrough for both Hauer and van de Ven and also for Verhoeven himself.The movie is filled with some typical and subtle Dutch humor which I really enjoyed in this movie.
Not THE best Dutch movie of all time (in my opinion that still is "Soldaat van Oranje") but this movie absolutely, most certainly is a romantic/dramatic masterpiece with lots of symbolism and unforgettable and powerful moments in it, that perfectly shows the early talent of Verhoeven, Hauer and van de Ven.10/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/.
Life and Love, As Interpreted by Paul Verhoeven.
In `Turkish Delight,' director Paul Verhoeven dissects a relationship born of passion, examines the ramifications of the attitudes and actions of the individuals involved-- as well as the couple they become-- and offers the results to his audience for consideration.
This is a film for neither the fainthearted nor the modest, but for the discerning viewer only.In the first few minutes of this film, we are introduced to Eric Vonk (Rutger Hauer), an artist with a passion for his work, but even more so for experiences that lean more toward the wanton and carnal in aspect.
Or so it would seem, initially.As the story unfolds, however, we begin to understand Eric and what it is that compels him thus; and it begins with a photograph of a beautiful young woman named Olga (Monique van de Ven), the woman with whom Eric once shared his life, love, passion and, yes, his lust.
The screen grows dark then; but the images to which the viewer has just been made privy are ones that are going to remain in the mind's eye for some time afterwards.Working from a screenplay by Gerard Soeteman (adapted from the novel by Jan Wolkers), Verhoeven establishes himself as the antithesis of Nora Ephron, presenting his `love' story in terms that are decidedly raw and primitive.
Though he does manage to establish the fact that Eric does have deep love for Olga, it is lust that seemingly dominates the picture, and though there is a dramatic twist to the story, it all comes across more like a twisted fairy tale than anything else.
Beyond the shock value (which is minimum), it just doesn't work.On the positive side, Verhoeven does extract worthy performances from his stars, Hauer and van de Ven.
Hauer, in his feature film debut (and at this point some eight years away from his American film debut in `Nighthawks') displays a natural ability in front of the camera and seems comfortably uninhibited, which enables him to use his rugged good looks to the best advantage.
That doesn't mean that much since my country isn't a major player in World cinema.Yet this film is very good and very famous.It was voted the best Dutch film ever a few years ago when a national poll was held in Holland.It's tough to agree with that,since I haven't seen all the classics but it's right up there,that much is true.The sex and dirty images of poo are not for everyone to see,yet it is essential to the free culture of Amsterdam in the 1970's.Amsterdam was the center of the world in the 70's,so my mother told me.
That was probably the reason why she left France (she is French) and came to Amsterdam."Turks Fruit" shows a very poignant picture of the city at that time and the sexual liberation of them days.The directing by the,at that time,young Paul Verhoeven is splendid and it's no mystery why he left Holland to go to Hollywood.His talents are clear but another reason was that he was misunderstood in Holland so he said himself.The camera work is great,but that's no surprise since it's done by one of the greatest cameramen Jan de Bont (who became famous in the 90's with his action classics "Speed" and "Twister",especially "Speed" show the superb talents of de Bont when it comes to camera work).The film also launched the careers of Rutger Hauer and Monique van de Ven. Van de Ven stayed in Holland,playing in some of the best Dutch films and Hauer went to Hollywood and gained cult fame when he starred in "Blade Runner",a terrific performance by Hauer.Verhoeven and Hauer would team up again 4 years later to make the Dutch war classic "Soldaat van Oranje"."Turks Fruit" is truly the epitome of 70's Dutch cinema with it's liberated sex approach that would echo in several other Dutch films in the 70's and 80's.Very important for Holland but maybe too much for the rest of the world,especially for the rather prudish Hollywood.Essential viewing though for everyone who wants to know something about the Dutch cinema.
Best Dutch film ever.A pre action movie Rutger Hauer proves he can act.The full romantic scrambles this film shows probably hit home for so many people.
Turkish delight is a book by the Dutch true artist Jan Wolkers: a painter, a sculptor, a writer.
And the beauty of both Rutger Hauer and Monique van der Ven, is a well deserved extra..
The first successful film from Dutch provocateur Paul Verhoeven, famous for of course Robocop and Basic Instinct (and infamous for Showgirls) is a small scale, human relationship drama that not only established the careers of Verhoeven and start Rutget Hauer but signalled the new wave for the Dutch film industry.
However Turks Fruit is nothing more than the Dutch Love Story, as moody artist Eric (Hauer) falls in love with Olga (Monique van de Ven) after the young lady pick him up from the side of a motorway.
I'm sure this kind of schoolboy theatrics played well to the Dutch polo-neck brigade, but as the film shifts into more serious territory the humour only deflates any building melodrama that Verhoeven was probably shooting for.Another problem with the film is Hauer's character Eric; he's too much of a chauvinist and bully, not only towards Olga, but even more so to the numerous women he sleeps with after she has left (You're fat is just one example of his pillow talk).
Anybody who thinks that Paul Verhoeven used to make "serious" films before he came to the States should be in for a rude awakening.
This is nothing but a pleasantly daft exploitation movie, in which beefy sculptor Rutger and his lady love hare around the Netherlands having a lot of sex and generally being wild, young and free.
'Turkish Delight' was Verhoevens first hit in Netherlands and was voted as best Dutch film of the century.
Very bold depiction of sex and sexuality doesn't seem forced and even the small bursts of intense violence don't stand out from the rest of the film as some bright (or dark) spots.'Turkish Delight' is heartwarming and heartbreaking love story between free spirited Olga (Monique van de Ven) and care free sculptor Eric (Rutger Hauer).
Their relationship seems as natural as sunshine in Florida (or rain in London).Very few directors are capable of making such warm films with provocative aplomb and Verhoeven is master at this game..
That aside i have to acknowledge that 'Turks Fruit/Turkish Delight' is a masterpiece of Dutch cinema and one of the greatest movies by Hollands most notorious directors Paul Verhoeven.
Turks fruit is a roller coaster movie about two people that live by the opportunistic way that characterizes Verhoeven's films and there characters.
This is a very intense movie about love, hate, life and death with a lot of symbolism and realism at the same time.
The plot is located in the early 70ies in Amsterdam and features Monique van de Ven and Rutger Hauer who give a really great performance.
The supporting actors are also very well chosen and there are no lengthy parts in the story that can make you laugh and cry at the same time.There are few movies that are able to create an atmosphere that intense.
The best Verhoeven movie ever.
No need to tell this is the best Verhoeven work in my opinion, and one of the best European films I've ever seen.
In this movie Rutger Hauer is very young.
This is one of Paul Verhoeven's early films.
This movie got nominated for Best Foreign Language Film.
Flesh + Blood is Rutger Hauer's best film.
Allthough it's not one of Rutger Hauer's most spectacularely voilent films, nor does it have vibrant special effects,it has everything els in it, sex, humour and romance with a twist!
One of Verhoeven's films I like best..
Also about artists sex, nudity, silent and loud rudety dutch life conservatism versus progressive as well as about crazy habit of hauer/verhoeven/man deviation but relatively friendly and light.
The film in question is pleasantly moody, showing various angles of love-sex-relationship, and courageous character actors (particularly Monique van de Ven as Olga Stapels, Rutger Hauer as Eric Vonk), skillful directing (Paul Verhoeven) and cinematography (Jan de Bont) provide this not-so-extraordinary script additional values and undertones.At the same time, I have doubts that Turkish Delight is a timeless film, that it approaches and influences future and current people as well, as many attitudes have changed, and many would consider depicted fashion and hairiness as odd (mildly speaking).
A story of true love and lots of passion, with superior acting by Rutger Hauer and a very young and till that time still unknown Monique van de Ven. Try not to be offended by the rather explicit sex scenes, see through them and notice that they are fully functional.
When asked, many will tell you they've learned more about life, romance, relationships, love and sex from his books then from anyone else including school and parents..
Turkish Delight is an erotic drama from Dutch director Paul Verhoeven, made early on in his career.
Nonetheless, there's plenty to enjoy about Turkish Delight, with superior cinematography from Verhoeven regular Jan De Bont and a wild, excessive performance from future big-shot Rutger Hauer in what is essentially a star-making performance.Although the plot of Turkish Delight is in essence a love story, Verhoeven uses the opportunity to throw in plenty of his trademarks.
This movie is a heartbreaking love story and one of the best films ever made in Holland.
Beautifully filmed by De Bont and great performances by van de Ven and Hauer.
This is a delightful film that started out as an adult movie.
The story is so good and the acting so superior that the second half becomes much more than just an exploitation film
It begins with Eric, a sculptor and chronic woman-chaser, whose wife is dying of a brain tumor
Eric is so successful with the ladies that he begins collecting their hair, attaching it into his scrapbook
He comes across a striking redhead named Olga, whom he brutally seduces in the car...
Instead of cutting her hair, he falls in love with her and chases her all over Holland
The treatment of sex is stimulating and humorous
It is not graphic, but the performers are quite active and the erotic encounters are exceptionally realistic
It moves quickly from reality to sexual fantasies combined with daydreams of killing, blood, and vengeance
Despite these outrageous displays, the movie is so full of life and powerful acting that it is more fascinating than repelling.
I'll deal with those parts of the film first (this next section may ruin the film for those who have not seen it).1) The scene with Rutger Hauer looking in the toilet before flushing it.
Thankfully, it gets a little less revolting as time marches on.2) The scene with Rutger Hauer vomiting on everyone present at the dinner party.
This was truly disgusting to watch, but also damned funny, because the burgeois society people that Hauer is dining with are so repulsive that they really do make a man feel like throwing up.
Like the film, it uses gritty and sometimes obscene language but it never fails to ooze with passion and love.
From director Paul Verhoeven (The Fourth Man, Total Recall, Basic Instinct), before he directed the atrocious Showgirls, which was chock-a-block with sex and nudity, in his home country of the Netherlands he made this film with similar high content, but of course this is much better, and was featured in the book 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die. Basically Eric Vonk (Rutger Hauer) is a highly talented sculptor, and he has a habit for picking up random women from the streets and having sex with them at his studio, but it is clear that he is only doing this to try and get over the breakup from Olga Stapels (Monique Van De Ven), and through flashback we see him recall his relationship with her.
Eric in anger trashes his studio, ruining anything that reminds him of Olga, and this is when the film comes out of flashback to present day, he still obsesses about his wife but they do occasionally see each other, each time with her acting more and more outrageously, often hanging around with other men, and the family are not allowing him to visit her until he will agree to end the marriage and divorce her.
All Eric can do for Olga is spend whatever time they have left together caring for her, and having refused for some time to eat he one day brings her some Turkish delight, this becomes the only thing she will eat as she worries her teeth will be broken by harder food, and in the end she does indeed tragically die.
Hauer, before becoming well known for dark and villainous roles, proves a good choice as the man with an obsession for sex and his art, and Van De Ven is also suitable as the beautiful who shares a passionate connection on and off with him, the film does mostly consist of the voyeuristic nudity and sensual sex scenes, in many situations, including bizarre and shocking moments during, but unlike Showgirls they work as part of the love story and are very interesting to watch unfold, it adds up to a marvellously inventive erotic drama.
Regarded as the most successful Dutch film, "Turks Fruit" (Turkish Delight) is a melodramatic romantic-tragedy directed by Paul Verhoeven.Verhoeven is renowned for his frank and extreme depictions of sex and violence, and "Turks Fruit" is no different.
It's the tale of an artist (Rutger Hauer) who has trouble dealing with his wife's (Monique van de Ven) selfish mother.
Rutger Hauer comes across as a sex starved brute, until the final act in which Verhoeven lingers on his sculptors and artwork, all of which feature pregnant women and babies.
Perhaps is because in the 1970's, every star crossed lovers in TV and film had very tragic endings to their relationships - and while this is another one, I liked the telling much better.Turks Fruit isn't as antiseptic as the American "Love Story" - this story is filmed as honestly as possible, showing you everything and anything that happened to this young couple of the early 70's and how the generation gap of the parent (not parents mind you!) really got in the way.
This is more adult and you do follow the story of a gifted artist and his wanton lover - in the early 70's.I too had to laugh at the vomit scene - you'd never see that in American Cinema back then for such a love tale, and how 'bohemian' the female was - not the male.
Rutger Hauer played his character of a gifted struggling 70's artist well - knowing what he wanted and how uncompromising he was to his art - but on the other hand would do what it took to support he and his wife.I had to find this film to remember it - it was shown on the Los Angeles based Z channel, but I didn't remember seeing it.
Makes me think there was more to this - or was Olga just responding to the exam?) Funny thing though - I never knew the name of the candy I loved so much as a child -- until this movie, and so this did have quite an emotional impact for me as tragedy struck these two. |
tt0037243 | The San Antonio Kid | A geologist, Walter Garfield (LeRoy Mason, discovers oil on land owned by Ben Taylor (Jack Kirk). Believing that the deposits extend to the surrounding ranches as well, Garfield wires his company that oil may be present and then teams up with Red Ryder’s arch enemy, Ace Hanlon (Glenn Strange) . Hanlon, the local saloon owner and his gang instigate a wave of terror against the ranchers hoping to drive the ranchers away, buy their land cheaply and make a fortune selling it to Metropolitan Oil Company for whom Garfield works.
Taylor is killed and his closest neighbors, the Duchess (Alice Fleming), her nephew, Red Ryder (Wild Bill Elliott), and his Indian ward, Little Beaver (Robert Blake), look after Ann Taylor (Linda Stirling). Red doesn’t believe that the attacks are the work of ordinary outlaws but fearing that the Duochess’ ranch will be next, Red and his foreman Happy Jack (Earle Hodgins) confront Hanlon. After Red overwhelms Hanlon in a fistfight, Hanlon decides to have Red killed and sends for Johnny Bennett, an old friend who is known as The San Antonio Kid (Duncan Renaldo). As Bennett nears the town of Maverick, the "Kid" has a freak accident nearly costing him his life but is saved by Red Ryder. When the "Kid" meets with Ace Hanlon he learns that Red Ryder is the man he has been paid to kill.
Johnny refuses Hanlon’s offer until Hanlon asserts that he will have Red killed anyway. Johnny informs Red of the situation, and the two lay a trap for Hanlon. Johnny distracts Garfield and Hanlon with a poker game while Red searches Hanlon's office where he finds proof of the oil discovery and Hanlon's partnership with Garfield.
Red Ryder arranges for a confrontation with Ace Hanlon but when Johnny fails to kill Red as ordered, one of Hanlon's men shoots him. Johnny is only wounded, however, and helps Red, Happy Jack and Little Beaver as they engage in a shootout with the gang. Ryder chases Garfield and Hanlon to a series of nearby caves, where a fight breaks out and one of the oil pools is set on fire. Garfield is killed by the blaze, and the gang is rounded up. Later, Red, Little Beaver and Happy Jack ride off in search of another adventure, and Johnny promises to look after the Duchess and Ann. | comedy | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0377084 | Ladies in Lavender | Set in picturesque coastal Cornwall, in a tight-knit fishing village in 1936, Ladies in Lavender stars Judi Dench and Maggie Smith playing the leading roles of sisters Ursula (Dench) and Janet Widdington (Smith). A gifted young Polish violinist from Krakow, Andrea (played by German actor Daniel Brühl) is bound for America when he is swept overboard by a storm. When the Widdington sisters discover the handsome stranger on the beach below their house, they nurse him back to health. However, the presence of the musically talented young man disrupts the peaceful lives of the sisters and the community in which they live.
Holidaying artist Olga Daniloff, the sister of famed violinist Boris Daniloff, becomes interested in Andrea after hearing him play the violin. As time progresses, Olga and Andrea grow closer. Olga tells her brother of Andrea's talent, and he asks to meet Andrea in London. Although Andrea cares deeply for the sisters, he knows this is his chance to start a career, and he leaves with Olga without saying goodbye to the women. He later sends them a letter, along with a portrait of himself painted by Olga, thanking them for saving his life. The sisters travel to London to attend Andrea's first public performance in Britain, while the rest of the village listens in on the wireless. | romantic, flashback | train | wikipedia | Short stories often make better films than full novels as is evident in the case of JD Locke's 'Ladies in Lavender' as adapted for the screen and directed by the multi-talented Charles Dance.
Given the barest outline of a quiet little idea of a 'fairy tale', LADIES IN LAVENDER becomes an unfolding meditation of quiet lives altered by an incident that awakens sleeping needs and emotions.Ursula (Judi Dench) and Janet (Maggie Smith) are elderly sisters living a quiet life of gardening, strolling the cliffs and beach of Cornwall, knitting, and reading.
A Russian visitor to the town, Olga (Natascha McElhone), the requisite 'evil witch' for a fairy tale, hears Andreas play, informs him she has a cousin who is a famous violinist, and attracts him away from Cornwall to London where he ultimately gives his own concert.Those are the bare facts of the film's story.
Likewise Daniel Brühl is superb in a role far different from his usual German repertoire (Goodbye Lenin!, The Edukators, Love in Thoughts) and manages to create the illusion that he is actually playing the violin (while the true artist is Joshua Bell in some stunning performances).
This film bursts into life in a few electrifying scenes - but these scenes are perhaps muted by the general leisurely air of the whole.What can be said is that this film belongs to Maggie Smith: although Judi Dench has the lovelorn role of the smitten sister, it is Dame Maggie who has the wider variety of emotions, the presence, and the charisma which gives the film the energy it needs to involve the viewer.
For some reason, I dvr'd this movie the other day, because I love the Dames Maggie Smith and Judi Dench.
Who but Dames Judi Dench and Maggie Smith could play elderly sisters who don't particularly agree too much with each other's conventions utlizing such subtle acting talents?
Its overall impressionistic and bland atmosphere of old rural England with seemingly plain, but emotionally tense story has a mollifying effect on our senses, long warped by clink-clank of special effects and overblown plots.If one has to compare this film with other forms of art, "Ladies in Lavender" feels like a fine piece of vintage literature, transfered on screen and complemented with exquisite acting and gorgeous music.
After all, it's not the story of the stranger that is so important; but the story of their loneliness and attachment to this young man that is the cornerstone of the plot.Not as shattering as some more action-driven movies, this film is a good treat for those who want to get away from the din of our modern life and enjoy some excellent music for precious one and a half hours..
So what this film was saying was - these ladies have been in storage a while, forgotten - and only when the young Polish guy comes into their lives do they flicker back to life.The usual superb performances from Judi and Maggie, what makes them so good, in Judi Dench's case particularly, is that you can *see* what they are thinking before they even speak.
It may have been originally a Mousehole speciality, but like Yorkshire pudding, has long since spread to other areas.Ladies in Lavender is one of those British films which will become a classic for its gentle theme, fantastic setting (inside and out) superb lighting and sound - and a good, strong story line..
Like Il Postino, Ladies in Lavender is a period piece, set around about the same time as Radford's film, which zeroes in on a sleepy coastal town and a specific inhabitant whose life has been somewhat bereft of incident, let alone incident with the opposite sex, and often, we feel, sheltered.
As either films progress, we will come to watch this lead go on to both interact as well as advance the nature of their feelings for the previously exterior individual; thus leading to all sorts of complications to do with lust and anger which lead to overwhelming residing sentiments.The film follows that of Judi Dench's Ursula, an elderly woman living in a Cornish town with her sister Janet – played by the seemingly ever-consummate Maggie Smith.
Culturally, and in terms of exposure to life and whatnot, Janet appears indelibly more advanced than her sister; brief establishments that go a long way to tee up what will be Ursula's tale of having to come to terms with certain feelings and drive a strand of her own that will go against this established patriarchy.Where we come to sense few ever get out, and that sense of the whole place being entirely tied in to one another in that community driven way some places are, we sense the film's catalyst arriving in the form of a young man washed up on the nearby shore through Daniel Brühl's Andrea could be quite the occasion.
McElhone plays a Russian love rival named Olga whom turns up and reveals herself to paint rather than merely knit; someone whom we enjoy observing at home, barefoot, and blowing smoke into the air from her cigarette as she sports a loose gown and sits comfortably on a chair in an extravagant looking house.The film gently constructs Ursula's gradual coming to feel for this young man, eventually revealed to be a Polish violinist.
"If music be the language of love, play on"- Very true statement you know.I wasn't expecting to like Ladies in Lavender, but being a lover of both Maggie Smith and Judi Dench, I knew I had to see it.
The music composed I think was one of those elements that made the film so touching, it was extremely beautiful.The direction from Charles Dance, who acted so well in Bleak House, is subtle, and this allows each actor to bring their character and the sophisticated screenplay to life.
The supporting cast were outstanding as well, Natascha McElhone, David Warner and Miriam Margoyles give suitably deft performances and it works for this sort of film.Overall, very beautiful and touching, particularly worth seeing for the acting and the music.
There is a small galaxy of wrinkly British acting talent supporting the leads not least amongst whom is the hilarious Miriam Margolyes as the grumpy old servant Dorcas.A young Polish sailor is washed mysteriously ashore on the rocks near where the old sisters (Smith and Dench) live.
LADIES IN LAVENDER is saved by these two ladies and their screen presence and the ping-pong-like banter with each other.The two veteran actresses play Janet (Smith) and Ursula (Dench,) two sisters living a comfortable and mundane life in Cornwall, England in 1936.
Their comfort zone, which is already disturbed, becomes more so when a young German female painter (Natascha McElhone)also shows an interest in the young man.Like in TEA WITH MUSSOLINI, Maggie Smith's character is the more level-headed and pragmatic, while Judi Dench's Ursula is overly-sensitive and borderline childlike.
"Ladies in Lavender" (2004) is a film starring two of the best British actresses, Dame Judy Dench and Dame Maggie Smith as two lonely sisters, a widow and an old maid who live quietly and uneventfully in their cottage on the seaside in Cornwall, England.
Two elderly sisters take in a young Polish man who washes up on their beach.You can search this film in an attempt to identify an obscure filming style, go on and on about the two ladies who star in this work, or preen and posture over the quality performance of Daniel Brühl...or you can merely enjoy this work for what it is: A beautiful drama; one fraught with intrigues.This is very well written, and highly enjoyable, though it is not anything I would watch again out of choice, the first viewing was quite good.
Janet, one of the sisters, played by Maggie, is a widow from that war and lives with her sister Ursula, a spinster, played by Judi.The story is delicate and mindful of others - Whales of August, Tea with Mussolini, but it has its own strength - the unrequited love that Ursula feels for the young man that the sisters rescue from the shore.Charles Dance does a superb job both with the writing and the directing of such a flimsy tale.
The two main characters are outstanding and they give wonderful performances as two dotty old sisters who live together in a wonderful old cottage on the coast line of England.The story is great and keeps you intrigued right up to the end.
Dance is the writer-director of the film, with the superior pairing of Judi Dench and Maggie Smith as the sisters Ursula and Janet, and inclusion of talented Daniel Bruhl as Andrea the center of attention, Natascha McElhone as the lovely Olga.
The story is a charming one with strong performances, and the film includes beautiful natural locales in Cornwall, England, captured by cinematographer Peter Biziou.The soundtrack of "Ladies in Lavender" is endearing.
(2004), directed and scripted by Charles Dance, is a triumph for two of the world's greatest actors-- Dame Judi Dench as Ursula, and Dame Maggie Smith as Janet.Ursula and Janet are sisters, living in a large house on the coast of Cornwall.
When one sees that both Maggie Smith and Judi Dench are in a movie, you almost automatically expect a very good film with brilliant acting.
Two great actresses, portraying a genuinely beautiful, moving story, and it's all handled by a director who really knows what he is doing, and who delivers a little masterpiece.Maggie Smith and Judi Dench can say a dozen lines of script with just a glance.
A Film for Grown Ups. By the standards set by Hollywood mayhem the pace of 'Ladies in Lavender' is very slow, but that importantly allows character development, as both sisters carrying differing emotional baggage we never quite understand are effected by their nubile male discovery on the beach.
This film takes place in the late 1930s.The problem with the film is that the sisters, played nicely by Judi Dench and Maggie Smith, are not able to fully develop their characters.
"Ladies in Lavender" is like "Whales in August" crossed with "Swept from the Sea." Regardless of the slight period story, which peters out three-quarters through, it is a joy watching Judi Dench and Maggie Smith interact on screen together.Dench gets to expand her portrayal of a childlike, somewhat mentally handicapped woman from a different direction than in "Iris." Her subtlety shows up all those actors who play such characters over the top, as we are never sure exactly how much this sister understands about the people and situations around her, protected as she is in a small, familiar town, because she just seems a bit off-kilter here and there, particularly in her emotional reactions.
Dench makes her exploration of unfamiliar feelings touching, as the elderly spinster becomes ever more fascinated by the handsome stranger who washes up by the house she shares with her sister (Smith) who had a bit more exposure to the world before she retreated after the first world war to care for her.Daniel Brühl only has brief flashes of how adorable he was in "Goodbye, Lenin!," coming across marginally less stiff than the object of the attention of an older woman in "Being Julia." Even playing a violin he does manage to inject some testosterone into the proceedings.Natascha McElhone is also a bit bland, especially as her relationship with the violinist doesn't go the direction we're assuming it will, but then Joshua Bell's mesmerizing playing on the soundtrack probably trumps Brühl's appeal here.The Cornwall scenery is lovely, and the movie is equally only lovely views.This is the kind of movie that makes one wonder how the British managed to populate an empire without procreation..
The accents when they speak 'fluent' German are non existent and i basically listened to the audio while i surfed the net ( like now ).The best acting in this movie comes from the maid played by Miriam Margolyes as Olga the maid with a typically maid performance i.e fast talking, bossy, fat, and lumbering at great pace around her kitchen.No wonder they ended up being spinsters..
Judi Dench and Maggie Smith play to type, but both are good when they get to the heart and humanise their characters in later scenes.
This beautiful movie has great moments of humour and tenderness as two elderly sisters rescue a young man and help him regain his health after he is washed up on a beach near their home in southwestern England.
The movie is brilliant in its treatment of village life and the way the two sisters, admirably performed by Judi Dench and Maggie Smith, gave the young Polish violinist (Daniel Bruhl) the care, rest and medical assistance he needed to launch his career.
We also come to know the two women, "ladies in lavender", who find an affection for the youth that helps heal their own unfulfilled desires; in the case of Janet (Maggie Smith), a husband lost in the previous war and Ursula, no love at all in a world where many young men never returned home.
Ursula (Judi Dench) and Janet (Maggie Smith) are two sisters starting to care for a wounded stranger (Andrea; Daniel Brühl) they find washed up near their beach house in Cornwall.
It has similarities to Babettes gæstebud / Babette's Feast: The modesty and simplicity of the lives the people in the village lead, but also their good nature by caring for people regardless of their background; And unable to recognize great talent (cooking in that film, playing violin by Joshua Bell here).Not the simple story is interesting, but the way the backgrounds and motivations of all four involved are only hinted at and never made explicit: Andrea and Olga are almost certainly (Jewish) refugees, Andrea stranded on his way to the U.S., the bad marriage of Janet and lack of love in the life of Ursula, as she starts to love Andrea like the love she never had.
Ladies in Lavender Ursula (Judi Dench) and Janet (Maggie Smith) are two sisters living in a quaint Cornish village in the 1930's.
When a young man named Andrea (Daniel Brühl, 'Goodbye Lenin!') washes up on the beach just outside their seaside cottage one night, the two sisters set about nursing the stranger back to health, with help from the local doctor (David Warner).
Dance recalls the similarly themed 1999 film 'Tea with Mussolini' in the pairing of Smith with actress Judi Dench, who deftly portrays Ursula as a restless woman, with an unquenchable desire to be loved by somebody far beneath her years.
A German actor in his second English-language film (following 2000's 'Deeply'), Brühl's tender disposition, along with an entertaining Miriam Margoyles as the sisters' housekeeper, helps manage to form an agreeable motion picture.Following Andrea's quest to return to his previous life, 'Ladies in Lavender' builds up to a well-staged concert scene, which essentially brings the story full circle.
Judi Dench and Maggie Smith star as Ursula and Janet, sisters who are living together in old age.
Two elderly sisters (Maggie Smith and Judi Dench) live along the Cornish coast in England.
It is always an immense pleasure to watch great British actors in period pieces.This movie is no exception.1930's in a small Cornwall village,two elderly sisters with a crusty maid and a lot of repressed emotions and passions in the air."Ladies in Lavender is like a postcard from old times,brings smile to your face,but doesn't say very much.That happens often with movies based on short stories.
It seemed that this crowd was starving for a gentle story with the two great actresses, Judi Dench and Maggie Smith.
I would like to write Ms. Dench and Ms. Smith, the young man, and the woman who played the maid, but it's too difficult to find good addresses for such persons.
Simple, clean story-telling w/ excellent performances and attention to the details that give it shape and make it interesting.Okay, I'm biased because I love Maggie Smith and Judi Dench and, although this is only the second time (after "Goodbye Lenin") that I've seen Daniel Brühl, he's already becoming a fave w/ me.
Dames Maggie Smith and Judi Dench play aging sisters by the seaside in a sort of a Cornish version of THE WHALES OF AUGUST.
Judi Dench and Maggie Smith are two of the best actresses in the world but "Ladies in Lavender" is, unfortunately, an utterly improbable bore, and the script gives Ms. Dench little to work with other than an unconcealed love (possibly sexual, more likely maternal) for the young man washed up on the shoreline next to their home just outside a Cornwall village.
Maggie Smith and Judi Dench play sisters who live together in rural area along the British coast in 1936.
After watching movies like this, I sometimes sit and think about how people have to write out a story or a script before it can be made into a film.
"Ladies in Lavender" seems to have been tailor made for its two stars.This is the story of a young man that is found by two lonely sisters living above the beach.
A lot of questions about the absurdity of the situation are never answered by the screen play, let alone how Andrea, in a matter of days, by the magic of the movies, becomes a soloist with the BBC Symphony orchestra, something that perhaps better and more talented musicians never get to do in their lives!"Ladies in Lavender" is the perfect way to spend almost two hours in the company of Judi Dench and Maggie Smith, two of the most beloved grand dames of the English cinema.
Miriam Margoyles plays the maid and David Warner is seen as the local doctor.This film will reward all fans of Maggie Smith and Judi Dench..
I was attracted to this movie first, because it has Judi Dench and Maggie Smith, playing sisters.
This is a character story, an evocation of people, time, and place, like so many wonderful small English films. |
tt0025907 | Treasure Island | Young Jim Hawkins Jackie Cooper) and his mother (Dorothy Peterson) run the Admiral Benbow, a tavern near Bristol, England. One dark and stormy night, during a birthday celebration, the mysterious Billy Bones (Lionel Barrymore) arrives and drunkenly talks about treasure. Soon after, Bones is visited by Black Dog (Charles McNaughton) then Pew (William V. Mong), and drops dead, leaving a chest, which he bragged contained gold and jewels. Instead of money, Jim finds a map that his friend Dr. Livesey (Otto Kruger) realizes will lead them to the famous Flint treasure. Squire Trelawney (Nigel Bruce) raises money for a voyage to the treasure island and they set sail on Captain Alexander Smollett's (Lewis Stone) ship Hispaniola. Also on board is the one-legged Long John Silver (Wallace Beery) and his cronies. Even though Bones had warned Jim about a sailor with one leg, they become friends.
During the voyage, several fatal "accidents" happen to sailors who disapprove of Silver and his cohorts. Then, the night before landing on the island, Jim overhears Silver plotting to take the treasure and kill Smollett's men. Jim goes ashore with the men, and encounters an old hermit named Ben Gunn (Chic Sale), who tells him that he has found Flint's treasure. Meanwhile, Smollett (Lewis Stone) and his loyal men flee to Flint's stockade on the island for safety. Silver's men then attack the stockade when Smollett refuses to give them the treasure map. While the situation looks hopeless, Jim secretly goes back to the Hispaniola at night, sails it to a safe location and shoots one of the pirates in self-defense. When he returns to the stockade, Silver's men are there and Silver tells them that a treaty has been signed. The pirates want to kill Jim, but Silver protects him. Dr. Livesey comes for Jim, but the boy refuses to break his word to Silver not to run away. The next day the pirates search for the treasure hold and when they find it, it is empty. When some of the pirates mutiny against Silver, Livesey (Otto Kruger) and Gunn (Charles "Chic" Sale) join him in the fight. Smollett then sails home with the treasure, which Gunn had hidden in his cave, and with Silver as his prisoner. Unable to stand by and let his friend be hanged, Jim frees Silver. As he sails away, Silver promises to hunt treasure with Jim again some day, as Honest John Silver. | action, murder | train | wikipedia | The most famous pirate in English literature sets sail across the High Seas of Adventure - bound for TREASURE ISLAND.Robert Louis Stevenson's wonderful 1883 tale of devious deeds, derring-do & hidden doubloons is given a first rate production by MGM in this swaggering, boisterous film.
The story has been necessarily streamlined a bit, but the excisions are judicious and the robust flavour of the original novel remains.Bulbous & bulgy, with a gimlet eye & a baby's grin, Wallace Beery makes a unique Long John Silver.
Here, he gets to personify every lad's dreams of fabulous exploits & personal glory.A trio of accomplished performers portray young Cooper's three friends: Otto Kruger as noble Doctor Livesey; Nigel Bruce as blustery, big-hearted Squire Trelawney; and Lewis Stone as sternly courageous Captain Smollett.
All three acquit themselves very well.Consummate character actor Lionel Barrymore adds another portrait to his gallery - that of the bullying, rumsoaked Billy Bones, whose possession of the treasure map is the instigation of the film's problems.
It is a shame the plot gave him no scenes with Beery - they would have been memorable together.Stevenson's story creates a few small, choice cameo roles which are here delightfully delineated - Charles McNaughton as the scurvy Black Dog; William V.
But someone at MGM had a flash of casting genius cuz Beery is the spittin' image of the Sea Cook in Winslow Homer's illustrations for the novel, and he wears the role like his favorite pair of--um--shoe.
I've seen Disney's, which I liked on the Disneyland telecast, but, while Robert Newton is a definitive Long John Silver and the quintessential adventure-tale pirate--people today say Arrrr!
(And Jack Palance is another great actor and his Long John Silver terrific but the version he's in is embarrassingly bad.
and setting the standard for the rest of the cast), and the unfolding story giving us as motley & mangy a bunch of pirates as ever were--among them Charles McNaughton as Black Dog, Charles Bennett as a creepy Dandy Dawson, Douglas Dumbrille as Israel Hands, and "Chic" Sale as loony Ben Gunn--to the last frame of the last scene this is a downright exciting adventure, and I think it does Robert Louis Stevenson proud (yep, even w/the minor differences).
Casting is spot on with the obvious out of the park home run for the choice of Wallace Beery as Long John Silver.
While this film does not have all the whiz bang special effects that newer pirate films have created, the great acting & directing more than makes up for that.Add to that the amazing fact that this film brings in so much good stuff that it only needs 101 minutes to cover a major novel is enough to make you wonder if some of the new longer films about pirates just aren't very efficient in telling their tales..
Yes here is a good adventure yarn from a famous novel; a treasure map, a seafaring trip to an island with pirates too, lost treasure, and characters with names such as "Black Dog" etc etc However what distinguishes this version of the tale in my opinion is the relationship between cabin boy Jim Hawkins and the wily old one legged sea lag Long John Silver with the parrot on his shoulders.
Entertaining and solid version in which Wallace Beery is great as the famous pirate Long John Silver.
Hollywood vintage adaptation of the Robert Louis Stevenson pirate adventure from an eyeball-rolling Wallace Beery and a splendid Jacke Coogan .
Jim Hawkins (an appealing acting by Jackie Coogan) encounters the map that lead to a distant island where is a buried treasure.
Then , the young boy join forces with captain Smollett (Lewis Stone), Squire (Nigel Bruce), Doctor Livesey (Otto Kruger) and of course a boisterous Long John Silver(a brilliant triumph by Wallace Beery who is notably snarly , though relatively subdued) journey to isle of hidden bounty.
Jim Hawkins matches with peg-legged Long Silver and adventures go on .Fun story of high seas adventure plenty of intrigue , fights and action.
Appropriately adventurous rendition of Robert Stevenson's often-filmed and spine-tingling tale , in which Wallace Beery hands perfectly the role as rogue pirate and gives a memorable acting, as always.
At the film appears usual and notorious secondary actors in several Hollywood productions, such as Lionel Barrymore as Billy Bones , Otto Kruger as Doctor Livesey , Lewis Stone as Captain Smollett , Douglass Dumbrille as Pirate of the Spanish Main and Watson's Nigel Bruce as Squire .
Other renditions -being multitudinous remakes , as there are many films made of it- based on this classic novel are the followings : Disney take on (1950) by Byron Haskin with Robert Newton , Basil Sydney and Bobby Driscoll , respectable full-blooded second-best the classic Fleming version ; European retelling (1974) by John Hough with Orson Welles , Angel Del Pozo , Lionel Stander and Kim Burfield ; Teasure Island (1999) by Marc Charlesbois with Jack Palance , Patrick Bergin and Kevin Zegers ; TV recounting by Fraser C Heston with Charlton Heston , Christian Bale and Richard Johnson ; and cartoon-Sci-Fi version Treasure planet (2002) directed by John Musker and Ron Clemens .
Victor Flemming, famous helmer for bigger films such as Gone With The Wind, conducts this adventure story with a pleasant, confidant ease, if not a touch of true inspiration.Wallace Beery is brilliant as Long John Silver while Jackie Cooper as Jim plays the perfect sounding board to Beery's loud, large, charismatic performance.Faithful to Mr. Louis Stevenson's chirography of the same tile; in this writer's humble opinion this incarnation of the film captures, most closely, the tone of the original novel - maybe it being closest to the novel chronologically can account for that.Beery delivers a truly classic American performance here, that anyone, even the most media jaded of our day, should have fun following the old tar and his young friend in their adventures across this terraqueous globe..
However, despite this, the movie is an excellent version of the Stevenson novel--mostly due to good acting, great sets and the nice MGM polish you'd expect from one of their top productions.As far as the film goes, it's one of the earliest of the Wallace Beery films that teamed him with a cute kid--a formula that was repeated again and again up until Beery's death in 1949.
Irresponsibly altering Stevenson's ending to 'tie in' with the film's top-heavy emphasis on the Long John Silver/Jim Hawkins relationship.
truly of a long past era, and yet this is an American film displaying convincing old British patriotism.Jackie Cooper is also far away from today's acting styles; manifestly limited to a few notes, but heck, the kid plays it for all its worth.
Every generation sees a new adaption of Robert Louis Stevenson's eternal classic Treasure Island.
And it has one of the great acting roles of all time, one you can really eat a whole living room set with and still be in bounds.For a scene stealing actor like Wallace Beery playing Long John Silver is no stretch at all.
He dominates this version over the entire cast and as he's in most of the scenes after Lionel Barrymore as Captain Billy Bones dies and leaves his map to that intrepid band of treasure hunters.
Barrymore gets his innings in as well as the bloodthirsty pirate captain who double-crossed his crew and had the presence of mind to die in Dorothy Peterson and Jackie Cooper's inn.It's a real toss up between who is loudest, biggest eyerolling, larger than life Silver, be it Wallace Beery or Robert Newton in the later version done by Walt Disney.
Yet you'd never know it seeing them together as Jim Hawkins and Long John Silver.Otto Kruger as Dr. Livesey, Nigel Bruce as Squire Trelawney, and Lewis Stone as Captain Smollett are perfectly cast in their roles.
Beery's Long John Silver and Barrymore's Billy Bones are the quintessential pop-culture pirates, parrots and all, and for that alone 1934's "Treasure Island" is worth watching.
TREASURE ISLAND is the sort of film that cries out for Technicolor since it deals with pirates, treasure maps, ships at sea and a fort under attack--the sort of thing done in scores of other movies (and other versions of the story), but usually in color.Here the B&W photography is handsome enough, the sets look sturdy, the ship masts are full and the acting is strictly from the '30s era of overacting--not too much of a flaw in this case because the story cries for some good old melodramatic turns.During the opening sequences, LIONEL BARRYMORE acts up a storm as Billy Bones, the man who has the whole tavern singing "Sixteen Men On a Dead Man's Chest".
Unfortunately, his role is a comparatively brief one.JACKIE COOPER resorts to too much pouting (in Shirley Temple style) to be truly effective as Jim Hawkins but does a decent enough job; WALLACE BEERY steals every scene he's in as the one-legged Long John Silver with a parrot on his shoulder; LEWIS STONE and NIGEL BRUCE do well enough in more conventional roles as high-blooded men from aristocracy; and even OTTO KRUGER, an actor I'm not particularly fond of, does one of his best jobs as Dr. Livesey, protector of the Hawkins boy, and DOUGLAS DUMBRILLE does a brilliant job as a master villain.Among the pirates, there's a good sense of adventure all the way through and the Robert Louis Stevenson story is faithfully rendered except for the sentimental ending.
This version is let down a little by an, for my tastes, overly-sentimental ending(though it is nowhere near as bad as the insulting ending of the bizarre-in-a-bad-way adaptation with Jack Palance) and Jackie Cooper's at times wooden and cloying Jim, though he does show believability in some of his scene with Beery.
Treasure Island(1934) is not one of Victor Fleming's very best films, it's not among the best films ever made like The Wizard of Oz and Gone With the Wind are, but it does rank high among his filmography and Fleming does a very good job directing, both technically and in his direction of the story and acting.
Stealing the show is Wallace Beery who is perfectly-cast as Long John and does wonderfully showing the character's good and bad sides, usually I take or leave him as an actor but his performance here is one of his finest, a career-best perhaps.
There is some great character actors involved and they don't disappoint, Lionel Barrymore plays Billy Bones with great menacing gusto, Nigel Bruce's blustering and bumbling fits Squire Trelawney like a glove and Charles "Chic" Sale is an amusing Ben Gunn.
In this 1934 film classic that actor happens to be the 12 year old future Hollywood adult star Jackie Cooper.
Treasure Island is another of Wallace Beery's greatest performances and to this day some 84 years later the film is as entertaining as when it was first released.
Treasure Island provided millions of people a few hours of relief in which they listened and laughed to the gregarious pirate Long John Silver played to perfection by Wallace Beery.
Young boys and girls today will greatly enjoy the key part that the 12 year old Jim Hawkins (Jackie Cooper) plays opposite both the pirate Long John Silver (Wallace Beery) and the good guy Captain Smollett (Lewis Stone).
Who knows, but maybe, just maybe, this 1934 version of Treasure Island will allow some of our own children's imagination to actually develop and at a future date when they become adults create a future film classic in this current century.For all real movie fans this is a film classic that should not be missed as it still stands up well almost a century old now.I give the film a perfect 10 for 10 rating for its time and even to this day!.
This is a pretty schmaltzy version of Stevenson's classic story.It's lots of fun,and quite enjoyable,but has been forced in to MGM's procrustean bed of turning classic novels into warm-hearted family fare,without regard as to the appropriateness of that decision.There's a big emphasis on the love story between Jim and Long John,which really doesn't occupy that place in the novel.Cooper goes around trying to convince everybody of how nice Beery is,and nobody else can see it,because it isn't there.Beery as Silver grunts and puffs away,and lacks both the energy,the smarts,and the boldness to do an accurate portrayal of the character-but no one else available could have carried it off,either.bruce is stupid,greedy,and reliable as the Squire;Krueger's Livesey is intelligent and incisive;and Stone is stern,capable and brave:bravo to each one.The English rustics are kind and stupid;the pirates are so grotesque as to be cartoony;and Barrymore and Sale ham it up something awful.(Black Dog and Pew,however,are first-rate.)The routines with the parrot and the nose-blowing are okay,if you're 7 years old.This is a fun movie,and a classic,but won't replace the 1990 version made by Turner..
I've never read the book Treasure Island so I can't compare this 1934 adaptation to the source material but rather give a point of view as someone who watched the film out of admiration for the stars involved.
The chemistry they share, what a pure and natural delight.For me Cooper's performance in Treasure Island is priceless; a little kid trying to act tough.
Dumbrille, by the way, should be congratulated for his acting here - he manages not to show off that stentorian voice of his, but uses a more weaselly sounding voice quite effectively.Note also Lionel Barrymore's noisy and frightening, but ultimately frightened Captain Billy Bones, forcing the civilians in the Admiral Benbow Inn to sing "Fifteen Men on a Deadman's Chest", but quivering when told the one legged sea cook has been seen nearby.
So the film merits a "10".*Historically, there was a pirate named Israel Hands, though he was dead by the time of TREASURE ISLAND (roughly 1740).
It only made sense that with the successful pairing of Wallace Beery and Jackie Cooper, that Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer studios would try their luck again with "Treasure Island." Wallace Beery adds his own unique charm to his portrayal of Long John Silver, that I found very amusing and he is actually pretty good on one leg.
Jackie Cooper's acting is a little wooden as Jim Hawkins, but he does manage to shine and is most endearing in his many scenes with Beery.
This above average adaption of the classic Robert Louis Stevenson story, still remains a very entertaining family film to watch..
Vintage movie is fun version of Stevenson's pirate adventure tale.
The gruesome death of Blind Pew, and the murder of an honest seaman by Long John Silver, witnessed by the horrified Jim Hawkins, are presented unflinchingly.The shipboard and island scenes are good, and the siege of the stockade is excitingly staged.
Robert Louis Stevenson has written a fine tale of adventure, life on the high seas, pirates, treasure chests, betrayal and intrigue, and all that.
Doctor Livesey (Otto Kruger), Squire Trelawney (Nigel Bruce), and Captain Smollet (Lewis Stone) hire a crew to sail the Hispaniola to Treasure Island and dig up the chests.
'Long' John Silver shows that he is an able conman, pirate, liar, double-crosser, and schemer through this whole treasure hunting experience.*Special Stars- Wallace Beery, Jackie Cooper*Theme- Men will look for treasure even if they suffer for it.*Based on- Robert Louise Stevenson's famous pirate novel*Trivia/location/goofs- There is a obvious film goof when Jim (Cooper) Hawkins goes to the Hispaniola's galley to speak to Long (Beery) John and stands at the galley door.
In later years during Jackie Cooper interviews, he tells about Wallace Beery's antagonism and drinking during their scenes in this film.
At one level, it's a reluctant buddy story between a devious, sometimes piratical, one-legged rascal(Long John Silver) and a naïve imaginative boy(Jim Hawkins) who worships the charismatic knowledgeable man.
On the voyage home, in reciprocation, Jim releases Silver from custody, so that he may sail off into the unknown, and avoid the hangman's noose that the gentlemen adventures had in store for him.....Wallace Berry makes an appealing charismatic Long John, but it's inevitable that he will be compared with Robert Newton, who took the same role in the 1954 Disney remake.
Of course, kids these days usually demand color movies, which is where Disney's version shines....Other charismatic characters include Lionel Barrymore as Billy Bones, who supplies the treasure map among his post-humus things., William Mung, as blind Pew, Charles McNunington as Black Dog, and ,of course, skeletal Ben Gun..
109 minutes.SYNOPSIS: Young Jim Hawkins tackles vicious Long John Silver.VIEWERS' GUIDE: Suitable for all.COMMENT: Young Cooper is not an overly convincing Jim Hawkins, but everyone else is absolutely brilliant in this outstandingly entertaining version of the Stevenson novel we all studied so assiduously at school.
In fact, Long John Silver was the role Beery was born to play.
What they don't realize however is that the recently hired cook—and Jim's new friend--named "Long John Silver" (Wallace Beery) knows quite a bit more than he lets on and he has a secret agenda all of his own.
In my opinion, the only good thing about this 1934 film was the wonderful relationship that developed between Jackie Cooper and Wallace Beery.
Victor Fleming teams up Beery and Cooper in Stevenson's Treasure Island.
Nevertheless, back in 1934, he was the one chosen to direct a film version of Robert Stevenson's 1883 novel, TREASURE ISLAND.
Elements of the story can be found the most recent Disney trilogy PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN.In this version, Wallace Beery stars as Long John Silver, then literature's most famous pirate.
His co-star is Jackie Cooper as Jim Hawkins, the protagonist in Stevenson's novel.
Silver connives his way through the boy's grace and gets a position as the ship's cook.I found neither Beery or Cooper entirely convincing here though both are fun to watch when together.
It's sad evidence showing how segregated Los Angeles was at time.However, for the movie sake, they're great antagonists for Stone and his crew and allows Silver and his pirates escape the ship for the island. |
tt1015475 | Transformers: The Game | === Autobots ===
The Autobot storyline begins with Bumblebee landing on Earth and taking on the form of a Camaro. He then defeats a group of Decepticon drones. After learning Sam Witwicky is going to buy a used car, Bumblebee goes to Bobby Bolivia's Used Carlot and is bought by Sam. Later, Sam and his girlfriend, Mikaela Banes, are attacked by a Decepticon, Barricade, but Bumblebee saves them. Bumblebee fights Barricade, while Sam and Mikaela escape. After defeating the Decepticon, Bumblebee finds Sam and Mikaela, who thank him for saving them. Optimus contacts Bumblebee, telling him that Sam has the artifact that contains the location of the AllSpark, and Bumblebee must protect Sam at all costs.
Optimus Prime, Ironhide, Ratchet, and Jazz land on Earth, assume alternate forms (a Peterbilt 379, a GMC Topkick, a Hummer H2 Search and Rescue vehicle, and a Pontiac Solstice) and meet with Bumblebee, Sam and Mikaela. Sam gives them the artifact, which turns out to be his grandfather's glasses, to Optimus, who explains to Sam and Mikaela the mission of the Autobots in Earth: they are in the search of the All Spark, a powerful artifact which is the source of life of all Transformers, so they can use it to revitalize Cybertron, the homeworld of the Transformers. Ratchet reveals Sam's grandfather discovered their enemy, the Decepticon leader Megatron, trapped in the Arctic. Megatron burned the information of the All Spark's location in Sam's grandfather's glasses so the Decepticons could find the All Spark. Afterwards, Mikaela sarcastically states that she is struggling with why Bumblebee disguised himself as such a "beater", and in response, Bumblebee scans a new and improved yellow Camaro as his new alt-mode.
Ironhide detects Sector 7 helicopters and Prime orders Jazz to create a diversion so that the Autobots, Sam and Mikaela can escape. In doing so, Jazz is cornered by Sector 7 agents. Ironhide rescues Jazz from Sector 7, and manages to defeat several drones on the way. After defeating the drones, Ironhide discovers that Sector 7 is trying to capture Bumblebee. Prime tries to rescue Bumblebee but he fails to save his comrade as he is taken away by Sector 7, partially because of Shockwave. Optimus defeats Shockwave and decodes his transmissions, discovering Starscream, Megatron's second-in-command, also knows of the AllSpark and Megatron's-whereabouts. With their mission clear, the Autobots decide to rescue Bumblebee, Sam and Mikaela from Sector 7. Bumblebee, Sam and Mikaela are captured inside Hoover Dam. A power outage allows Bumblebee to escape. While exploring Bumblebee finds the frozen Megatron and the All Spark. Bumblebee recovers the AllSpark and rescues Sam and Mikaela, and then flee when Megatron awakens. Starscream and Blackout, fly through the dam and cause several generations which allow Megatron to escape.
Bumblebee, Sam and Mikaela travel to Mission City with the All Spark. The All Spark's power surges transform human machines into feral drones which attack Bumblebee. However, Ironhide rescues Bumblebee and defeats the drones. Meanwhile, Jazz encounters and fights Starscream and Blackout. Jazz manages to defeat the Decepticon duo, but Brawl appears behind him and extinguishes his spark in front of Ironhide. The Autobot then defeats Brawl in a "slow death", avenging his fallen brother. Bumblebee, however, fights Barricade, who is trying to take the All Spark. Bumblebee defeats the Decepticon and meets with Sam and Mikaela but Megatron appears behind him and quickly defeats Bumblebee, forcing Sam and Mikaela to run away. Megatron is about to kill Sam and Mikaela, but Optimus knocks Megatron aside, challenging him to a final battle. Optimus defeats Megatron, however, just as Sam is about to give Optimus the AllSpark, Megatron jumps up and tries to kill Prime in one last attempt using his flail. However, Optimus catches Megatron's flail and pulls him in closer while crushing the AllSpark in his other hand, and plunging it straight into Megatron's chest, presumably uniting with his Spark, killing him instantly. The story ends with Optimus and the Autobots choosing to remain on Earth.
=== Decepticons ===
The Decepticons storyline begins with a MH-53 Pave Low helicopter falling out of the sky, with severe tail rotor damage, presumably caused by Blackout, one of the Decepticons arriving on Earth, who then takes the form of the downed craft by scanning it. He uses the craft in order to enter and destroy SOCCENT Air Base in Qatar, and ejects his companion Scorponok to chase after the survivors who attempt to call for help using mobile communication vehicles, while Blackout searches for top secret data about the All Spark from the remains of SOCCENT through computer terminals kept inside Software towers, then Blackout accidentally sent a Morse Code signal inviting Stealth Bombers and F-22s over to stop him. After destroying the air force Blackout discovers Data about an Artifact that will lead the Decepticons to the All Spark.
Meanwhile, Frenzy is in the captivity of Sector 7. Barricade, scanning a Police cruiser and becoming it as his alternate form, recovers Frenzy and they go to hunt down the human called Sam Witwicky who has the glasses with the AllSpark's location burned into them. Barricade finds Sam and his girlfriend Mikaela Banes, and he chases after them, only to be confronted by Bumblebee. Barricade eventually defeats Bumblebee, and Sam gives up the glasses. Barricade contacts Decepticon subcommander Starscream, that they will soon be heading to Mission City with the All Spark, so Starscream decides to round up the other Decepticons, Brawl and Bonecrusher, and send them to Mission City. However, he is delayed at the airbase, but takes the opportunity to make a 'smoking ruin' of it.
Later, Starscream and Blackout arrive at Hoover Dam, then help Megatron to escape, destroying a group of Autobot drones in the process, and then the three transform and fly to Mission City. In the city, the rest of the Autobots have arrived and Jazz drops off Sam and Mikaela, and tells them to run and hide, while Barricade orders him to step aside so he can claim the All Spark for Megatron. Jazz then confronts Barricade, who eventually kills him and leaves his body at the foot of a monument in the Central Park. Barricade then contacts Blackout, when he arrives with Starscream and Megatron, to eject Scorponok, to destroy Energon drones that have spawned from the All Spark. Scorponok destroys them, but has to run away when Ironhide kicks him away just as Sam was preparing to give up the All Spark. Blackout then arrives, killing Ironhide who is being helped by numerous Autobot drones.
Megatron goes looking for Optimus Prime by destroying the city, instead finding Sam and Mikeala hiding. Optimus appears and intervenes before Megatron can kill them, to have the last battle. Eventually, Megatron injures Optimus badly, and as he reaches for the All Spark, Megatron stands in the way. He lowers his flail, and can tell Optimus what happens now. He raises the flail, swings it around his head once, then swings it into Prime. Prime's optical display flickers for seconds, showing all of his past recordings before, flickering out, along with his Spark. With Optimus dead, Sam and the other humans remain unharmed, as Megatron is seen activating the All Spark, then releases a massive shockwave, presumably converting all the electronics in the world into Decepticons, and uses the new army to take over Earth. The story ends sometime later, with Megatron ordering all Decepticons to kill the last of Mankind from his "throne" before they leave Earth.
=== Characters === | violence | train | wikipedia | Better than the film.. First of all, this game is based upon Michael Bay's film version of Transformers (2007), and I've got to be honest, Bay ruined the good old idea about giant alien robots
But, I am not going to rant here about it, if you want to read my ranting, go see my review about all three Bay's "Transformers" films. Now, I think this game depicted the idea of the film far more better. No, really, check it, I mean it's the same story, Allspark is on earth, autobots and decepticons are here to find it, they need Sam's help
but in this game, the plot revolves around the robots, not humans, and I think this is the best reason why this game is better than films. Well, that was pretty obvious, but still better idea. Now, you can choose to be autobot, or decepticon. The game play is pretty easy, I mean with every of them
Bumblebee, Optimus, Ironhide, Jazz, Megatron, Starscream, Barricade
really it's easy and pretty playful. Peter Cullen voiced Optimus and Frank Welker voiced Megatron
I can tell you right away, the game creator Jon Burton is definitely a G1 cartoon fan. Thank you, Jon, for bringing back that good old 80s element in the game. Shia LeBeouf and Megan Fox also voiced Sam and Mikaela and to mention Keith David voicing Barricade
he was awesome. The missions are pretty fun, but they can be tiresome sometimes, maybe because you can't save and you need to search for energon cubes all over the entire level, and sometimes you need to chase other robots around the area. Levels are big and pretty spacious and they are well designed. The sound effects are good, graphics are very beautiful, but I think that the music score is very, very awesome, pretty thrilling on some occasions, sometimes dark, or heroic, very good score.So, overall, I recommend this game and enjoy yourself.. descent but could have been better. i actually bought the game without renting it cause i loved the movie so much and to me this game stays faithful to the film but has more flaws the robots themselves needed a transformation makeover all they did was jump in the air and land down as a vehicle the weapons were utterly useless therefore combat is your best friend and the boss battles were more or less to aggravating only reason i liked the game was the mass destruction you can cause but overall this game is way too short and you can finish it in 1 day or less and not al the robots are playable but the ones you do control are pretty exciting plus it is good to hear peter cullen and frank welker as the iconic leaders again. Why all the bad reviews?. Look, OK? After reading all those negative reviews on Transformers: The Game, I decided someone should break the silence for everyone who liked it. I mean, for those who said it sucked, look at it on the other side: It's not that bad (As for me, I think it rocks!!!!!) True, some missions can get annoying after you die all the time, like when you are Bumblebee in Hoover Dam, and Megatron just keeps shooting at you with such powerful blows that you die after about 6 blows. I like the way that instead of playing as only the Autobots(good guys) , you get to play also as the bad guys(Decepticons). Anyhow, I was just writing to tell you guys that even if many critics were neglecting the game, Activision and Traveller's Tales have produced an excellent effort in this game and it should be respected.. Peter Cullen and Frank Welker Enough Said. As we all know a lot of video games based off movies turn out to be some of the worst games to ever be made.However Transformers The Game is truly in a class all by itself because the game does some good and some bad but overall it is something worth looking at.In the game you get to play as both The Autobots and Decepticons each side with their own story.On the Autobots Side you play the level as if you were watching the movie where Bumblebee is send to earth to search for the location of the Allspark and to protect Sam who holds the key to it location.You only get to play as Optimus Prime, Jazz, Ironhide and Bumblebee on the Autobots Side.The Decepticons Side is a different take on the movie, this is what would be if the Decepticons had got to Earth first. you get to only play as Megatron,Starscream,Blackout,Barricade and Scorponok.The Game has it fair share of pros and cons.The Pros are that Peter Cullen and Frank Welker each reprise their respected roles of Optimus Prime and Megatron the best voices ever for the Transformers Legends. Also Megan Fox reprise her role as Mikaela as well as Shia LeBeouf reprise his role as Same. Keith David took the role of Barricade and Mark Ryan took the role of Ironhide The voice is very good with a lot of new style for the Transformers Voice work different from the movie.The Graphics are very nice with great level designs and the Transformers look really awesome close to their movie counterparts as well.The Sound is a strong one with a lot of the score use from the same composer who work on the live action movie.The Cons are that the game can give you a real headache from time to time.A good bit of the levels are so hard that you have to try over and over again to beat them.The Controls take time to get use to but they are not that bad. The game also has tons of unlock-able items such as pictures of the Transformers figures, comic book images, the movie trailer is in the game as well as the TV spots for the movie is also on the game.So overall the game has it ups and downs but I am glad that I own this game and enjoy playing it just took time but it is a lot of funI give Transformers The Game a 8 out of 10 for the pros can outweighs the cons of this gameAutobots, Transform and roll out! Decepticons Attack! |
tt0065832 | Hercules in New York | Hercules, at Olympus, berates his father Zeus for not allowing him to leave the gods' abode to adventure on earth. Eventually Zeus sends Hercules, on a beam, to the land of men.
After some strange encounters in the air and at sea, Hercules arrives in New York City, where hilarity ensues in the form of interactions with various New Yorkers, who regard him as physically superior but socially awkward. He meets a skinny little guy called Pretzie (Arnold Stang). Hercules becomes a successful professional wrestler.
Zeus, watching Hercules from the heights, becomes irritated with Hercules' antics, which he feels are making a mockery of the gods, and calls on Mercury to stop Hercules. After Mercury makes an unsuccessful attempt to bring Hercules home, Zeus orders Nemesis to see to it that Hercules is consigned to the infernal regions ruled over by Pluto.
However, Juno instead convinces Nemesis to poison Hercules with a poison that would strip him of his divinity and then talk to Pluto. Nemesis informs Pluto of what is happening and he bets a large sum of money against Hercules in an upcoming strongman competition with Hercules' gangster manager.
When Hercules loses the strongman competition his friends try to lead off Hercules' angry manager's henchmen, but Hercules follows them to save them.
Meanwhile, Zeus uncovers the truth from Nemesis as to what is happening but only intervenes at the last minute to restore Hercules' divinity, not wanting any son of his to die at the hands of a mortal.
Hercules defeats the gangsters and realizes that he has been disobedient and returns to the heavens shortly after, only saying good-bye to Pretzie over a radio after he leaves.
In the heavens, Zeus tells Juno and Hercules that he is not going to punish Hercules for his behavior as they ask him about it and then asks to be left alone. They leave him alone, and upon their departure, Zeus sneaks out of the heavens and descends to earth, scaring a passenger jet on his way down. | good versus evil, cult, violence | train | wikipedia | This may on one hand actually well be the worst movie I've seen, on regular movie basis that is, because on the other hand it's also the funniest movie I've stumbled across since I saw "Monty Python and the quest for the holy grail".I've always thought Arnold Schwarzenegger has been wooden in his acting, but none of his other movies even come close to the extreme amount of talent vacuum he possesses in this movie.
Long live the underdog!Then we have main supporting character Arnold Stang, an actor which has exactly two different looks: one of utter confusion, probably because he's wondering about what the hell he's doing in the movie in the first place and one look of not so utter confusion, which he often uses when Hercules flexes his muscles for him.
But as far as characters go, the goddess of beauty is a really pug-ugly woman/dog/gorilla with a stuffed bra and all, Pluto has the incredible ability of turning out all the lights in a plastic version of New York, Atlas and Samson helps Hercules by throwing punches a few meters in front of bad guys, probably to stun them with their utter uselessness or possibly showing off their godly talents that doesn't even require them to hit people to hurt them.
After I saw it ten times in repeat I understood that there actually was a hidden door somewhere and that it actually made sense in a surreal "Hercules in New York" kind of way.Then we have Olympus, not only home of the Gods but also home of the big evil city traffic, you can hear cars driving by and honking every second.
Yeah, thats more like it.I have only listed a few of the errors in this movie here, since I won't spend the entire day of writing this review but I think the fact that Arnold Scwarzenegger actually managed to not only have a movie career but also got elected as a senator has to rate as the biggest of the lot.
If you have seen the DVD version you can watch the movie with his voice, which makes all the difference in the world, if you're an Arnold fan that is.
This movie may be the most underbudget, worst film of all time, but it's Arnold and it's great for a laugh.
Stop taking life so seriously and go watch "Hercules Goes to New York." If you can't laugh at this movie and appreciate it for the horrible piece of seventies anti-porn money at work that it is, then perhaps something along the lines of, oh, we'll say that Mariah Carey movie put out a number of years ago, or perhaps a documentary on the Exxon Valdez disaster would be more up your alley.
If I feel down, all I need to do is think of Arnie fighting the grizzly bear in Hercules in New York and it cracks me up.
Hercules' simplicity and god-like physique, as well as Monstro the Magnificent's lopsided hair cut, symbolize the yin and yang of life and death, bigness and smallness, truth and the GOP.The frequent unfocusing of the shot shows that mankind's mind is frequently unfocused and Arnold's partially literate accent represents the garbled marbles we often use to express the inner desires of our hearts.
The four-hundred-and-something witless souls who awarded this a 10 should be permanently banned from voting.Forget that it was made on a shoe-string budget, and that at one point Arnold fights the worst bear costume in movie history; forget that he takes his shirt off in every other scene, often with zero motivation; forget that the Mount Olympus scenes are obviously shot in New York; forget even that the acting is of such monumental ineptitude that James Karen (one of the worst actors in "Return of the Living Dead") is far and away the finest thespian in sight.
Most porn movies are produced with more consideration for plot.I recommend "Hercules in New York" to anyone who likes to go to the dentist or enjoys a hard punch in the nose.
A film of at times incredible and hilarious ineptitude (scenes of the "gods" on Mount Olympus are interrupted constantly by the sounds of honking horns, which are often louder than the heavenly dialogue) saved to some extent by the sincere starring duo of Stang and Schwartzenneger (whose voice is dubbed in the theatrical version, perhaps unintentionally making this film funnier for those like myself who've seen more than a few Italian "pec epics").
Try to count how many times Arnie says "I am Hercules" (as if to convince HIMSELF that he's truly acting), and if you can make it to the end I'll give you a cracker or something.You gotta love this film..
That the dumb body builder who played "Hercules" could possibly end up where he is today...........(If you had been watching this movie in 1970 and somebody had said to you, "that guy is going to be a great star AND the future Governor of California" you would have laughed until you peed yourself!).
Better laughs are rarely found, and besides it is a suitable tribute to Arnold to watch this one from start to finish, a never forgotten movie in history, and it really sucks!
It's night, but no, actually, it's day most of the time, they just forgot to shoot some parts of it, so it's day, and Hercules has to save a precious young lady from a wild bear that escaped from the zoo...the only problem is that the thing never looks like a real bear.
You can't deny that Arnie has an amazing physique.It's a(n) homage to New York and a reflection of the late 20th Century It is some of the worst acting you will ever see and there is a total absence of decent special effects.So bad it's good, see it now!.
Its obvious Arnie could'nt speak barely any English and it just adds to the humour, some of the acting is just appalling the grisly bear fight will stay in my mind forever, the actor in the suit acts more like a gorilla than anything and as soon as Arnie sees the poor bear he begins to beat the crap out of it, well more of a play wrestle than anything then his girlfriends actress trys to faint....
Ignore the non-existent plot and acting and just roll along on the river of cheese in a film that is so bad it is hilarious.Three is a low score, yes.
Yes it is probably one of the worst movies of all time, but the films many short comings make it extremely funny.
Funny seeing this 1969 film with Arnold sounding like he was dubbed with a deep voiced actor who was a regular Godzilla film /Shaw Brothers Dubber Actor !!!Back then the Austrian Oak had won Mr. Universe several times and came up short in Mr. Olympia behind the Myth, Sergio Oliva !!!
When Arnold competed in the Mr. Olympia the next year , he would win and dominate for the next 6 years !!!I watched Hercules in New York on Comet-TV today and was surprised to hear Arnold's real voice and not the dubbed voice that I remember from the VHS movie, Hercules Goes Bananas !!!I mean I'm a big fan of Sword and Sandals Films and Arnold Schwartzenegger Films but this Particular Farce of a Film just didn't get me pumped up like his others !!!
First up is Hercules In New YorkPlot In A Paragraph: Hercules (Arnie) is sent to Earth, where he finds true love and starts a career in the bodybuilder business.In his feature film debut, Arnie is billed as Arnold Strong in the movie's credits, The DVD obviously has Schwarzenegger in huge letters across the top, and his voice is dubbed.The premise behind Hercules in New York is certainly strong enough to carry a movie, especially a comedy like this one, but it's very cheaply made, the scene with Hercules fighting a grizzly bear has to be seen to be believed, and no matter how bad the performance, everything seems to be the only take they filmed.
Over a decade before his movie career exploded and eight years before even Pumping Iron, Arnold Schwarzenegger starred in this cheapie B comedy playing the Greek demigod Hercules, who has been banned from Olympus by Zeus.
Schwarzenegger can barely speak a line of coherent English at this point (the film is probably more commonly seen with his performance dubbed, but his original voice is available nowadays).
Falling from the sky into the sea, Hercules is picked up by a ship travelling to New York, where he meets friendly pretzel salesman Pretzie (played by Arnold Stang, the voice of Hanna-Barbera's Top Cat), falls in love with professor's daughter Helen (Deborah Loomis), enters a strongman competition against bodybuilder Monstro (Tony Carroll), and upsets local mobsters in the process.Arnold Schwarzenegger's screen debut is shoddy nonsense that will test the patience of all but the most dedicated Arnie fan.
Production values are incredibly low, most notably in the scenes set on the supposedly tranquil paradise of Mount Olympus (actually filmed in Central Park), where the props are cheap and nasty and the action is frequently interrupted by the sound of New York traffic and car horns.That said, Hercules in New York is almost worth seeing just for the hilarious sight of the future governor of California wrestling a grizzly bear (actually a man in a very unconvincing moth-eaten bear costume).Also look out for a guy who looks a lot like John Candy (the jury is still out on whether the bloke in question is actually the portly Canadian comedian in an uncredited role, but I wouldn't have blamed Candy one bit for not owning up if it was him)..
Arnold in his prime body builder form makes an interesting choice with an impossible to understand accent.As Hercules struggles through New York in the modern times, he met with users and abusers who would try to take advantage of a god-like naivety.
With sets about as convincing as an F-grade porn production, acting so wooden you could easily pass it off as construction material and a soundtrack so ear-splittingly awful that it'll likely make you scream in agony, Hercules in New York is definitely a classic in the "so bad it's good" category.
I'm giving it 2 stars on a "real" grade scale because of its camp appeal, but that doesn't mean it's not an entirely enjoyable film.This is Arnold Schwarzenegger's first screen role, and you can really tell: his delivery is stiff as a frozen tree, his expression more dead than a zombie that's had its head removed, and his English is nearly incomprehensible gibberish that will make you laugh at every turn ("I am tired of ze zame old zings!").Everything else in this movie goes wrong too in about a 100,000 ways: for example, the gods are supposed to be Greek, but they often refer to their comrades by their Roman names, which were invented centuries after ancient Greece's prime.
Sponsored by the Tooniversal Company, this piece of cinema is fun to watch for nostalgia purposes only.This is Arnold Schwarzenegger's first film debut as the man who is part god, and part human.
Whatever.Along with Schwarzenegger is Arnold Stang, who plays a character called Pretzie, a wimpy man who carries a basket of pretzels in the first part of the film that he's seen.
The other part that is nostalgic about this film is to see what SOME of New York looked like back then, but that's about all the viewer will get.What makes this movie so awkward are how the scenes are done.
What shocks me even more is that the director of this film is still making movies today!Hercules in New York is a very silly kid's movie that may not even entertain the smallest of ages.
Hercules in New York was a pretty bad movie though the actual Schwarzenegger's voice-dubbed version was the most interesting of the two.
With today the day Maria Shriver officially files for divorce from Arnold Schwarzenegger (serves him right too since he betrayed her by cheating on her with the maid and had a baby with her, to boot!), I thought I'd watch the former Governator's first movie that he made way back in 1969-Hercules in New York.
I saw two versions: the first that I watched on Hulu had no music score and Arnold's voice was badly dubbed by another though compared to his real one, you could hear each word clearly and the second one I saw on YouTube which had his accented voice not always easy to understand (which made his confused mix-up on "bucks" and "dough" with "bucs" and "doe" not as funny) though it had a good Greek-like score.
So on that note, Hercules in New York is interesting for the early role of Mr. Schwarzenegger, not to mention his thick accent, and not much else though one can't completely hate a movie where Hercules fights an obviously bear-suited man.
And what a laugh!The man is totally failing in every aspect of acting and his speech is so bad that it becomes absolutely funny.That's where the charm of this movie lies cause in every other way it is a bad 90 minutes of celluloid.The story sucks,the acting is worse and the camera-work is terrible.Nevertheless,a must see for everyone who wants to know something about cinema and it's rather strange history.We had to wait another 10 years before Arnie came back in a big way with Conan the Barbarian.Cinema history,for sure,although it will never be written down in any book about the subject..
Imagine having a young Arnold Schwarzenegger (whose command of English was MUCH worse than when he did his movies in the 1980s) playing a Greek god who comes to New York for a few laughs!
BUT, for people who like watching stupid films and laughing at them, then they are in for a treat with HERCULES IN NEW YORK!
In an alternate version of the film, Arnie is dubbed with god-like hamminess by an uncredited voice artist; reports suggest the movie is even funnier this way!.
Like Dungeons and Dragons or The Room this is one of those movies that are just full of Its So Bad Its Good moments that keep me entertained throughout the film.
Arnold is Hercules in New York in the human world and in peril is a pretty basic synopsis but the ridiculous use of cinematography and sound make this film a riot..
Hercules in New York is my favourite bad movie of all time.
Here's why I think it's a work of absolute genius.The perfect cast - you get Arnie as a Greek god, he's got the body for it but not the accent and if you think he sounds a bit Austrian these days you should hear him back when this movie was made.
In this scene the guy in the bear suit is met with two immediate challenges - 1) how can I stop this pitiful bear suit from falling off me and 2) The strongest man in the universe is beating the crap out of me with rather too much enthusiasm like maybe he doesn't realise this is just acting.Brilliant fun from start to finish, probably one of the funniest bad movies ever - If I ever feel sad I watch this film, it always works..
Ever heard the phrase, "it's so bad that it's good?" Well whoever said that never saw Hercules in New York.You know the different factors one takes when analysing a film?
Worthless camerawork, and i think the director was on one big coffee brake during the filming of this movie.Anyway, Arnold is extremely hilarious with lines as "HA-HA!
Yes, The Oak from Austria (in this movie still known as Arnold Strong) is making his way to the great white screen!His accent at the time was so bad, that the audio-dub of his voice was re-done by some American guy, but lucky me, I got my hands on the original one!I hardly understand a word he's saying, and his annoying gnome-buddy Pretzie isn't doing the job quite well either.
YOU HAVE STRUCK HERCULES!" and also its funny because the dubbed arnies voice because they did not like his accent.
The rumor I always heard was that he could not speak English at the time of filming, but I swear that it is most definitely, the "It's not a toomah" voice.Not that it makes it any better a movie, it's still a big load of cheese.
Hercules in New York was Arnold Schwarzenegger's first film, and while not really good, it did open up the world of movies to him.
If you enjoyed such "classic", dare I say, films like "Santa Clause Conquers the Martians" then you'll love Hercules in New York, which co-stars Arnold Stang as "Pretz" I believe was his name.
As bad as the film is i still found it one of the funniest films I've seen in a long time,the acting is awful, the plot does not really make any sense at all.their is a scene where Arnie is fighting a bear (I'd watch the whole film just for that scene).if you are a fan of Arnie or just bad acting then this is the film for you.this film deserves a higher rating,10/10 comedy.I found myself in a laughing fit every few minutes its that good/bad?
Maybe I just got the wrong version, but Schwarzenegger can barely speak English in this movie (I've heard somewhere that he was dubbed).Not just acting and low budget makes the movie the one of the worst ever, I bet it was thought as some hobby-project, the camera adjustments are cheap and bad.
Anyway, you might as well see this movie if you want a lesson in bad film-making.
"Hercules in New York", the first movie to star Arnie, kind of makes you wonder how the guy ever got a movie career going. |
tt0084099 | Human Highway | Employees and customers spend time at a small gas station-diner in a fictional town next to a nuclear power plant unaware it is the last day on Earth. Young Otto (Dean Stockwell) has received ownership of the failing business by the Will of his recently deceased father. His employee, Lionel Switch (Neil Young), is the garage's goofy and bumbling auto mechanic who dreams of being a rock star. "I can do it!" Lionel often exclaims. After some modest character development and a collage-like dream sequence there is a tongue-in-cheek choreographed musical finale while nuclear war begins.
At the destroyed gas station-diner post nuclear holocaust Booji Boy (Mark Mothersbaugh) is a lone survivor, but after his cynical prose the opening credits are a return to present time prior to apocalypse. [Some edits of the film place this scene at the end, including the most recent Director's Cut.]
At the nuclear power plant nuclear garbage persons (members of Devo) reveal that radioactive waste is routinely mishandled and dumped at the nearby town of Linear Valley. They sing a remake of "Worried Man Blues" while loading waste barrels on an old truck. Meanwhile, Lionel and his buddy Fred Kelly (Russ Tamblyn) ride bicycles to work. Fred states that Old Otto's recent death was by radiation poisoning. They remain unaware of the implications as Lionel laments it should have been himself that died because he has worked on "almost every radiator in every car in town."
Early in the day at the diner Young Otto announces he must fire an employee for lack of money. He chooses waitress Kathryn (Sally Kirkland) who has a tantrum and refuses to leave. She sits down weeping at a booth that has a picture on the wall of Old Otto (also Stockwell) and chooses on the juke box the song "The End of the World". Later, waitress Irene (Geraldine Baron) overhears Young Otto's plans to fire everybody, destroy the buildings and collect on a fraud insurance claim. Irene demands to be included in the scheme and to seal the deal with a kiss.
Although Lionel has a crush on the waitress Charlotte (Charlotte Stewart), she has a crush on the milkman Earl Duke (David Blue). After an earthquake Duke, dressed in white, enters the diner with a delivery. He flirts with her saying, "Charlotte ...on my way over here this morning I thought about you and the earth moved." She replies, "You felt it too!" He also offers her a milk bath. While he is there a dining Arab sheik offers him wealth in return for his "whiteness."
A limousine stops at the gas station. After Lionel learns his rock star idol, Frankie Fontaine (also Young), is in the limousine he insists the vehicle will need work. After meeting rock star Frankie, who appears to lead an opulent, sequestered and drug influenced life-style, Lionel says to the wooden Indian in his shop, "Now there's a real human being!"
Lionel receives a bump on the head while working on Frankie's limousine and enters a dream. He becomes a rock star with a back up band of wooden Indians. Back stage he is given a milk bath by Irene. Lionel travels with his band (the wooden Indians) and crew (all people from his waking life) by trucks through the desert. The wooden Indians become missing.
During "Goin' Back" (a song by Young) the entourage recreates in the desert near a Pueblo. Native Americans prepare a bonfire to burn the wooden Indians which had been missing. Soon Lionel is playing music and dancing around the bonfire which appears to have become the center of a Pow-wow. "Goin' Back" ends gazing into the bonfire of burning wooden Indians. "Hey, Hey, My, My" is a ten-minute studio jam performance of Devo and Young.
Lionel wakes from his dream surrounded by concerned friends much like Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz. Soon there is the start of global nuclear war. No one is sure what is happening until it is announced by Booji Boy, as "the hour of sleep." He then provides shovels and commands everyone to "dig that hole and dance like a mole!" The cast then enters a choreographed adaptation of "Worried Man". The planet is engulfed in radioactive glow and the cast, still festive, climbs a stairway to heaven accompanied by harp music. | psychedelic, comedy | train | wikipedia | When you've got movies like this to watch!
Seems like Young, Stockwell and co.
Part musical, part comedy, part fantasy, part anti-nuke message film, all filmed on a stylised set somewhere between Pee Wee's Playhouse, One From The Heart and The Wizard Of Oz. You've got Neil Young with goofy teeth, and a supporting cast of solid cult types like Stockwell, Hopper, Kirkland and Tamblyn, plus Mary from Eraserhead and DEVO!
I'm watching this movie in anticipation of catching my two favorite actors, Dean Stockwell & Dennis Hopper, in a couple of offbeat roles....but wait, is that Devo?
And Neil Young, with buck teeth and thick glasses, acting like a kid brother of Jerry Lewis....hold on, this ain't no offbeat movie - this movie is so OFF the beat, it's incredibly hip!
I couldn't stop watching the damn thing....yep, Neil is really singing "Tonight" from West Side Story while wiping the windshield, 'cause, you see, Russ Tamblyn is his buddy, and, oh forget it.....Then, to find out Dean Stockwell and Russ Tamblyn helped write this production...and, what, you say Stockwell directed it?
New wavers and hippies get together and make weird movie..
Why don't they make movies like this any more?
Best part is forced perspective set and Devo deconstructing "My My Hey Hey!" Plus, look for Neil doing a one of a kind "shovel dance!".
The performances range from surprisingly decent (in the case of Devo) to ridiculously over the top (Neil Young) to barely coherent (Russ Tamblyn and the ever bizzare Dennis Hopper).
The highlights are a song-and-dance finale reminicent of Monty Python's Life of Brian and a brilliant deconstruction of Young's classic Out Of The Blue (performed by Devo and Young) which starts as a fairly straight ahead rendition and quickly devolves (so to speak) into a frenzied, chaotic "Screw You" to the fans of Young's sixties and seventies hits.
By all means, this is only for big fans of Neil Young and/or Devo.
Not to say it is painful to watch - at times its combination of hokey special effects, screwball comedy and pointless plot is somewhat interesting.
And the scene where Devo's mascot Booji Boy runs through a searing version of "Hey Hey, My My (Into The Black)" with Young on guitar and the rest of Devo behind him is as surreal as it is amazing.
This is clearly a movie the cast enjoyed making, but they didn't stop to think if anyone would enjoy watching it.
After seeing it I learned the film was only made possible because Neil Young fronted the budget.
I think if in the writing they fleshed out the wonderful bizarre characters a little more, this thing could have been a masterpiece.
As it stands, it has a wild surreal bent, with Neil Young and company not being afraid to fall on their collective face.When the cast does the final WORRIED MAN number, it is rousing and strangely moving..
Neil Young and Dennis Hopper wrote this movie during bouts of drug use...
Like that unintelligible waste of film, this movie is practically unwatchable.
"Good" bad movies are supposed to be entertaining.
When hearing about Human Highway I had some doubts about a film made by a musician.
If my life has a purpose, it is to watch Human Highway 1000 times.
When seen at face value the film looks like an absolute piece of crap, but when seen in context with the subtext and style it is one of the most powerful movies in existance.
The acting is top notch, the greatest surprise was the versitilty of Dennis Hopper playing 4 characters each played with masterful skill.
Neil Young's acting displays the trials and hardships of the little man, never is it patronising.
Makes the three stooges look like total normalcy.
Neil Young and the Devo members are in this a lot.
This is a musical comedy, but not like one you have ever seen.
Dennis Hopper plays two or three different characters.
But the main focus is on Neil Young as a goofy, not too bright, very incompetent auto-mechanic.
Walk inside the diner, and it looks bigger on the inside- like a full blown regular diner with sexy waitresses and a grumpy but amenable cook (Dennis Hopper) and all the usual eclectic customers.
The band Devo works and plays music at the local Nuclear Power Plant down the street from the diner-gas station-garage.
They wear day-glow radiation orange work clothes and strange looking nose tubes instead of masks.
Please-please if you do not have a very strange sense of humor, do not watch this movie.
For some strange reasons I can hardly fathom (not), this film has not been available except on a rare laserdisc or OOP VHS not usually seen around much.
These guys are so aggressively strange, anything they are in is worth watching at least once and this is no exception.
The movie does ramble on and on with not much holding it together, and there are some weak romantic subplots, but I was looking forward enough to what came next so I kept watching.
I loved "Booji Boy" and although the dream sequence with Young and DEVO seemed tacked on to give them an excuse to "Rok Out", Rok they do.
And am I the only one to think Neil looks like he's on drugs?
This movie is easily whack enough to be worth seeing, especially if you are a DEVO or Young fan..
Neil Young's Human Highway is probably a gem just for his musical fans.
Some funny scenes, but too uneven and boring to be enjoyed by the casual viewer.Highlight for Young's fans: Young and Devo playing Hey Hey, My My during a dream sequence..
A vomitorium is a passage situated below or behind a tier of seats in an theater, through which big crowds can exit rapidly at the end of a performance.In the case of this movie, during the beginning.
I am a DEVO and Neil Young but this was a total waste of talent.
Well I have just spent more time in this review than I did the movie.
Young spent $3,000,000 of his own money on production of this movie.
Those aren't spaceships, those are nuclear missiles ...A treat for Devo fans, as well.
This came out at the time that Neil Young was experimenting with the New Wave musical style himself with his album "Trans", several tracks of which can be heard in the film.This film displays a very unselfconscious Punk/New Wave aesthetic.
Sure, it's disjointed and nonsensical, but everyone's obviously having a lot of fun, and the set design is quite effective, and some of the special effects are interesting as artifacts of the time it was filmed.Can you identify the four cast members who have also appeared in David Lynch films?.
The movie's primary setting is the last day on Earth at a small gas station-diner in a fictional town located next to a nuclear power plant.
The characters are diner employees and customers including Young Otto (Dean Stockwell) who has received ownership of the failing business by the Will of his recently deceased father.
One employee, Lionel Switch (Neil Young) is the garage's goofy and bumbling auto mechanic who dreams of being a rock star.
"I can do it!" he often exclaims.The song "Breaking in the Wind" highlights the opening scene set in a post-apocalyptic world.
Devo are bizarre in this film as radiated garbagemen, not surprisingly.
Booji Boy is especially strange, with his mask, squeaky voice and gasoline-tasting.Dennis Hopper who played the addled cook (among other roles) was performing knife tricks with real knives on the set.
Hopper has admitted to drug abuse during this time period.The version of this film I watched was a VHS transfer, and as far as I know there has been no real attempt to bring this film out on DVD.
I am not a fan of Neil Young, and I found this movie largely boring and pointless, but for the fans, a good transfer would work wonders: improved sound would be nice, but if the grainy picture could be cleaned up, this has the potential to become a cult classic.If you're a die-hard Devo fan, or a Neil Young fan, try to track this one down.
Another review from a hardcore Devo fan, you know what to expect....
I find that most of the comments ever said about Human Highway tend to say that it's horrible, save the fact that Devo makes an illustrious appearance.
Well, prepare for more of the same.I won't say the movie was horrible, for I have watched it more than twice, and stayed awake for the duration.
A strange appearance by Dennis Hopper tries to brighten things up, but he's not a villain out to destroy things, he's a short order cook.
The final scene where all characters dance in formation can be described as a "surrealistic" romp, in a movie that can be summed up the same way.Now on to the Devo performance in the film.
"It Takes A Worried Man", a Kingston Trio song from a long ways back, performed here by Devo (with resident Mothersbaugh alter-ego Booji Boy), is more than likely THE high point.
A close second is the jam with Devo and Young himself, banding together to make some organized noise in a dream sequence.If you're not into Neil Young or Devo, please refrain from checking this out.
The movie can be described as "bad", but you have to be on a Young-Devo level to understand it (or make any sense out of it for that matter)..
Human Highway: The Neil Syndrome.
Despite its clunkiness Human Highway is one of those films that is sprinkled with touches of humor, even though it focuses more on the harmful effects of radiation...much like in The China Syndrome.Too many comparisons exist between Fail Safe and Dr. Strangelove, the ultra serious and the comical, both released in 1964, at the height of the cold war.
Yet, the overlooked Human Highway is more than one of these post apocalyptic films.
It was released in 1982 when a slew of serious themed films were distributed about the horrors of nuclear war and accidents, i.e., The China Syndrome, the highly hyped and overblown The Day After and the brilliant and ultimately forgotten, Threads.
Yet Human Highway stands on its own as a satire and is clearly one of the most bizarre films ever made.I have unfathomable respect for Neil Young as an artist, but his films have never received the proper distribution they deserve.
Rust Never Sleeps is a brilliant, exquisitely filmed concert document, despite its clunky touches of odd humor, oversized stage props and bizarre road crew (dressed like the Jawas from Star Wars).
Neil also utilizes some amazing bits of rear projection and the sets have a stunning surreal quality to them very reminiscent of the 1954 musical Red Garters and Paul Schrader's Mishima.
But it simply doesn't work, for the humor is quirky, dry and riddled with bizarre, undeveloped characters.Not much goes on in the story line.
The Rock Group Devo portray employees at a nuclear power plant in a desolate town, who have been so exposed by the radiation that they glow bright red.
Dennis Hopper plays the drug-addled chef at the rest stop, complementing a mish-mash of odd characters.
Neil Young and Russ Tamblyn play incompetent mechanics at the establishment.
Neil is obsessed with a Sinatraesque crooner (also played by Young), who is giving a nearby concert and can barely hide his excitement when the crooner unexpectedly shows up at the station in his limo for an oil change.
It is at this point where Human Highway comes to life and blends elements of the surreal and incoherent.
Neil's character imagines himself a folk music star, touring the desert in a bus with his motley crew of friends.
It is also here where Neil decided to utilize state of the art video techniques and incorporated them to the film's warped imagery, while snippets of classic Young songs are heard on the soundtrack.
It's very hard to determine what is actually taking place in the story line, but one can guess that it is all a series of in-jokes known only to the cast and crew.The dream like quality of the images and music are stunning and it almost makes one forget the action prior to this sequence.
Almost immediately the serene tone of this sequence is interrupted by a warped version of "Hey Hey, My My" performed by Neil with the rock group Devo.
However it's not Neil who sings his classic anthem, but Mark Mothersbaugh in his alter ego of Booji- Boy (basically an oversized mask of mongoloid child's face) in a fractured voice.
However, it is the most fascinating sequence in the film, for I'm sure that those who actually got a chance to see the film wished the whole thing was like this: more noise, feedback and rock and roll.
In the end it symbolizes Neil's character coming out of his dream of being a rock star, and when he does the viewer is left with the thin, mundane plot.To make matters more confusing, or even worse, there is an endless musical production number at the end of the film, in which all the characters dance with shovels.
Even though it doesn't work, it is a great piece of inspired lunacy and in some ways makes up for the rest of the plodding film.I guess Neil scrapped plans to make Human Highway 2, as announced at the end of the film.
But with Neil, you never know..
After the almost universal panning this movie received I did not have the bar set very high for this one.You will probably not like this movie if you are expecting a concert film or the ads that MTV and VH1 have stuck in high rotation.
And I suppose you have to be enough of a Neil Young fan to appreciate and understand his dark humor.
I was surprised by the amount of screen time the normally reclusive Mr. Young enjoyed.I found myself laughing out loud several times through the film.
This film warrants a DVD release (and I hope to be able to see "Journey Through the Past" some day).Normally I am tolerant of other's taste in film, but those who describe this film as a painful ordeal or attribute it to drug (ab)use should stick to HBO.Thank's, Neil, for this wonderful, visionary and hilarious "trip.".
This is a great movie!!.
Don't believe the negative reviews, this is a very clever movie with great music by DEVO and Neil Young.
Well, neither had I but her performance here as Young's character's 'love interest' is perfectly flaky; all of the roles are played very well, from Hopper's deranged cook 'Cracker' to Stockwell's sleazy 'Young Otto'..
Excellent anti-drug movie.
It's pretty obvious that Young and Stockwell and probably everyone else involved was hopped up on goofballs during the whole production.
Who needs 'em?" The low point comes during a dream sequence which is actually a live jam between Devo and Neil Young.
It's one of the saddest displays I've ever seen of an aging ex-hippy desperately trying to be hip and "punk." (In the 70s sense.) Meanwhile Devo, who was at perhaps their most creative and virulent point in their career (I think this sequence was actually filmed in 1979) is relegated to being Neil's back-up band, playing the same four chords over and over for at least 10 minutes while he makes noise on his guitar.
After many years of searching i finally managed to pick up the VHS release of this utterly bizarre movie.
I've always been a huge fan of Neil Young and was a massive fan of Dennis Hopper until the early '90s when he started coming back into mainstream Hollywood rubbish.
Young was experimenting with new age music at the time and many of the songs from the underrated Trans album turn up during the movie.
Those who followed Hoppers career won't be surprised by his appearance here being good friends with Stockwell and Tamblyn.
Hopper was in full melt down at this stage and his performance here shows it, he was actually sued along with Young by Sally Kirkland who claimed he cut her with a knife under the influence of drugs.
Best for me is the brilliant musical number (choreographed by Tamblyn no doubt) at the end and the one of a kind shovel dance!!!!
See this movie if you're into Young and Hopper in full gonzo mode.....
I didn't even know this movie was available!
I was probably in a similar state to Neil and Russ, et al, who wrote it and played in it.
Similar line today and for similar reasons, different "terrorists".A good movie to watch for a glimpse of the birth of the culture of fear..
The box for this movie says something like 80 minutes.
That's odd, because whenever I watch it it seems like upwards of four hours.This movie will suck your soul, though I don't know why.
Having experienced the whole film, you can on later occasions just fast-forward to the Devo parts without feeling guilty.Neil Young's acting is a lot like Stephen King's acting in Creepshow.
Great curiosity for Neil Young fans.
The music is very good, especially the Devo/Neil Young "Hey Hey, My My" during the dream sequence.Not for everybody.
Basically for hardcore Neil fans and fans of "bad" cinema..
For hard core Neil Young and Devo fans only....
This movie has no plot and a simple message: Nukes = bad.
But if you're a Neil Young fan, I'd recommend buying the video if only out of curiosity.
There is a very cool jam session wherein Neil jams with Devo in the middle of the movie where they play "Hey hey My my (into the black)." The sound quality in the movie is quite good, but the acting is minimal at best. |
tt0274166 | Johnny English | Johnny English is an inept MI7 agent with dreams of being their most trusted employee. After Agent One dies in a submarine accident (courtesy of English making a mistake on checking the submarine hatch code), the remaining agents are assassinated via a bombing at Agent One’s funeral (again courtesy of English's incompetence at security), leaving English as the lone surviving agent. English is assigned to follow a plot to steal the Crown Jewels, which are on display at the Tower of London.
At the display, English is head of security, and meets the mysterious Lorna Campbell. The power is cut, and the jewels are stolen. During the chaos, English knocks out Col Sir Anthony Chevenix, Head of Royal Security in the process and pretends to fight the assailant (in reality fighting himself).
He later makes up a false description of the assailant to MI7 head Pegasus. English and his assistant Angus Bough find the jewels were removed via a hole dug beneath their display case. The two follow a tunnel, confronting the two thieves Dieter Klein and Klaus Vendetta. The two escape in a hearse, with English trying to pursue them, but he mistakes another hearse for the escaped vehicle, gatecrashing a funeral until Bough comes to his aid by pretending he is from the Lunatic Response Unit and that English is a patient named Gunther who wasn't supposed to be released until 2028 but was accidentally released due to "a most monumental cock-up".
English connects the thieves to Pascal Sauvage, a French prison entrepreneur who helped restore the Crown Jewels. Pegasus finds the claims of his involvement absurd and warns English not to involve Sauvage. In the car park, English and Bough are attacked by Vendetta, but are unharmed beyond Bough getting a nose bleed (courtesy of English mistaking him for Vendetta and covering up for himself by saying that there could have been other thieves and adamantly insisting that Bough drop the issue and move on).
English again encounters Lorna Campbell in a sushi restaurant as he recognized her motorcycle. During their meeting English is suspicious of her since he has seen her at two of their crime scenes and her records cannot be found on any government computer. English and Bough decide to break into Sauvage’s headquarters via parachutes, but English lands on the other twin tower containing the City Hospital by mistake taking hospital employees hostage until he sees the "SAUVAGE" sign from the building with Bough inside.
He then covers for himself by telling the employees that the holdup was just a test of their emergency response systems while telling Bough that he merely did a precautionary sweep of the immediate environment. Going to the correct building, the two learn Sauvage, who is a descendant of Bonnie Prince Charlie, plans on making himself king, using an impostor to impersonate the Archbishop of Canterbury. Lorna arrives, revealed to be an Interpol agent tracking Sauvage. With evidence of Sauvage’s involvement, English crashes a reception hosted by Sauvage but he is suspended from work by Pegasus for breaking into Sauvage's office, assaulting his staff and insulting the foreign secretary.
With English knowing their plans, Sauvage scraps the fake Archbishop and instead sends his minions to force Queen Elizabeth II to abdicate by threatening her corgis, causing the entire line of succession to be swept clean for Sauvage to become king. Lorna, now in charge of the assignment by Pegasus, visits the depressed English and convinces him to travel with her to Sauvage’s French Château to investigate.
Eavesdropping on Sauvage’s meeting with renowned criminals, English and Lorna learn Sauvage plans to turn the United Kingdom into the world’s biggest prison when he becomes king. English and Lorna are exposed when the former accidentally activates a microphone, and they are taken prisoners. English tries to steal the DVD of Sauvage’s plan, but accidentally drops it onto a tray of identical discs and takes the wrong one without looking. Bough rescues the two and they race to stop Sauvage’s coronation.
English crashes the coronation and discovers the Archbishop is the genuine article. Undeterred, English orders Bough to play the DVD, only to find it is camera footage of himself dancing in his bathroom in his underclothes to “Does Your Mother Know” by ABBA, Sauvage having bugged English’s flat beforehand, much to Pegasus' disgust. English sneaks away but swings in on a wire to steal St. Edward’s Crown from Sauvage. Sauvage angrily shoots at English with a pistol, causing him to drop the crown. Moments before Sauvage is crowned king, English drops from the wire after being shot, lands on the throne, and is crowned instead. In his singular act as king, English has Sauvage arrested and restores the Queen to the throne, requesting a knighthood as a reward.
In the final scene, English and Lorna drive to southern France for a romantic holiday, only for English to accidentally launch Lorna out of the car by pressing the ejection seat button. Lorna lands in a hotel swimming pool, where Bough happens to be vacationing as well as a man identical to the assailant that English described to Pegasus earlier in the film. | violence, comedy, humor, comic | train | wikipedia | Johnny's only help is from his loyal partner (Ben Miller) and a beautiful, mysterious spy woman (Natalie Imbruglia) could help bring Sauvage to Justice.Directed by Peter Howitt (Anti-Trust, Laws of Attraction, Sliding Doors) made a entertaining comedy that spoofs the films of James Bond and The Naked Gun Trilogy.
Johnny English, with the support of his assistant Bough (Ben Miller) and Lorna Campbell (Natalie Imbruglia), fights against the evil Pascal Sauvage (John Malkovitch), a powerful French who wants to be the king of the United Kingdom and transforms England in a great prison for all criminals of the world.
The singer Natalie Imbruglia is very beautiful, the unknown Ben Miller is the efficient assistant of Johnny English, and John Malkovitch, with a ridiculous French accent, complete the funny cast of this comedy.
Johnny English starts off a little bit like Bean: For some reason, wildly constructed, Rowan Atkinson ends up in a position that is far beyond his capabilities.
Expect lots of visual humour, but also the odd moment of funny dialogue (the "making love" dialogue scene is quite hilarious)The plot is standard Bond fare: A French tycoon is up to no good, stealing crown jewels and trying to become king of....
The answer surprisingly is quite well,although the film does have flat spots and gags that somewhat misfire.The plot and incidents that take place are an obvious mixture and borrowing from the NAKED GUN and AUSTIN POWERS series of parodies,but what is refreshing is that the character of Johnny English is mostly free of the occasional mugging that was witnessed in the above films,and also Atkinson's MR BEAN creation,which was of course wordless but did sometimes engage in some rather messy slapstick.There is some messy slapstick here,but Atkinson's interpretation is closer to his greatest comic character of Edmund BLACKADDER,with his sometimes cynical and sarcastic tone,though he has traits of bumbling incompetence like Mr.Bean,though not total idiocy which makes English more sympathetic.A lower budget than the AUSTIN POWERS series means there are fewer elaborate set pieces,but some scenes work very well and there are some witty exchanges of dialogue.There's decent support from Natalie Imbruglia,Ben Miller and Tim Pigott-Smith,but John Malkovich is the most amusing as the villain with his cod French accent.It is encouraging to see a comedy which underplays it's scenes these days,rather than performers shouting and screaming in a desperate bid to force laughter out of an audience.That said,some scenes in the film don't always come off,perhaps because they are understated too much,but the best bits are very funny(especially the final scenes)and further sequels with this character would be most welcome..
I was amused many places, but the plotlines were so predictable you could tell all the things meant to be funny was about to happen, way before the climax of the amusement took place...sad, very sad....Johnny English is a strange character - he has his moments where he seems a little intelligent and he has a big talent for coming up with excuses, but apart from that, he is immensely stupid - stupid to a point where the fun stops.
This is one of those movies peppered with those occasional gut-busting scenes that we have come to expect with a comic actor on the order of Atkinson, but is substantially more full of a lot of disposable humor in the form of English's bumbling; for example, going to the wrong building, going up the "poop shoot," Sauvage's coronation (which is probably the best/worst example of this) etc.
The bumbling James Bond-ish character is a one-noter--Atkinson would be funnier in funny SITUATIONS (I daresay mini-"Bean"-type scenes peppered throughout the movie) that are not strained to reveal merely how bumbling and stupid he can be (yes, by 15 minutes into the movie we GET how bumbling English is - don't spend the entire movie explaining it to us again and again).
This James Bond spoof, headed by British comedian Rowan Atkinson, was okay....a fair amount of laughs but not enough to add this film to my collection.
Amusing moments along with embarrassing in this first entry about secret agent Johnny English with a likable Rowan Atkinson , role of the accidental spy who doesn't know fear or danger in this comedy spy-thriller .
Just remember not to take it too seriously and I'm sure you'll enjoy it as much as I did.Atkinson plays MI7 agent Johnny English, a bumbling spy in the Inspector Clouseau mould who dreams of being just like James Bond.
English suspects that "greedy Frenchman" Pascal Sauvage (John Malkovich) is behind the theft and working alongside his trusty sidekick Bough (Ben Miller) and beautiful Lorna Campbell (Natalie Imbruglia), English battles his superiors and his incompetence in order to bring Sauvage's schemes to a halt.It isn't exactly difficult to spoof a spy film - even "Die Another Day" had a good chuckle at itself - but Atkinson's rubber-faced idiot takes things into straight-up slapstick and it works.
It's a funny, silly film that is a great time-passer but not exactly one that stays with you.While it isn't exactly difficult, "Johnny English" is a much funnier film than Atkinson's previous outing "Bean".
Trust me, it's far funnier than the forth-coming "Capital One movie" in production...**Not actually in production, thank God. Not The Worst Brit Comedy You Will See. The critics were unkind to this and I got the impression it was down to two reasons:1 ) The character Johnny English is based on a character that appeared on credit card adverts in the early 1990s .
" " They took some of my blood "" The b@stards " Of course you can see the pay off long before it appears but that still doesn't stop it from being amusing when it doesNo doubt a lot of pretentious John Malkovich fans were left stratching their heads wondering why he was slumming it in JOHNNY English but if you've enjoyed anything Rowan Atkinson has been in you'll certainly find this comedy very watchable.
After Johnny English (Rowan Atkinson) is put in charge of security at a gathering for all the British secret agents, things go badly wrong and he is suddenly the last of his profession left alive.
The prime suspects are the French entrepreneur (John Malkovich) and the beautiful Lorna Campbell (Natalie Imbruglia), he must find the guilty party and save the nation's pride.Rowan Atkinson is simply funny by design, it doesn't seem to matter what role he has to play, or what script he has to deliver; he just always entertains.
Malkovich clearly enjoyed his role as the evil villain, and delivered a typically great portrayal; albeit as a very shallow character, and finally Natalie Imbruglia does a great job of looking sexy throughout.Full of sustained and silly humour, this spy spoof is pretty good entertainment, and should satisfy most Rowan Atkinson fans adequately.7/10.
Despite his sheer incompetence, English manages to uncover Sauvage's plot to succeed the Queen and take control of England.I don't think I really need to explain why I didn't bother to see this at the cinema - the level of humour didn't appeal to me at the time and it simply didn't look like it would be much good.
The script tries hard, but it's basic humour is not clever enough to be an effective Bond spoof; the concept is funny but it overdoes the `incompetent' thing way too far and damages the humour it could have had.Atkinson may not be playing to the same crowds as he once did with Blackadder but he is still good enough for this material.
When the Crown Jewels are stolen, English suspects French tycoon Pascal Sauvage (John Malkovich) who has cooked up a dastardly plan to become King of Great Britain.Atkinson showed in the Blackadder series that he could do cynical cunning comedy really well.
It deserves a good 6.5/10.If you like Rowan Atkinson in other movies so don't miss "Mr. Bean's Holiday".
Rowan Atkinson does about as good of a spy he can do in "Johnny English," and while the film provides enough laughs, some of the story and jokes just fall flat.
This is probably a pretty good movie for kids who like comedy and spy films as it is pretty tame (except for the painfully unfunny "crawling up through the toilets" scene).Overall it is ok, nothing great but not too bad.5 out of 10..
I was pleasantly surprised by this spoof of James Bond films, starring the ever-hilarious Rowan Atkinson as the title character.
I am a bit biased, being an Atkinson fan--which seems to be an acquired taste, if you ask some folks--but "Johnny English" turned out to be a much better film than I expected it to be.
The first scene in which we hear his character, Sauvage, speak at length plays out rather poorly and takes a good deal of the steam out of the film's sails.This movie has its moments, but I think its appeal will be mainly to Rowan Atkinson fans like myself.
If you like the good Pink Panther films (A Shot in the Dark, The Return of the Pink Panther, The Pink Panther Strikes Again and Revenge of the Pink Panther), Rowan Atkinson makes a good new addition.With the character Johnny English, Britain has their Inspector Clouseau (Bond spoof).
It's no Austin Powers, but Johnny English does its business (no pun intended) as yet another spoof of the spy genre and making us laugh.Rowan Atkinson, who you may remember as the voice of Zazu in The Lion King or the narcoleptic from Rat Race, makes this work.
This really isn't Atkinson's fault, but more that of the filmmakers, none of whom have ever made a comedy before.As is the case with `secret agent' movies, the overall framework of `Johnny English' follows the traditional spy-thriller formula.
Well, anyway, the film's framework mirrors the 007 spy-thriller, including the plot, the gadgets and the female counterparts; this isn't surprising, since the screenwriters are Robert Wade and Neal Purvis, co-writers for the last two Bond films, `Die Another Day' and `The World is not Enough.' The star of the film being Rowan Atkinson, you'd think that there would be more `Mr. Bean' style comedy, since this was his signature caricature for which most people know him.
In one scene involving his mixing up two drugs, a truth serum and a muscle relaxant, I was in tears laughing for a good five minutes, even though the entire skit was predictable and not very creative.While Atkinson's work was well done, `Johnny English' doesn't really overcome its downsides: the comedy feels inconsistent, the plot line is sloppy, and the supporting characters don't compliment Atkinson's style of humor.
Rowan Atkinson is just a very talented comedian, and you can sometimes in Johnny English see a little from Mr. Bean and his character come back, but that gives the movie a little extra.
Now it's the turn of rubbery-faced English comedian Rowan Atkinson to take on the role of bumbling secret agent Johnny English in this far superior spoof of the Bond movies, directed by Peter Howitt.
Some reasonable action set pieces, a lot of laughs, definitely worth an hour and a half of your time.In difference to some of the other reviews - Johnny has had the requisite spy training, and isnt completely clueless(seeing as from the start he knows who the villain is) - merely very clumsy and incompetent.Perhaps I went in the right mood to see the movie, but the line about whistling in the right pitch still cracks me up, even when it's obvious what's going to happen.Not worth buying on DVD, but definitely worth a cinema or rental view.Probably wont go down too well in France!Just scrapes a 7/10, I feel..
However, if you like Rowan Atkinson or if you are a fan of the Mr Bean character, you will have a good laugh..
You can see lots of the jokes coming, but that doesn't really stop them being funny.I prefer Rowan Atkinson in his "Blackadder" guise (series three and four though for those in the know), but I presume he makes more money this way.
I guess that many people are going to compare it to the much franchised "Austin Powers", I mean true this movie didn't produce as many laughs in comparison to the latter but I believe it made it's own little niche in the comedy-spy movies.I love John Malkovich as any kind of villain, his passive attitude to Johnny making a fool of himself was funny.
Ben Miller was great as Bough, the smart side kick of Johnny.I suggest that if you like Rowan Atkinson's comedy then watch this.
Forever remembered for his role as Mr. Bean, he does excellently to play Johnny English, as a bumbling spy who contradicts himself, collapses the simplest of plans and makes a complete idiot of himself - all in a good cause.
Rowan Atkinson is a great comedy character actor in films such as BEAN, Rat Race, Four Weddings etc and this is no different.
As one comment has just said, this is 90 minutes of harmless fun.Harmless it is, well made it is, but something which i have taken away after seeing this is how funny it is.Mr Bean was a really good character who now seems to have been used too much, although the film did have some hilarious moments, as does this.The premise was ok, a good character from some very funny old commercials for Barclaycard and the film extends those adverts into a film.The end product was actually better than i had expected.Ok some of the gags were signposted well in advance but each one was wonderfully done and then there were scenes of comedic genius such as the car chase and the funeral.The writers of THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH and DIE ANOTHER DAY were behind this one and that was comforting to know because in the last bond film the plot was good but sometimes TOO spectacular and too little thinking time.
This spy movie spoof is actually quite funny, Atkinson and Malkovich give some great perfomances.
Johnny EnglishIt's unavoidable that people will try to judge this film by making comparisons to Atkinson's other characters and all the James Bond spoofs out there.
Excellent funny movie.Maybe not the best comedy of the world but it makes me laugh and it's a good start!
If you are a fan of Rowan Atkinson's brand of slapstick humor, then just perhaps Johnny English is the film for you.
Even if you've liked his performances in such films as BEAN, you'll probably need to see Johnny English only on a day when your silliness quotient is through the roof.
We've all seen bumbling secret agents before, but none quite like Johnny English who, again thanks to Rowan Atkinson, is a completely original character.
If you do not like Rowan Atkinson's comedy in general then you probably won't enjoy this film, but fans of Atkinson's various TV series like "Blackadder" and "Mr Bean" are certain to roll about laughing.
Very funny and very very good performance of Rowan Atkinson 😂😂😂 I like this movie very much.
Other interpretations that have to be mentioned were Ben Miller's who played as Bough (English's Sidekick) and John Malkovich's who played as Pascal Sauvage the Greedy Frenchman.Finally, I have to say that "Johnny English" is a nice movie to watch, with an interesting plot and many funny scenes that I am sure that they will make you laugh a lot.
Rowan Atkinson is the perfect role for the silly, Mr.Bean-like spy in this Bond parody film.A movie with silly but hilarious and reckless mistakes made by English, like his character in the legendary show Mr.Bean, fake French accents, Aston Martin, and action scenes suitable for a wider audience.Johnny English is a very funny main protagonist who is a spy and tries hard to be serious and is very full of himself, but makes clumsy mistakes that end up embarrassing himself or others, even accidentally harming them!The movie does have some kind of a cult following but I still think the movie does need some more appreciation.
Rowan Atkinson delivers big time, giving Johnny English the perfect mix of slapstick Mr Bean and even some James Bond elements.
CHARACTERS are the main thing to tell, So, Let me show you!🚶🏼LETS GO!Rowan Atkinson as Johnny English - A stupid spy, Who is hitting and punching the wrong person and coming to wrong buildings as well, Also, He has a different friend.Tim Pigott Smith as Pegasus - Wait a minute, Pegasus is a women in the second movie?
"Johnny English" (essentially "Mr. Bean Becomes a Secret Agent") is everything that you would expect from a Rowan Atkinson spy film.
Atkinson, as you would expect, does a great job portraying the bumbling English, and there are several very funny scenes, leading up to English taking on Sauvage at the latter's coronation.The basic success of this movie is measured by the fact that it did indeed make me laugh out loud on a number of occasions.
Although it isn't original it is a very funny film, and I thought that Rowan Atkinson was great as Johnny English.
Rowan Atkinson stars in Johnny English as a British secret agent whose job it is to bring back the stolen Crown jewels.
I can't think of anyone better for this role.Johnny English is the kind of a film that makes you feel great.
It is much better that the Mr. Bean film and I hope Rowan Atkinson will make other movies in the future as well.
I only sat down to write this user comment so I could come up with word-plays on 007/Mr Bean.I've always enjoyed Rowan Atkinson and I'm a huge Bond-fan so "Johnny English" should be right up my alley, and the movie certainly looks great but the jokes...
This movie stars Rowan Atkinson as Johnny English, and he plays a role something of the sort of a James Bond, a bumbling James Bond (think Lt. Frank Drebin in the Naked Gun series). |
tt1181614 | Wuthering Heights | === Opening (Chapters 1 to 3) ===
In 1801, Lockwood, a wealthy young man from the South of England who is seeking peace and recuperation, rents Thrushcross Grange in Yorkshire. He visits his landlord, Heathcliff, who lives in a remote moorland farmhouse, Wuthering Heights. There Lockwood finds an odd assemblage: Heathcliff seems to be a gentleman, but his manners are uncouth; the reserved mistress of the house is in her mid-teens; and a young man who seems to be a member of the family, yet dresses and speaks as if he is a servant.
Snowed in, Lockwood is grudgingly allowed to stay and is shown to a bedchamber where he notices books and graffiti left by a former inhabitant named Catherine. He falls asleep and has a nightmare in which he sees the ghostly Catherine trying to enter through the window. He cries out in fear, rousing Heathcliff, who rushes into the room. Lockwood is convinced that what he saw was real. Heathcliff, believing Lockwood to be right, examines the window and opens it, hoping to allow Catherine's spirit to enter. When nothing happens, Heathcliff shows Lockwood to his own bedroom and returns to keep watch at the window.
At sunrise, Heathcliff escorts Lockwood back to Thrushcross Grange. Lockwood asks the housekeeper, Nelly Dean, about the family at Wuthering Heights, and she tells him the tale.
=== Heathcliff's childhood (Chapters 4 to 17) ===
Thirty years earlier, the owner of Wuthering Heights is Mr. Earnshaw, who lives with his son Hindley and younger daughter Catherine. On a trip to Liverpool, Earnshaw encounters a homeless boy, described as a "dark-skinned gypsy in aspect". He adopts the boy and names him Heathcliff. Hindley feels that Heathcliff has supplanted him in his father's affections and becomes bitterly jealous. Catherine and Heathcliff become friends and spend hours each day playing on the moors. They grow close.
Hindley is sent to college. Three years later Earnshaw dies and Hindley becomes the landowner; he is now master of Wuthering Heights. He returns to live there with his new wife, Frances. He allows Heathcliff to stay but only as a servant, and regularly mistreats him.
A few months after Hindley's return, Heathcliff and Catherine walk to Thrushcross Grange to spy on Edgar and Isabella Linton, who live there. After being discovered they try to run away but are caught. Catherine is injured by the Lintons' dog and taken into the house to recuperate, while Heathcliff is sent home. Catherine stays with the Lintons. The Lintons are landed gentry and Catherine is influenced by their fine appearance and genteel manners. When she returns to Wuthering Heights her appearance and manners are more ladylike, and she laughs at Heathcliff's unkempt appearance. The next day, knowing that the Lintons are to visit, Heathcliff, upon Nelly's advice, tries to dress up, in an effort to impress Catherine, but he and Edgar Linton get into an argument and Hindley humiliates Heathcliff by locking him in the attic. Catherine tries to comfort Heathcliff, but he vows revenge on Hindley.
The following year, Frances Earnshaw gives birth to a son, named Hareton, but she dies a few months later. Hindley descends into drunkenness. Two more years pass, and Catherine and Edgar Linton become friends, while she becomes more distant from Heathcliff. Edgar visits Catherine while Hindley is away and they declare themselves lovers soon afterwards.
Catherine confesses to Nelly that Edgar has proposed marriage and she has accepted, although her love for Edgar is not comparable to her love for Heathcliff, whom she cannot marry because of his low social status and lack of education. She hopes to use her position as Edgar's wife to raise Heathcliff's standing. Heathcliff overhears her say that it would "degrade" her to marry him (but not how much she loves him), and he runs away and disappears without a trace. Distraught over Heathcliff's departure, Catherine makes herself ill. Nelly and Edgar begin to pander to her every whim to prevent her from becoming ill again.
Three years pass. Edgar and Catherine marry and go to live together at Thrushcross Grange, where Catherine enjoys being "lady of the manor". Six months later, Heathcliff returns, now a wealthy gentleman. Catherine is delighted, but Edgar is not. Edgar's sister, Isabella, soon falls in love with Heathcliff, who despises her, but encourages the infatuation as a means of revenge. One day, he embraces Isabella, leading to an argument with Edgar. Upset, Catherine locks herself in her room and begins to make herself ill again.
Heathcliff takes up residence at Wuthering Heights and spends his time gambling with Hindley and teaching Hareton bad habits. Hindley dissipates his wealth and mortgages the farmhouse to Heathcliff to pay his debts. Heathcliff elopes with Isabella Linton. Two months after their elopement, they return to Wuthering Heights, where Heathcliff hears that Catherine is dying. With Nelly's help, he visits Cathy secretly. However, Catherine is pregnant. The following day, she gives birth to a daughter, Cathy, shortly before dying.
After Catherine's funeral, Isabella confides in Nelly, laughing as she tells Nelly how glad she is that Cathy died and that she has left Heathcliff. Rejected shelter by Edgar, Isabella eventually finds refuge in the South of England and gives birth to a son, Linton. Hindley dies six months after Catherine, and Heathcliff thus finds himself master of Wuthering Heights.
=== Heathcliff's maturity (Chapters 18 to 31) ===
Twelve years pass. Catherine's daughter Cathy has become a beautiful, high-spirited girl. Edgar learns that his sister Isabella is dying, so he leaves to retrieve her son Linton in order to adopt and educate him. Cathy, who has rarely left home, takes advantage of her father's absence to venture further afield. She rides over the moors to Wuthering Heights and discovers that she has not one but two cousins: Hareton, in addition to Linton. She also lets it be known that her father has gone to fetch Linton. When Edgar returns with Linton, a weak and sickly boy, Heathcliff insists that he live at Wuthering Heights.
Three years pass. Walking on the moors, Nelly and Cathy encounter Heathcliff, who takes them to Wuthering Heights to see Linton and Hareton. Heathcliff hopes that Linton and Cathy will marry, so that Linton will become the heir to Thrushcross Grange. Linton and Cathy begin a secret friendship, echoing the childhood friendship between their respective parents, Heathcliff and Catherine.
The following year, Edgar becomes very ill and takes a turn for the worse while Nelly and Cathy are out on the moors, where Heathcliff and Linton trick them into entering Wuthering Heights. Heathcliff keeps them captive to enable the marriage of Cathy and Linton to take place. After five days, Nelly is released and later, with Linton's help, Cathy escapes. She returns to the Grange to see her father shortly before he dies.
Now master of both Wuthering Heights and Thrushcross Grange, Cathy's father-in-law, Heathcliff, insists on her returning to live at Wuthering Heights. Soon after she arrives Linton dies. Hareton tries to be kind to Cathy, but she withdraws from the world.
At this point, Nelly's tale catches up to the present day (1801). Time passes and, after being ill for a period, Lockwood grows tired of the moors and informs Heathcliff that he will be leaving Thrushcross Grange.
=== Ending (Chapters 32 to 34) ===
Eight months later, Lockwood returns to the area by chance. Given that his tenancy at Thrushcross Grange is still valid, he decides to stay there again. He finds Nelly living at Wuthering Heights and enquires what has happened since he left. She explains that she moved to Wuthering Heights to replace the housekeeper, Zillah, who had left.
Hareton has an accident and is confined to the farmhouse. During his convalescence, he and Cathy overcome their mutual antipathy and become close. While their friendship develops, Heathcliff begins to act strangely and has visions of Catherine. He stops eating and, after four days, is found dead in Catherine's old room. He is buried next to Catherine.
Lockwood learns that Hareton and Cathy plan to marry on New Year's Day. As he gets ready to leave, he passes the graves of Catherine, Edgar, and Heathcliff and pauses to contemplate the quiet of the moors. | tragedy | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0826776 | Cthulhu | When young history professor Russ is called upon by his sister to execute their late mother's estate, he is reunited with boyhood friend Mike, and with his father, the charismatic leader of a New Age cult. While exploring his memories, Russ wanders into a warehouse where hundreds of names are listed on the walls. As he sleeps that night, he dreams of a stone cudgel and awakens to find a cudgel (with the word Dagon written on it) in his motel room; the town drunk warns him that it is an instrument of sacrifice. A young liquor store clerk enlists him to help find her brother, whom she believes has been taken by the cult. Russ's aunt, who has been living in an asylum, tells him that his mother left a message hidden in her house.
Looking for answers in the warehouse, Russ is taken on an unbelievable journey through the small town's ancient, subterranean origins. When he escapes, he and Mike find the girl's brother murdered. Russ begins to believe preparations are underway for a mass sacrifice, and engages the attentions of a seductress in order to obtain information. He is raped and arrested for murder on the eve of the May Festival. The stakes are raised when Russ discovers that the cult intends to take over the world by raising anthropomorphic creatures from the sea.
Russ is shown his children, presumably gilled Deep Ones swimming in a bath. The film ends with Russ and his best friend/lover being held by the cult, as Russ' father orders him to choose between the man he loves and the life he has been called to lead in his father's church. | cult | train | wikipedia | Determined amateur's zero budget effort. Cthulhu is an amateur production shot in Canberra, Australia in 1996 and '97. It has shown at a number of festivals, but has never been released to theatres. A burn on demand option is available through Amazon. This production should not be confused with the commercial 2007 U.S. film of the same name.Cthulhu is an an amateur production shot with a single 16 mm camera using tails and excess film stock. It has no professional actors (you can often see them reading their lines), no closeups, little story coherence, no colour matching, and (it seems) no second takes. Apart from some gunshot squibs and and an exploding car, the SFX comprise single screen hand-drawn monsters and extremely crude polarization effects. The claim made on IMDb that it had a $100,000 budget is wishful thinking of the most extreme kind.Cthulhu's plot is a pastiche drawing on the Cthulhu mythos of H.P. Lovecraft; in particular the tales 'The Thing on the Doorstep', 'The Dunwich Horror', 'Shadow over Innsmouth' and 'The Call of Cthulhu'. Coherence is sacrificed as so many elements are crammed in.The most interesting aspect of the film is its use of Canberra locales, including the now demolished Canberra Hospital as Arkham Asylum and The Australian National University as Miskatonic U. The results are often unintentionally hilarious, such as a Belconnen second-hand bookstore selling rare occult medieval manuscripts. The exploding car has nothing to do with the story, but was the result of the SFX consultant mentioning how it might be done. The catering budget was emptied to buy a $200 car shell from a wreckers, and the director went door-to-door to farms outside Canberra asking for permission to blow up a car in a paddock.The exploding car is a highlight of the film. (This says everything that needs to be said). A second highlight is the hordes of student extras morphing into inbred Innsmouth locals by the use of absurd Middlesex accents; "The trees they be a rustling'.Cthulhu is not without its guilty pleasures, but they fall firmly into the so-bad-it's-good category. With the application of large amounts of popcorn, it might be enjoyed as a rehearsal take for a Hammer horror send up as directed by Ed Wood. Today, similar or better results could be obtained using a mobile phone.However, the original music by Jason Sims is exceptional.Cthulhu is a tribute to first time producer-director-scriptwriter Damian Heffernan's determination and passion to create something from nothing. I salute him. If you ever have a chance to see it, bring popcorn. |
tt0028345 | Tarzan Escapes | Jane's two cousins, Eric and Rita, arrive in Africa to tell Jane about a fortune left to her back in their world and to try to convince her to return with them. They are led to Tarzan's escarpment home by Captain Fry (John Buckler), a hunter with an agenda of his own. Jane convinces Tarzan to let her go back with Eric and Rita, promising that their separation will only be temporary. But Captain Fry (unknown to the others) attempts to capture Tarzan to take him back to civilization so he can be put on public display, and actually succeeds in caging Tarzan. Fry's treachery includes making a deal with an unfriendly native tribe to give him food, canoes and protection for the journey back in exchange for his handing over Jane, Eric and Rita for "ju-ju" and taking away the greatest "ju-ju" – Tarzan. Fry's plan goes wrong when the natives capture Tarzan in his cage and all four white people are taken prisoner. Tarzan manages to escape with the help of elephants and Cheeta, and guides what's left of Fry's party through a cave passage filled with treacherous quicksands. Just before they exit the caves to safety, Tarzan forces Fry to go back the way they came as punishment for his betrayal. Fry starts to go back, then seizes a heavy branch to attack Tarzan, but before he can exit the cave he falls into a quicksand bog and is swallowed up. Rita and Eric tell Jane that it is not necessary for her to return with them and that she belongs with Tarzan. The film ends with Tarzan and Jane reunited at their tree house. | murder | train | wikipedia | Paradoxically, what was cut from Tarzan Returns was its biggest 'plot menace' - a Giant Vampire Bat sequence, set in a swamp, which would have been great!
Nasty hunter Captain Fry (John Buckler) leads an expedition to Tarzan's stomping ground with the aim of capturing the ape-man and exhibiting him in England.
Unaware of Fry's nefarious intentions, Jane's cousins, Eric and Rita (William Henry and Benita Hume), tag along for the journey hoping to convince their relative to return to England in order to help them claim the fortune that has been left to them in a will.It's back to the Mutia escarpment for more jungle action in the third of the Weissmuller Tarzan films; unfortunately, this time around, much of what made the first two films so much fun—the gloriously un-PC violence and steamy sexuality—is missing thanks to the introduction of the Hays code, Hollywood's moral guidelines.So instead of Maureen O'Sullivan giving us an eyeful in her animal skin bikini, we have her wearing a much more demure dress, and when the film gets down to the dispatching of native bearers, much of the nastiness happens off-screen; the film also suffers due to a troubled production which saw much of the original film being re-shot and re-edited.
It all amounts to a rather tame offering that lacks the thrills and spills of Weissmuller's earlier outings as the affable ape-man (even the nasty execution via tree that horrified me as a child was less gruesome than I remembered).Still, the film remains fairly watchable thanks to the chemistry between Weissmuller and O'Sullivan, some funny antics from Cheetah the Chimp (she teases lion cubs, attempts to ride a zebra, and laughs as comedy relief Rawlins tries to master swinging on a vine), the impressive sight of Tarzan's 'town-house' (complete with elephant powered elevator!), and one particularly bizarre scene featuring a weird dodo-like bird (which I presume must have been performed by a man with no legs, walking on his hands in a feathered suit!!!).6.5 out of 10, rounded up to 7 for IMDb..
Although the Movie does Retain a bit of the Jungle Violence, the Nasty Natives of Previous Entries, and a Few Scenes of Terror, it Loses the Pre-Code Edge and is Replaced with some Clunky Scenes (Tarzan walking zombie like with depression and extended Cheetah shenanigans).Overall, the Story of Tarzan being Caged and put on Exhibition is a Nervous Anxiety and some Safari Scenes Impress, the much Talked About Ju-Ju is Only Talked About.After this, when the Hays Code and "Boy" showed up, the Series fell into a "Flintstones" Frolic that can at times be Witnessed in this one.
He does manage to get him into a cage but with the help of some of his elephant friends and Cheetah, he escapes and towards the end, gets his revenge when he makes Fry go back into a cave they just went through where there are hungry lizards and Fry is killed.As always, Johnny Weissmuller and Maureen O'Sullivan are excellent as Tarzan and Jane.Tarzan Escapes is a must for any Tarzan fan.
That said, TARZAN ESCAPES (1936; ***) is much better than online reviews would have you believe: true, there is ample stock footage on display here but it also boasts a strong plot line and cast (featuring Benita Hume, future wife of Ronald Colman and later George Sanders, as well as MGM staple Herbert Mundin and James Whale favorite E.E. Clive, not to mention the villainous John Buckler who comes to a particularly sticky end in this one) to even things out.
By now, Weissmuller and O' Sullivan have grown considerably in their respective parts but the influence of the Hays' Office (established while the film was in production, resulting in extensive re-shoots before it could be classified for exhibition!) is also very much in evidence: Tarzan and Jane's behavior (to say nothing of the latter's 'wardrobe') is rather chaste this time around, and even the violence is there mainly by virtue of recycled scenes from the two previous entries in the series!!TARZAN FINDS A SON!
(1939; **1/2), though certainly briskly-paced and fairly enjoyable in itself, is where things really start to degenerate and a sense of deja'-vu hangs over the proceedings like a cloud; not that this factor is an isolated case in franchises of this period consider, for instance, the noticeable leap in quality from the ornate SON OF FRANKENSTEIN (1939) to a strictly programmer-level THE GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN (1942)
To make matters worse (though, I guess, this can be pinned down to personal opinion), we have here the addition of another jungle 'initiate' in the figure of Boy who emulates Tarzan in his every move, down to that grating yodel!
Besides, his getting into endless predictable scrapes throughout, forcing Tarzan's nick-of-time intervention and queuing in further stock footage from the earlier films (now looking pretty rough-hewn alongside the lavish budgets MGM could afford by the end of the decade!), does the picture no favors at all in the story department!!
Third film in the Johnny Weissmuller--Maureen O'Sullivan Tarzan series.
With them is safari hunter Captain Fry (John Buckler) who secretly has plans to capture Tarzan and bring him back to civilization as a sideshow attraction.
And there are shots of Cheetah laughing that are hysterical.The acting varies--Weissmuller is very good as Tarzan--his emotions show clearly through his face (but he does look a little old in a few sequences); O'Hara is still bad as Jane and everybody else is TERRIBLE--especially Buckler and Herbert Munder (stuck with the thankless "comic" relief role).Still this is fast-moving with plenty of action.
No Johnny Weissmuller and Maureen O'Sullivan certainly shine as the romantic leads Tarzan and Jane.
The cousins played by Benita Hume and William Henry, hire Captain Fry, an evil white trapper, to guide them to Tarzan and Jane.
His motive is to capture Tarzan and take him back to civilization as a caged exhibit.Johnny Weissmuller, the most popular Tarzan, manages to escape and come to the rescue of the others that are being held captive.
Unfortunately, the Hays Code no longer permitted the lovely Maureen O'Sullivan playing Jane, to wear the skimpy jungle bikini she wore that barely covered the essential parts of her anatomy in the first two Tarzan/Jane movies her and Johnny Weismueller did for MGM.
Good plot as once again Jane is being deceived by family and an evil white hunter, Captain Fry (John Buckler) who intends to capture Tarzan to put on display.
I forgive them since the overall experience of this picture is enjoyable and interesting.This is likely the most violent of the MGM Tarzan films, and certainly depicts Our Hero dispatching justice in a very cold, yet understandable, fashion.
At the same time, this film has some of the most emotional and heart-rending moments of the series, and there is something vaguely messianic in the way Tarzan, believing himself betrayed by one he loves, willingly enters the cage, later to descend physically down a violently rocky slope into unconsciousness, only to re-emerge into the world commanding an army of avenging elephants.Weissmuller has all the moves down here, and utters mono-syllabic sentences with the strength of a conqueror or the vulnerability of three year old child, depending upon the needs of the script.
Directed by Richard Thorpe, story has Tarzan fending of the nefarious intentions of an expedition group who plan to take Jane (Maureen O'Sullivan)) back to civilisation, and Tarzan into side-show captivity.Weissmuller flexes his muscles and gets help from his wildlife pals, while Jane wonderfully looks like she's auditioning for the porn movie version of the plot.
The wildlife footage is impressive for the time and Leonard Smith's photography is very slick.There's some holes in the plot, but it matters not in the grand scheme of 30s Tarzan movies, it's the sort of film you watched as a kid and adored, and now as adults we go back to find it has thankfully lost none of its charm.
This installment of the Tarzan series starring Johnny Weissmuller is very similar to one of these movies made just a few years later, "Tarzan Finds a Son!".
Living among the apes by choice, Ms. O'Sullivan mated with jungle man Johnny Weissmuller (Tarzan) in "Tarzan and His Mate" (1934).
Jane's cousins consider themselves lucky to find safari guide John Butler (as Captain Fry), but he secretly plans to cage Tarzan and display him as an exhibit...
This was noticed by writer/director John Farrow, one of those brought in to patch up production problems.***** Tarzan Escapes (11/6/36) Richard Thorpe ~ Johnny Weissmuller, Maureen O'Sullivan, William Henry, Benita Hume.
In this episode,Jane meets again two of her cousins,eager to latch onto a rich inheritance ;they need her signature and she 's got to go back to England with them .Jane isn't interested in money at all,but she 's got to help her relatives so his cousin can study medicine .A long sequence shows Tarzan and Jane is their garden of Eden .They do not need anything more,they could not ask for more.Civilization (here represented by a nasty man ,who wants to take Tarzan back to exhibit him in a circus) is evil,this will be even more obvious in "Tarzan's secret treasure" in which Boy would like to know the "other" world and all the things gold can bring.Johnny Weissmuller and Maureen O'Sullivan were irreplaceable and these delightful black and white Tarzan movies owe much of their charm to them..
There were very few, if any, boring lulls in these films and some of the African wildlife footage is still amazing to this day!Tarzan Escapes is considered one of the best in the series, even if some parts were cut.
In this film, elephants are the heroes, coming to the defense of Tarzan (Johnny Weissmuller).; the humor is provided by a member of the safari team ; Jane (Maureen O'Sullivan) doesn't appear the first half hour and the action ends with some great film-noir like photography in a swamp (minus the bats).
TARZAN ESCAPES (Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, 1936), directed by Richard Thorpe, based on the characters created by Edgar Rice Burroughs, reunites Johnny Weissmuller and Maureen O'Sullivan in their third outing as Tarzan and Jane.
Following the controversial TARZAN AND HIS MATE (1934) with such notables as Jane's skimpy two-piece outfit along with her long shot skinny dipping alongside Tarzan, TARZAN ESCAPES does have its moments of controversy such as some graphic violence, with much of it trimmed, hence the Production Code that had recently gone into effect.The story starts off with plot development and character introduction involving Rita and Eric (Benita Hume and William Henry) who hire Captain Fry (John Buckler, whose physical appearance resembles that of Basil Rathbone) to lead them to the Mulia Escarpment and locate their cousin, Jane Parker, living somewhere in the jungles of Africa.
During their expedition, which consists of Herbert Henry Rawlins, better known as Jiggs (Herbert Mundin), and Bomba, (Darby Jones), Fry's native boy, the Parkers do find Jane (O'Sullivan), taking residence in a tree house with Tarzan (Weissmuller), her mate.
In the meantime, Fry, who reveals himself as a conniving villain, convinces Tarzan that Jane is never coming back and succeeds into tricking Tarzan into a specialty built metal cage where he attempts to take the jungle man back to civilization where Fry attempts to make money by showcasing him as a circus attraction.TARZAN ESCAPES has Tarzan doing just as the title indicates.
After he is caged, and desperate in reclaiming Jane, he manages to break out with the help of his elephant friends, and avenge himself on the evil Fry. As mentioned earlier, the most celebrated scene missing from the final print is the one where Tarzan fights off devil bats and hostile pygmies in a haze-shrouded swamp.
Although much of the movie had been toned down through edits and revisions, which explains why it was in production for nearly two years, the finished product of TARZAN ESCAPES can still be considered graphic for its time anyway, especially in what results with certain characters, especially Captain Fry, making this possibly the last "adult oriented" Tarzan adventure.
This became the last in the series to provide Jane with her operatic distress call as well as her leaping from the tree into the arms of Tarzan like a professional acrobat.As much as Johnny Weissmuller can be criticized for his bad acting at times, and doing nothing more than being Tarzan of the movies, belting out his jungle yells for example, he's more articulate than in the previous two films, with his speech consisting of mono syllables that would remain through the duration of the Tarzan/Weissmuller series, he convincingly shows the emotional impact and tender side to his character, especially the thought of losing Jane.
A strange entry in the MGM series, 'Tarzan Escapes' eschews a predictable plot and at times wants to be a serious melodrama about Tarzan and Jane's relationship.
Over the course of the series, particularly the episodes with Johnny Weismuller and Maureen O'Sullivan, it's made clear time and again that Tarzan and Jane are madly in love.
Fry eventually runs afoul of a dangerous tribe; Tarzan comes to the rescue and saves them all but realizing Fry's treachery, forces him back into a cave where those killer lizards reside, and that's the end of Fry. Though things were not nearly as standardized as they would be in later MGM films, we see the beginnings of recurring ideas and situations, such as the elaborate treehouse and its Flintstones-style amenities, like the elephant-operated elevator.
"Tarzan Escapes" is both a beautiful love story and great jungle adventure—I couldn't ask for nothing else since this movie even gives us the violence.
There are some recycled scenes that seem lifted from the first film such as a rescue consisting of a great elephant stampede, Cheetah the orangutan fleeing a lion, and Tarzan having to save Jane and her cousins from a savage native tribe.What is unique about this one is the unwavering affection between Tarzan and Jane, their devotion to each other is touching and sweet.
The villain of this particular Tarzan movie is "great white hunter" Captain Fry (John Buckler, who would die in a car accident drowning the same year), who sees a profit in exploiting Tarzan's gifts with animals in England, making a potential alliance with a heathen tribe, which goes awry.Maureen O'Sullivan, a sophisticated and gentle little beauty, has some marvelous scenes where she faces splitting from Tarzan, the very notion of such a separation anguishing, but important in her mind because to sign a "piece of paper" (she was willed a fortune but doesn't really have an interest in wealth because of her happiness in the uncivilized world with Tarzan) would provide her cousins Rita (Benita Hume) and Eric (William Henry) with a comfortable income and living.
Some might find this a bit campy (considering Cheetah's antics and Rawlins' goofy bumpkin) and its romance story a bit sappy, but I really adore the casting of Weissmuller and O'Sullivan as Tarzan and Jane; their genuine chemistry I find irresistible.
Its a huge let down after the classic Tarzan and His Mate which is possibly the best film in the series.The plot has Jane's cousins coming into the jungle to tell her that she has inherited a fortune if she'll come back to claim it.
Finally into the last half hour the plot to capture Tarzan is put in motion and things at last become interesting as plans go awry and things look very grim for all concerned..Painfully dull film is clear evidence of a troubled production.
To me its a great wonder how the series managed to continue on from here since this film isn't very good (except at the end).I would be hard pressed to explain it except I would have to say that it was the relationship between Weissmuller and O'Sullivan as Tarzan and Jane which kept people coming back.
I'm pretty sure I've seen it before in a picture like that but don't ask me to nail it down.I wasn't surprised to see Tarzan take on a crocodile in the story, Weissmuller did it any number of times in his Jungle Jim flicks a little over a decade later.
However the Jungle Jim movies were done on a way cheaper budget, so that probably explains a lot.As for the main story, I found it interesting that the expedition led by Captain Fry (John Buckler) traveled through all sorts of terrain to find Jane (Maureen O'Sullivan) and her Great White Ape companion.
It was cool to see Cheetah on hand as well; his little interlude with the zebra added a nice comedic touch to the picture.With only a handful of Weissmuller's Tarzan films viewed recently, this is probably the most romantic one involving the relationship between Tarzan and Jane.
It makes you glad Jane decided to hang around the jungle when all was said and done, and made the picture one of the better Tarzan films, even with some of the other goofy stuff going on.One last thought - Cheetah's laugh - it kills me every time I hear it..
Although the MGM Tarzan films with Johnny Weissmuller were usually of high quality I had some problems with Tarzan Escapes.
This film which does have a bit of continuity in it to connect with the two previous Weissmuller outings, I had some trouble wrapping my mind around the plot.The story has Maureen O'Sullivan's cousins from Great Britain, William Henry and Benita Hume searching for Jane to resolve an inheritance issue back in the old country.
Of course he doesn't stay captive long, it helps to be on a first name basis with all the elephants in the jungle.Herbert Mundin is always good to have around as he plays Buckler's assistant and one with a conscience.
Buckler drowns in a swamp in this one and in real life drove into a river and also drowned.Though the film has the usual MGM production values that a place like RKO couldn't bring to its later Tarzans, the story here was a bit much for me to swallow. |
tt0029345 | On the Avenue | Gary Blake (Dick Powell) stars in a new show, On the Avenue, with Mona Merrick (Alice Faye). The show contains a satire on The Richest Girl in the World, Mimi Carraway (Madeleine Carroll). Mimi and her father (George Barbier) are in the audience on opening night and they feel insulted. She goes backstage and tries to get Gary to take the skit out of the show. He refuses and calls her a "bad sport".
Shocked by the remark, Mimi decides to make a date with Gary. They spend the entire evening together and, by morning, have fallen in love. He finally agrees to revise the skit so it can no longer hurt the Carraways. Mona is in love with Gary and is furious when she hears about Gary's date with Mimi. When the Carraways appear to see the revised sketch, she changes it, without Gary's knowledge, making it worse than before. The Carraways decide to file suit against Gary.
To get back at him, Mimi buys the show from the producer and embarrasses Gary by hiring a paid audience to walk out on the show. Word leaks out to the press and Gary is now the laughingstock of New York. Furious, he tears up his contract, refusing to work with Mimi. Soon, Mimi becomes engaged to Arctic explorer Frederick Sims (Alan Mowbray). On her wedding day, Mona arrives and tells Mimi that it was she, not Gary, who changed the skit. She runs out on the wedding and is taken to city hall with Gary to be married.
The movie's action is interspersed with songs from the play, including Berlin's songs "He Ain't Got Rhythm," and "Let's Go Slumming On Park Avenue." | romantic | train | wikipedia | ON THE AVENUE (20th Century-Fox, 1937), directed by Roy Del Ruth, is a lively musical film capitalizing on the current trend of screwball comedies that never seems to go out of style: spoofing high society.
For instance, art imitating life with a theatrical company poking fun of a rich family with a well-to-do family recognizing themselves as the subject matter, and taking action.Gary Blake (Dick Powell), star of the latest musical show, "On the Avenue," has written a play about "The Richest Girl in Town," starring himself as the rich father with Mona Merrick (Alice Faye) in the title role.
Mimi Carraway (Madeleine Carroll), the richest girl in town, along with her father, the Commodore (George Barbier), Aunt Fritz (Cora Witherspoon) and fiancé, Frederick Sims (Alan Mowbray), an Arctic explorer, attend the opening and immediately recognize themselves as the topic of society fun.
Believing Gary is at fault, Mimi gets even by buying the rights to the show and hiring patrons to walkout during Gary's performance and using the Ritz Brothers to make him look ridiculous for every newspaper critic in town to see.
Once Gary discovers what Mimi has done, it becomes his turn to have the last laugh.With music and lyrics composed by the legendary Irving Berlin, the motion picture soundtrack is as follows: "He Ain't Got Rhythm" (sung by Alice Faye, and The Ritz Brothers); "The Girl On the Police Gazette"(sung by Dick Powell in 1890s attire, bowler and mustache); "You're Laughing at Me" (sung by Powell to Madeleine Carroll); "This Year's Kisses" (sung by Faye); "I've Got My Love to Keep Me Warm" (sung by Powell and Faye); "Slumming on Park Avenue" (Sung by Alice Faye and The Ritz Brothers); "You're Laughing at Me" (Powell); "Ochye Tchonia"(Russian Folk Song sung and performed by The Ritz Brothers); "This Year's Kisses'" (sung by Alice Faye); and "Slumming in Park Avenue"(sung by cast).In spite the fact that the Berlin songs, as good as they are, never became as legendary as "Blue Skies" or "White Christmas," he did acquire fine singers to promote his distinguished tunes: Dick Powell, on loan out from Warner Brothers, having the film's best song, "You're Laughing at Me," while Alice Faye, in a secondary role, contributes some of her best vocals, namely "This Year's Kisses." In between songs,the Ritz Brothers collaborate their version of bizarre comedy, ranging from facial expressions, crossed-eyes, and dressing in drag.
Others in the cast include: Joan Davis (Miss Katz, a secretary); Douglas Fowley(Eddie Eads); Stepin Fetchit as "Step," billed as Herman; Sig Rumann(Herr Hanestange); Billy Gilbert (Joe Papaloupas, the lunch wagon proprietor); Walter Catlett (Jake Dibble); and E.E. Clive (Ben, the Central Park Horse Cabby), Dewey Robinson (Lunch Wagon Patron), among others.The sequence where Powell (in tuxedo and top hat) and Carroll (in glittering white evening gown) are strolling through Central Park, in medium camera range the couple resemble that of current song and dance team of Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers.
In fact, watching Powell and Carroll together in this scene alone, anyone would expect them to go into their dance to "You're Laughing at Me," which doesn't happen.
With Seymour Felix credited as choreographer, much of the dancing takes place on stage.Regardless of listenable tunes, agreeable cast and above-average story, ON THE AVENUE is a forgotten item from the 1930s.
Its 1994 video cassette distribution consisted of an added bonus with a surviving comedy outtake featuring Alice Faye and the Ritz Brothers.
Glowingly photographed in B&W by Lucien Andriot on Zanuck's Twentieth Century Fox's lot, the blonde English beauty Madeline Carroll --best remembered for being handcuffed to Robert Donat in "The 39 Steps"-- never looked more enchanting.
The great character comic Sig Ruman ("To Be or Not to Be") shows up as an over-weight trainer in gym clothes, and for the grand finale even gets to sing part of "Slumming on Park Avenue" in a German accent.
Excellent Alice Faye Musical with lots of memorable tunes.
But "On the Avenue" has a taste and class of its own, not to mention lots of great and rollicking tunes including the memorable "Slumming on Park Avenue", "He Ain't Got Rhythm", "I've Got My Love To Keep Me Warm", and "This Year's Kisses".
The Irving Berlin score is among the best he ever wrote for the screen and Alice does well with Let's Go Slumming on Park Avenue and This Year's Kisses.
So Zanuck had to reach out to his former employer, Jack Warner, to borrow Dick Powell to play opposite Faye.
Ironically Powell got the hit song out of this film with I've Got My Love To Keep Me Warm.The rest of the cast is top rate.
Madeline Carroll plays a typical 1930s débutante and it's the antics of her family and actor-writer Dick Powell's satire of same that form the basis of the story.
My two personal favorites of the supporting cast are George Barbier who always hits the right note as Madeline's perennially choleric father and Billy Gilbert who has a great bit as a diner owner.Wonderful film, great entertainment..
Alice Faye's singing is a real plus for this movie and Dick Powell sounds pretty good as well.
Greatest strengths - Irving Berlin score, plus Dick Powell and Alice Faye.
Songs include : He Ain't Got Rhythm - This Year's Kisses - You're Laughing At Me - The Girl on the Police Gazette Slumming On Park Avenue - I've Got My Love to Keep Me Warm"On The Avenue" has been sitting on my video shelf for more than a dozen years - unwatched and overlooked.
An oversight.In spite of one of the other reviews above, the film is hardly the cinema tragedy painted by that reviewer.Dick Powell, on loan out from Warner Brothers to Fox, Madeline Carroll and Alice Faye and The Ritz Brothers head an all star cast of Hollywood favorites - Joan Davis, Billy Gilbert, Alan Mowbray, Walter Catlett, George Barbier, Cora Witherspoon, Sig Ruman, Stepin Fetchit and others.The production values are quite high, though the story in uninspired.
Sadly, "I've Got My Love to Keep Me Warm", the most enduring song of the film, is kind of tossed away in a production number of modest proportions.The Ritz Brothers are an acquired taste, perhaps.
Absolutely!Madeline Carroll is an attractive woman, but Alice Faye sings, dances and quietly radiant through-out the entire film.There are some amusing similarities between this film and "Hollywood Hotel" another Dick Powell from 1937 - both are show business stories, Powell gets slapped in the face in both films by a stuck up girl and uses the same facial expression both times, Powell escorts his female star around the circumference of an outdoor fountain at night in both films, Alan Mowbray also appears in both filmsIt's not a great film or a great musical, but it is as entertaining as many musicals of the era with it's greatest strengths being its score and its 2 top performers, Powell and Faye..
I don't know what's better - Irving Berlin's songs (Let's Go Slumming, He Ain't Got Rhythm - to start) or the production numbers with the Ritz Brothers (especially those two numbers just mentioned).
Just boy meets girl,but the score by Irving Berlin lifts this one above most of the others.Two of his gems "This years kisses" and "Your laughing at me" show why his songs are timeless.One of Alice Faye's early roles,and the one that made her a star..
"On the Avenue" was made in 1937 and starred Madeline Carroll, Dick Powell, Alice Faye and the Ritz Brothers.
However, Mona Merrick (Faye), the leading lady who is in love with Gary, performs the skit so that the family comes off as even worse.
Mimi retaliates by buying the production and planning some big revenge on Gary.There are some good numbers and wonderful singing by Faye and Powell; alas, the appeal of the Ritz Brothers has always been lost on me.
Alice Faye looks great and sings in her beautiful, smooth contralto; her stardom was just about to hit its peak.All in all, very pleasant.
Also had mixed feelings on the Ritz Brothers, though admittedly this is one of their better film outings.They don't disappoint in the dancing, which they are remarkably nimble at, and do have some entertaining sequences, with the slumming number being especially priceless.
Their comedy is an acquired taste, to many people and to me, and while some parts work others are overdone, gimmicky and bizarre so it comes over as irritating.Flaws aside, 'On the Avenue' works absolutely terrifically as entertainment and as a film on the whole.
"You're Laughing At Me" and "I've Got My Love to Keep Me Warm" are particularly noteworthy, while "This Year's Kisses" has the benefits of being beautifully sung and providing a lot of emotion.Roy Del Ruth directs adeptly, and his reputation from getting great performances from his casts is evident.
Both in the musical numbers and in the comedy and the drama, making for a script with a good balance of the funny and the heart-warming.Madeleine Carroll and Dick Powell are both stunning, as is an affecting Alice Faye in one of her better and underrated performances (though all her performances seen of her have never been less than very good).
The cast is top notch (Alice Faye is outstanding in her numbers and she brings real pathos to her role as the ignored but adoring admirer of Dick Powell), the story silly and witty in that charming mid 1930s screwball comedy style and the score by Irving Berlin is one of his very best.
The parody they do on "Let's Go Slumming" with Harry Ritz in drag, dressed in the identical outfit worn by Alice Faye only moments before, is just priceless.
Faye Stands Out. Ignore the sappy plot but enjoy the musical productions especially Faye and the Ritz Brothers (who dance bare feet in one of them!).
Silly backstage story with a beautiful but uninteresting leading lady in Madeleine Carroll, this 20th Century Fox musical is buoyed by a couple of happy factors: third-billed Alice Faye, in the last of her kewpie-doll roles (after this she was always a noble leading lady, and arguably less interesting), and an excellent Irving Berlin score.
Dick Powell, stuck with playing the sort of insipid roles he hated at Warners, doesn't seem that happy, and Cora Witherspoon, as Carroll's dotty aunt, dithers in a part that almost certainly was designed for Alice Brady.
But Faye's "This Year's Kisses" and "Slumming on Park Avenue" are fabulous, and the Ritz Brothers, while nobody's favorite comedy team, are well used.
It also features the Ritz Brothers as well as Alice Faye and Dick Powell.
Including the Ritz Brothers and Stepin Fetchit didn't help, that's for sure.
The only big plus in the film COULD have been Alice Faye--but she just isn't given much to do because the filmmakers didn't realize she would very soon be a mega-star--far bigger than Powell or Carroll.
Within a year of making "On The Avenue", Faye would be on to far better things and probably never looked back..
A scene in a small diner, featuring Billy Gilbert, Madeleine Carroll, and Dick Powell, is one of the most embarrassing comedy bits of the era.
Dick Powell does his best, but the plot keeps him from doing anything more than he did in Dames and the other Warner Brothers musicals of the time.
Alice Faye isn't given much to do but pout and sing some forgettable songs.
The problem with this movie is that Alice Faye should have had a bigger part and got her man at the end.
And, of course, you just knew that Gary Blake (Dick Powell) would found longer, lasting happiness with warm hearted Mona (Alice Faye) than wilful, spoilt Mimi (Madeline Carroll).
"On The Avenue" was her first prestigious film but top billed Madeline Carroll was always going to end up with the guy - in this case Dick Powell, who was still in his musical period.Gary Blake's musical "On The Avenue", a satirical revue that pokes fun at a prominent society family, is the hit of the season.
The course of true love doesn't run smooth and after witnessing a particularly barbed skit, Mimi secretly buys the show in order to embarrass Gary with a few surprises of her own thrown in.The most memorable thing about the film is Faye's singing of a couple of the most beautiful songs of the late thirties.
Dick Powell gets to sing "The Girl on the Police Gazette" and the melodic "You're Laughing At Me".
The cast is rounded out by the always good Alan Mowbray (who didn't have much to do), the Ritz Brothers, who seemed like an earlier version of Danny Kaye and Cora Witherspoon as a dizzy aunt, who was definitely no threat to Alice Brady.Recommended..
Songs: "I've Got My Love To Keep Me Warm" (Powell, Faye ); "Slumming on Park Avenue" (Faye, Ritz Brothers, chorus); "He Ain't Got Rhythm" (Faye, Ritz Brothers, chorus); "You're Laughing At Me" (Powell); "The Girl on the Police Gazette" (Powell, Faye, chorus); "This Year's Kisses" (Faye); - all music and lyrics by Irving Berlin.
88 minutes.SYNOPSIS: Famed as the movie that deleted its title song, what's left is the story of a beautiful heiress and her pompous father, who senselessly object to a satirical sketch of themselves in a Broadway show (thus giving the annoying show reams of free publicity).COMMENT: "On the Avenue" has a large number of good things going for it: Alice Faye, Madeleine Carroll, Dick Powell, George Barbier, Alan Mowbray, Sig Rumann, Billy Gilbert; Irving Berlin songs; a reasonably amusing story; 20th Century-Fox production values.On the other hand, it manages a number of big disappointments as well: Alice Faye, the Ritz Brothers, Stepin Fetchit; not enough Irving Berlin songs; a story that gets in the way; mediocre direction and (aside from the beautiful photography) lackluster technical credits.To take these problems one by one.
Even in her musical numbers she tends to play second fiddle to either Dick Powell or the Ritz Brothers.
It's clear that he was treated as number one by the studio (which is what we might expect, as he was loaned by Warners) with Miss Carroll coming in second, and Alice a distant third.
The hit song, "I've Got My Love To Keep Me Warm", is entertaining too.
OTHER VIEWS: Saddled with those obnoxiously raucous, hammily amorphous "comedians", the Ritz Brothers, who dare to lampoon Alice Faye of all people, "On the Avenue" is something less than the first-class Faye vehicle the credits promise.
Alice is often pushed aside not only by the demands of the straight story in which plays little part but even by her singing co-star Dick Powell.
When the wealthiest girl in the world and her family are spoofed in a Broadway musical revue, she takes action against the producers and ends up falling in love with the leading man!
That's about all the plot line in this Irving Berlin classic that stars Dick Powell (on loan from Warner Brothers), Madeline Carroll, Alice Faye, and The Ritz Brothers.
Dick Powell, always paired with Ruby Keeler in those Warners musicals (except when someone like Gloria Stuart or real-life wife Joan Blondell stepped in), came over to Fox for this two years after doing a delightful political musical spoof called "Thanks a Million".
When Powell decides he no longer wants to cruely spoof Carroll and papa George Barbier, Faye adds her own schtick into the revue material.
They do fine when spoofing Alice Faye's "Let's Go Slumming" by one of them appearing as her in drag.
Irving Berlin's music is wonderful, especially the standard "I've Got My Love to Keep Me Warm".Sad to state, Joan Davis, who plays a secretary in the film, has very little to do.
Still, this is a very enjoyable film, and worth a look on DVD, which has a great bio on Alice Faye attached..
Consider the plot: We're spoon-fed the information that Gary Blake (Dick Powell) has written and will star in a new Revue 'On The Avenue' just about to open on Broadway and co-starring Mona Merrick (Alice Faye).
Cut to opening night and after a number by Mona (He Ain't Got Rhythm) we segue into a sketch satirising 'the richest girl in the world' even as the subject of the sketch, Mimi Caraway (Madeleine Carroll) takes her seat in the orchestra along with her father, Commodore Caraway (George Barbier) and fiancé Frederick Sims, the well-known Arctic explorer (Alan Mowbray).
So, if you've seen Let's Make Love starring Yves Montand and Marilyn Monroe then you've more or less seen On The Avenue but Let's Make Love had neither Alice Faye nor an Irving Berlin score and On The Avenue had to make do with Dick Powell instead of the great Yves Montand.
Be that as it may Berlin contributed a fine score in which ironically singing joke Dick Powell, on loan from Warners, got to 'sing' what has become the best-known number, I've Got My Love To Keep Me Warm - for good measure he was also allotted two further ballads, You're Laughing At Me (how right he was) and The Girl On The Police Gazette, whilst Alice Faye, the best singer by a mile, wound up with This Year's Kisses, Slumming On Park Avenue and He Ain't Got Rhythm.
On the Avenue has a simple musical comedy plot.
Dick Powell plays the lead actor and creator of a musical comedy on Broadway.
The girl (Madelein Carroll) gets steamed up, goes backstage, slaps Powell around, and then .
He promises to change the play so it is less offensive to her, but the lead actress (Alice Faye) is in love with him and she manages to make it even more offensive when Carroll and her family come back to the theater to see it again.
Carroll then gets revenge by buying the musical from its producers and sabotaging Powell's performance.It's a promising little plot, but the attempts at comedy they hang on it often misfire terribly. |
tt1273658 | Elevator | Nine people board an elevator in a New York City skyscraper 52 stories tall: security guard Mohammed, television reporter Maureen and her fiance Don, comedian George, newly widowed Jane, overweight employee Martin, pregnant Celine, and the building owner Henry Barton with his spoiled ten-year-old granddaughter Madeline, who are on their way to a company party on the top floor.
On the way up, George, a claustrophobic, panics and, on the 49th floor, Madeline hits the emergency stop button to torment him. Henry presses the lobby floor button, but the elevator only descends by a few feet and stops. Henry presses the call button and alerts security. When the elevator fails to move, security dispatches a maintenance crew.
While waiting for help, the group talk with each other. Jane, who says that her son died in Iraq in the last year, confronts Henry and says her husband lost everything because Barton Investments pushed junk bonds. In her anger, she planned on "making a point" at the party. Suddenly, Jane collapses and dies of a heart attack, but before she dies, she admits that she has a bomb. After arguing, Celine checks Jane's body and finds the bomb secured around her waist by means of a bike lock. Don tries to look for a way out via the ceiling, to no avail.
Don stops Celine from smoking, and she asks when he became a concerned father. Maureen overhears and demands an explanation; Don confesses he is possibly the father of Celine's unborn child. Maureen is distraught. Henry once again calls security, but he angers them and they stop responding. Maureen documents the events with her phone and sends them to her television station, which picks up the story and starts running the footage she has captured.
The other force open the doors, and Don attempts to climb out. The opening is too small, but he uses Jane's walking stick to press the elevator call button. At the same time, Madeline presses several buttons on the control panel. The elevator's brakes deactivate, and Don's arm is severed as the elevator drops several floors. Mohammed uses a necktie as a tourniquet to slow the blood loss. Henry is left confused and dazed. George suggests that they pry open the doors again to see if the elevator has lined up with a floor in their drop, but they discover that the elevator stopped between floors, much to their dismay. Martin brings up the local news on his phone, and they watch a live interview with the bombmaker. The man was good friends with Jane's son and felt that he owed their family. He estimates it will detonate in ten minutes.
Desperate, George suggests dismembering Jane's body to separate her from the bomb and throw it down the shaft. When he loses his nerve, an angry Henry takes over and promises each person $1 million if they survive. While they are trying to tear the bomb off, a security guard on the intercom tells them that the bomb squad is there and lowering the elevator. They open the doors, make a small opening, and help all but Martin escape. When only Martin is left, he knows that the opening is not big enough for him to fit through. George desperately orders the SWAT members to raise the elevator to rescue Martin. As they lower the elevator to the basement to get him out there, Martin weeps, knowing his death is imminent. Before the bomb explodes, he regains his composure and realizes he is the hero, as he helped everybody survive.
Don is taken to hospital, and George asks Henry about the $1 million he promised each of the group, which he ignores. George and Mohammed have a brief discussion outside the building about what lies ahead for them. A news reporter asks George how he stayed so brave during the ordeal, to which George lies and said he had to stay calm for everybody there, then races off after a phone call from his wife, who had no idea what happened, to pick something up from the store. Mohammed looks on. | suspenseful | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0085033 | Inspector Gadget | John Brown is a security guard working at the Bradford robotics laboratory in Riverton, Ohio, run by Artemus Bradford and his daughter Brenda, to whom John is attracted. Brenda and Artemus create a lifelike robotic foot as part of the Gadget Program, an organization for manufacturing computerized law enforcement officers. Sadistic tycoon Sanford Scolex attacks the lab, steals the foot, and has Artemus murdered before escaping in his limo. Brown chases him down in his Chevette and in the ensuing chase Scolex blows up the upside down wreck and leaves John for dead. A bowling ball coming from the blast of the Chevette crushes Scolex's hand, forcing him to replace it with a mechanical claw and taking the alias "Claw."
John barely survives the explosion, and due to his devotion to pursuing her father's killer, Brenda chooses him to be the first test subject for the Gadget Program. Under Brenda's guidance, John becomes Inspector Gadget, equipped with a variety of crimefighting and investigating tools, as well as a car named the Gadgetmobile run by an AI program. Claw, with the help of scientist Kramer and minion Sykes, plots to use the technology he stole to make robotic mercenaries to sell to the world. However he is unable to get the foot to function due to a control chip left in the lab. Police chief Quimby, seeing Gadget as merely a publicity stunt and not a true police officer, refuses to let him help on the Bradford case, causing Gadget to procure evidence on his own. With help from Penny, Gadget suspects Claw, who Brenda now works for. Claw uses Brenda's robotics research to manufacture a new control chip for his android, a robotic version of Gadget, "Robo-Gadget," and sets it loose to cause chaos in Riverton. Gadget infiltrates Claw's lab but is caught and deactivated, Claw crushing his control chip.
Brenda, Penny, her dog Brain, and the Gadgetmobile track Gadget to the junkyard but find him unresponsive. Brenda kisses him, and the power of Gadget's heart reanimates his body without the need for the control chip. After dropping Penny and Brain off at home, Gadget, Brenda and the Gadgetmobile give chase to Claw's limo. Gadget and Robo-Gadget are thrown off and do battle, ending with Gadget detaching Robo-Gadget's head. Gadget uses his helicopter hat to fly to Claw's headquarters, where he is planning to escape with Brenda via a helicopter. In the confrontation, Gadget uses an improvised weapon to forcibly activate Claw's claw, breaking the helicopter's control stick and causing it to go out of control. Gadget and Brenda use a parasol to escape safely, and Claw lands via parachute but is arrested by the police. Penny arrives with a guilt-stricken Sykes who surrenders the technology Claw stole from Brenda and has told Penny everything about Claw's plans. Saluted by Quimby, Gadget departs with Brenda and Penny as Claw vows revenge.
During the end credits, several afterscene clips play, including Sykes going to a minion-recovery group, and the Gadgetmobile addresses the audience till the end of the credits. | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0118460 | The Shining | Jack Torrance arrives at the mountain-isolated Overlook Hotel, which is twenty-five miles from the closest town, to be interviewed for the position of winter caretaker. Once hired, Jack plans to use the hotel's solitude to write. The hotel, built on the site of a Native American burial ground, becomes snowed-in during the winter; it is closed from October to May. Manager Stuart Ullman warns Jack that a previous caretaker, Charles Grady, developed cabin fever and killed his family and himself. In Boulder, Jack's son, Danny Torrance, has a terrifying premonition about the hotel, viewing a cascade of blood emerging from an elevator door, and then falls into a trance. Jack's wife, Wendy, tells a doctor that Danny has an imaginary friend named Tony, and that Jack has given up drinking because he dislocated Danny's shoulder following a binge.
The family arrives at the hotel on closing day and is given a tour. The chef, Dick Hallorann, surprises Danny by telepathically offering him ice cream. Dick explains to Danny that he and his grandmother shared this telepathic ability, which he calls "shining". Danny asks if there is anything to be afraid of in the hotel, particularly room 237. Hallorann tells Danny that the hotel has a "shine" to it along with many memories, not all of which are good. He also tells Danny to stay away from room 237.
A month passes; while Jack's writing goes nowhere, Danny and Wendy explore the hotel's hedge maze, and Hallorann goes to Florida. Wendy learns that the phone lines are out due to the heavy snowfall, and Danny has frightening visions. Jack, increasingly frustrated, starts behaving strangely and becomes prone to violent outbursts. Danny's curiosity about room 237 overcomes him when he sees the room's door open. Later, Wendy finds Jack screaming during a nightmare while asleep at his typewriter. After she awakens him, Jack says he dreamed that he killed her and Danny. Danny arrives and is visibly traumatized with a bruise on his neck, causing Wendy to accuse Jack of abusing him. Jack wanders into the hotel's Gold Room and meets a ghostly bartender named Lloyd. Lloyd serves him bourbon whiskey while Jack complains about his marriage. Wendy later tells Jack that Danny told her a "crazy woman in one of the rooms" attempted to strangle him. Jack investigates room 237, encountering the ghost of a dead woman, but tells Wendy that he saw nothing. Wendy and Jack argue over whether Danny should be removed from the hotel and a furious Jack returns to the Gold Room, now filled with ghosts attending a ball. He meets the ghost of Grady who tells Jack that he must "correct" his wife and child and that Danny has reached out to Hallorann using his "talent". Meanwhile, Hallorann grows concerned about what's going on at the hotel and flies back to Colorado. Danny starts calling out "redrum" and goes into a trance, referring to himself as "Tony".
While searching for Jack, Wendy discovers he has been typing pages of a repetitive manuscript: "all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy". She begs Jack to leave the hotel with Danny, but he threatens her before she knocks him unconscious with a baseball bat. She drags him into the kitchen and locks him in the pantry, but she and Danny are both trapped at the hotel: Jack has disabled the hotel's two-way radio and snowcat. Later, Jack converses through the pantry door with Grady, who unlocks the door.
Danny writes "REDRUM" on the outside of the bathroom door in the family's living quarters. When Wendy sees the word reversed in the bedroom mirror, the word is revealed to be "MURDER". Jack begins hacking through the quarters' main door with a firefighter's axe. Wendy sends Danny through the bathroom window, but it will not open sufficiently for her to pass. Jack breaks through the bathroom door, shouting "Here's Johnny!", but retreats after Wendy slashes his hand with a butcher's knife. Hearing Hallorann arriving in a snowcat he borrowed, Jack leaves the room. He murders Hallorann with the axe in the lobby and pursues Danny into the hedge maze. Wendy runs through the hotel looking for Danny, encountering ghosts and the cascade of blood Danny envisioned in Boulder. She also finds Hallorann's corpse in the lobby. Danny lays a false trail to mislead Jack, who is following his footprints, before hiding behind a drift. Danny escapes from the maze and reunites with Wendy; they escape in Hallorann's snowcat, while Jack freezes to death in the snow. In a photograph in the hotel hallway dated July 4, 1921, Jack Torrance smiles amid a crowd of party revelers. | insanity, murder, haunting, flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt4191054 | Strange Magic | A realm divided between a land of fairies and light, and a land of bog creatures and darkness, living in the dark forest. Primrose flowers, which are a crucial ingredient to love potions, mark the border between the lands. Marianne is a fairy princess and heir to the throne of the Fairy Kingdom, and is engaged to be married to Roland, a handsome warrior who breaks her heart when she discovers him kissing another fairy on their wedding day.
Scorned, Marianne vows to never fall in love again. Sometime later, her sister Dawn, who frequently says she is in love, is distraught regarding the upcoming Spring Ball over which boy she could meet there. Her best friend Sunny, an elf who has a crush on Dawn, tries to cheer her up with a song, but they are nearly devoured by a giant lizard before a hardened Marianne rescues them. Sunny, having fallen through the border of the dark forest, finds a Primrose petal, which he subsequently hides when fleeing the forest.
At the ball, Roland tries to assert his intention to marry Marianne, who refuses and humiliates him out of the dance. He encounters Sunny and tricks him into returning to the dark forest to convince the Sugar Plum Fairy, who had been captured years ago by the Bog King, to create the love potion. Sunny acquires the petal he had hidden and with the help of a curious imp, ventures into Bog's castle, eventually finding the fairy and promising to free her in exchange for the love potion.
Their escape rouses Bog, who manages to recapture the Sugar Plum Fairy while Sunny escapes, followed by the imp, and Bog is enraged when he learns that Sunny has a vial of love potion. Sunny returns to the ball and tries to hit Dawn with the love potion during his musical number. Bog interrupts the celebrations and captures Dawn just as she is sprayed by the love potion and the imp steals it in order to spread it throughout the forest. Bog orders them to deliver the potion to him by moondown or he would harm Dawn. Defying her father's order, Marianne flies off after her sister while he grants Roland a small army to head off on foot to Bog's castle.
Meanwhile, Dawn falls in love with him due to the potion, and Bog has her imprisoned for his own sanity. Marianne arrives and fights with Bog to return her sister. When she realizes the severity of the situation, the two of them begin to find common interests. When they consult the Sugar Plum Fairy for an antidote, she explains that true love will negate the effects of the potion, recounting a time where Bog fell in love with another female in the forest who left him despite his use of the love potion on her, as she was in love with someone else at the time he used the potion on her. A mutual attraction begins to develop between Marianne and Bog, but it is only Bog's mother who sees it.
Sunny recovers the potion from the imp and gives it to Roland as they march on to the castle. Bog sees this and suspects that Marianne had set him up, breaking his heart again as he leaves her stranded in a spider web. She escapes and joins in the battle taking place at the castle. Sunny frees the Sugar Plum Fairy, Dawn, and (at the Sugar Plum Fairy's insistence) the love-stricken forest creatures that imp had hit with the love potion.
In the escape, Bog seemingly sacrifices himself by holding the mouth of his den open long enough for everyone to escape. He survives, to Marianne's relief, and Sunny reveals his true feelings to Dawn, who then reciprocates them, breaking the love potion's spell over her and they kiss, to her father's surprise. Roland sprays Marianne with the love potion, who pretends to fall in love with him, only to suddenly punch him and send him off the chasm, being hit by the love potion in the process.
Marianne and Bog, at the insistence of Dawn and his mother, finally admit their feelings for each other and kiss. | fantasy | train | wikipedia | If you look at the statistics of IMDb votes, you will find that Strange Magic unfortunately falls into the category of "either you love it or hate it" - very few in-betweeners.From a graphical animation viewpoint it is superb, with well thought out details backed by a lot of hard work.
For adult viewers who like animations (like me of course!) the plot, musicality and characters are significantly above the average animation, with a well-balanced socially and politically conscious theme.The immense flake it has got in the media and the "hate it" viewers are totally unwarranted.
Its main problem is the strong disconnect between its actual adult theme and characterization, vs the way it is portrayed and marketed as a family animation - a sort of fairy tale mummy bring kiddies to - and you can see many of the complainers fall directly into this category.In other words, it 'looks like' animation for kids, but the plot and dialogue is totally way too adult....
No, it's definitely not going to sit well with people who hate musicals and a little sappiness, but overall it's a pretty likable movie that isn't anywhere near deserving the amount of hate that it is getting.
I love the originality of this film even though in some places it does look a bit like 'Epic' however the story line is unique.
It's a little bit of a love story with a twist that my kids definitely thought was different..
For sure not the Disney uber techno whatever that most people expect from animation these days but I enjoyed it and was not disappointed at letting my 8,10, aw yr olds watch this.
I haven't seen any in between, but the story pulls one in and for those who've experienced anything like the main characters went through then this is a story you'll definitely want to watch.
I like the animation, the characters were fun and gosh the songs are so good (some of them are great classics)!!
I love the songs they sing in the movie ..I really do recommend it .....you might find it very entertaining even for an adult and I'm 30 by the way P.s. I think it's really dumb I'm not allowed to shout in my summery If I feel like shouting how much I liked this movie, I think I should be allowed to shout it out lol.
Because the movie is packed with innovative arrangements (and I must say some wonderful performances) of popular songs old and new, the story must remain simple, but it is not only solid, it incorporates some very funny as well as some sparkling and simultaneously touching moments.
I was NOT expecting this to be a Musical (you barely get to be familiar with the characters and setting animation when its one song after another)and I was about halfway through the movie and mentally writing a scathing review for IMDb, when the Storyline grabbed me in and swept me through until the predictable end.
Why don't you guys actually watch it and say what you honestly think...and why don't you go to the movie planning to like it, and try to have a good time like most movie goers would and unlike the critics who clearly decided to hate it before they saw it?
I know a lot of people have said bad things about this movie, but if you haven't given it an honest chance and watched it with an open mind, it's your loss.Wonderful movie full of adventure and fantasy.
I know a lot of people have said bad things about this movie, but if you haven't given it an honest chance and watched it with an open mind, it's your loss.Yep. My review is so nice, I said it twice!
The initial negative critical reception of "Strange Magic" is a perfect example of how such mismatched critical expectation can wreak havoc on a perfectly entertaining movie.With a colorful, over-the-top cast of characters with ticklish absurdity, and seamlessly integrated pop-rock karaoke performances, "Strange Magic" is an entertaining oddball sketch of the early millennial spirit wrapped into "A Midsummer Night's Dream." The film is a crowd pleasing cult classic in the spirit of "Willow.".
There is something incredibly beautiful, fun and spiritual going on with this movie that has been a pet project of George Lucas for 15 years, crafted as a storyteller's gift to his daughters, an ode to love in stark contrast to his career's fame for boy war fantasies.
If you want to watch Indiana Jones or Star Wars go watch those movies and leave this to people who like musicals.
Yeah, the poster tells us "Everyone Deserves to Be Loved" (to which I reply, "Here,Here!"), but if you're going to make your point by placing only the ugly characters in your movie on the poster and putting the ugliest of the ugly (even if they have only minor roles in the actual film) front and center, expect to turn some people off.
The animation is so good that I often felt like I was watching a 3-D movie!
It is a very beautiful movie to watch, the characters and colors are wonderful and they do a nice job with the various creatures.
Plenty for the younger ones to enjoy with bright beautiful animation, fairies, fantastic songs, and a scene stealing bad guy in the Bog King.
Great vocals, fun soundtrack, beautiful visuals, and a love story that isn't cut- and- paste from every other princess movie you've ever seen...
It has beautiful animation and it's a great music; I really love their version of "Three Little Birds" and "I Can't Help Myself ".
I understand why they did it from a business point of view, because of the popularity of things like Glee, but I feel it's lazy not writing your own songs and I hope this is not a new trend for animated films, Especially in animated films which, thanks to the Disney formula, we expect original content with the music composition instead of ripping off contemporary songs.
Something that could have been better achieved with smoother transitions and more character building.as it stands there is no emotional link to the characters from scene to scene because they are ether paper flat or emotionally all over the map with little to no reason.this is just a grab at trying to make something like Brave or Frozen, with no consideration to what actually made those movies work.because of this the plot looks something written in a mental patient's journal, has no closure, and ends up doing nothing well.The actors voices are fine, the art is great, but I would scrap the script and re-voice the whole thing..
Didn't expect much, seeing as the trailer did look absolutely awful, but when babysitting a family friend's four children (aged 15, 13, 11 and 9) while their parents went away they opted to watch the recently released on DVD Strange Magic.
The verdict from all of us was while it was not as bad as the trailer looked or quite the abomination that critics made out, it was not a good film and had a lot of faults.Strange Magic did have some redeeming merits.
Kelly Clarkson's song and the song sung by Roland at the ball are the only songs that come off well, at least they didn't sound butchered and the singing was quite decent for both, and Alan Cumming and Evan Rachel Wood are the ones that come off best in the voice cast, both give their all are very good in this film and their chemistry is actually enjoyable to watch.Unfortunately, while the voice cast are incredibly talented and give their all (most of them don't come off too badly), their talents are not very well used in this film with most of them saddled with very limp and not particularly funny dialogue that is likely to go over children's heads, very forced and stale jokes (apart from Griselda's wanting a wedding but instead getting a funeral line) and dull and annoying characters that are difficult to connect with.
The problems are the ghastly arrangements, that change some of them beyond recognition and strip them of their initial charm (instead making them little more than constant chaotic noise, the slower songs are so self-indulgently show they could induce boredom), and their placement, most of them misplaced, coming out of nowhere and grind the film to a screeching halt, often feeling like too much music (almost like a music video) and not enough story or characterisation.The story is far too muddled as a result of trying to do too much, Marianne's quest is at odds with everything else and lacks emotional impact or heart, the themes and characterisation are far too disconnected, a lot of half-baked ideas with abrupt transitions and the busier, noisier parts feel too frenetic for their good.
You get caught up in "how did they know this music?" and it really takes your mind out of the moment, that's not a good thing when you want to keep your audience focused on the story.
Most of the creatures were decent enough as you sort of expect "ugly" to be what you see when you think of trolls or goblins or any manner of strange thing that isn't human.The story itself was good, but it did seem to drag on a bit, there are points where you will be thinking "oh, they're gonna wrap this up pretty quick" and then find out that you're only half way through the movie.
Overall, it's just a basic love story, nothing really new or exciting except it's fairies and creatures.Not a terrible movie, not the best either, it does fall somewhere in between.
The animation is great and the realistic textures makes the sceneries really wonderful to watch,Only two things stop me from really loving this movie: 1.
Especially the shadows on their face around their mouth looks weird.Over all it's still a good movie, but you can tell these choices leave both kids and adults alike uninterested and not actually paying attention, which is unfortunate..
The movie opens with Marianne (Evan Rachel Wood), a fairy princess, flying around on her wedding day in jovial bliss singing Elvis Presley's "I Can't Help Falling in Love With You." She briefly wanders into the wrong part of the forest so we can meet the antagonist, The Bog King (Alan Cummings), only to return to her rightful place and continue the song in a duet with her groom-to-be Roland (Sam Palladio).
The film is unpretentious, and the familiar soundtrack will keep you (or at least me) singing along.The cast does a good job at providing the characters with their voice and songs.
I especially liked Allan Cumming as Bog King and Elijah Kelly as Sunny.There is strange magic in this film, because from the known and predictable we get something magic, perhaps just hocus-pocus, and a freaky love story.
A case in point is "Strange Magic," a decidedly low-grade entry in the genre that is as leaden as it is uninvolving, as earthbound as it is unmemorable.The story is loosely based on Shakespeare's "A Midsummer Night's Dream," a tale of two lands - one good, one evil - filled with fairies and imps and all sorts of other fantastic creatures falling in love and doing battle with one another.Probably the most distinctive aspect of the movie is that, rather than spending money on a score of its own, the makers of "Strange Magic" have instead opted to fork out the royalty fees for a dozen or so recognizable pop tunes from the 1950s to the present day (including, of course, ELO's "Strange Magic").
Beyond the score, the mise-en-scene is dark, dank and claustrophobic, and the screenplay, based on an idea by none other than George Lucas himself, is strangely lacking in originality and humor.The heavy emphasis on the love aspects of the tale, as well as the aforementioned over-abundance of musical sequences, will likely make the movie's target audience both listless and fidgety throughout..
However, when the love potion is stole from the forest, the Bog King (Alan Cumming), a despicable, ugly creature from the dark part of the forest, takes Dawn as a hostage until he gets the potion back to destroy the fabric of love in the kingdom, Marianne and her pal Sunny (Elijah Kelley) work to try and negotiate with the Bog King to get Marianne's sister back.George Lucas, who crafted the story for Strange Magic and allowed the film to be released on his Lucasfilm platform, has stated that Strange Magic serves as Star Wars for teenage girls.
Strange Magic rushes through all the development to focus on cookie-cutter characters and a hodgepodge of babble between them that it barely has time to work with what it has in any way that comes off as memorable.Another problem is the characters here, all of whom basic archetypes - fairies and grotesque-looking creatures, none of which ever breaking their mold into something worthwhile (or worth watching for that matter).
In an age where animated films are cast in a different light thanks to the progressive Pixar and DreamWorks in terms of storytelling and thematic weight, to focus yet another story on fairies and goblins and not provide them with any substance is like returning to the traditions of decades past that have proved to be defunct and unsuccessful.The characters are even more sacrificed in terms of substance when they have to break out in song, however, not songs written especially for the film - mainstream pop hits that are covered by the voice actors in the film, some multiple times throughout the course of the film.
Furthermore, the themes presented in Strange Magic about love find themselves having some merit (the idea that the idea of love shouldn't be discarded because of one mishap or shortcoming is a fairly original idea for an animated film), but are so muddled beneath layers of tiresome musical numbers and grotesque characters with little to say that it makes an hope of this film resonating on a deeper level completely hopeless.Voiced by: Evan Rachel Wood, Meredith Anne Bull, Elijah Kelley, Alan Cumming, Kristin Chenoweth, Maya Rudolph, Alfred Molina, and Sam Palladio.
But the music is unenjoyable, which is a big down side if your movie is basically a musicale.Its a pity cause I think the trailer was actually fun to watch, notable to mention the trailer almost have every moment when they not singing.
I am having trouble deciding whether it was intended that these fairies were making these songs up or if they'd heard them from humans (I don't recall any sign of humans in the film).However the animation was pretty and the character designs were cool.And I really liked the character of Sunny.
The film, for me, was enjoyable and entertaining from start to finish and I must admit I would have liked to have seen what happened next (although it did end at a good point).
It's as if this movie was tailor-made to annoy me.If you like character inconsistencies, plot holes, unfunny jokes, and uncanny valley faces, then this movie is for you.Sorry George, but your animated musical stinks..
Although my mood was completely killed by the constant musicals from dreadful pop songs -my boyfriend couldn't stand it after 8 minutes into the movie so I was left alone to watch it- the cheesiness and cliché plot, I really enjoyed the graphics, effects, colors, excellent effort put into the backgrounds and animation, all of the characters, the silly humor.
But if you're the kinda person that really likes musicals and cheesy plots, happy endings, love etc, you'll definitely like this movie!
The title gives it away, "Strange Magic." It's not called "Beautiful Magic" so enjoy the strange and unique quality of an entertaining movie that is filled with music from multiple eras and genres put together in a way that makes them all belong together.
And the soundtrack isn't bad, it's just a little annoying there being quite so many songs when a bit of dialogue here and there would give the viewer a break, help flesh the story out, and perhaps even make the musical interludes more enjoyable.
So aside from too many songs, basic plot, and some nice animation, is the film worth watching?
Beautiful graphics, but an excessive singing, characters which are too hideous or exaggerated, and a love story which is basically gross makes this movie unwatchable for adults and totally inappropriate for children.
So it starts off with singing and i'm like, "Ok, I can get into this and look at the HD Graphics!" But then, we went through 5 different songs from each different character (who couldn't apparently finish their sentences without getting interrupted in song) within the first 10 minutes of the movie!!
Unfortunately here, I couldn't really really root for any.On top of it all, a predictable plot plus too many loose ends.On the plus side, if you really enjoy animations, like me, forget about what's going on in the movie & just watch the immaculate animation.
I enjoyed most of it; parts of it are painful to watch but at least the music is good and it's an inspiring tale for kids.Wood stars as Marianne; a princess in the Fairy Kingdom, who's also next in line for the throne.
I'm a 90's kid so I'm used to music in movies but I thought this was a little too much, but somewhere along the way I completely fell in love with the movie.
While I'm in love with this movie I still would've liked to see some more action.
She just loved it and enjoyed it throughout.Great movie I'd like to see more of those!.
It is done elegantly and the music is not cheesy like most animated movies seem to be. |
tt0248667 | Ali | The film begins with Cassius Clay, Jr. before his championship debut against then heavyweight champion Sonny Liston. During the pre-fight weigh-in Clay heavily taunts Liston (such as calling Liston a "big ugly bear"). In the fight Clay is able to dominate the early rounds of the match, but halfway through he complains of a burning feeling in his eyes (implying that Liston has tried to cheat) and says he is unable to continue. However, his trainer/manager Angelo Dundee gets him to keep fighting. Once Clay is able to see again he easily dominates the fight and right before round seven Liston quits, making Clay the second youngest heavyweight champion at the time after Floyd Patterson. Clay spends valued time with Malcolm X and the two decide to take a trip to Africa.
Clay is then invited to the home of Nation of Islam leader Elijah Muhammad where he is granted the name Muhammad Ali due to his status of World Heavyweight Champion. His father, Cassius Clay Sr. disapproves of this. Ali marries Sonji Roi, an ex-Playboy Bunny, despite her not being Muslim and not abiding by sex segregation. While at home with his wife and children, Malcolm X is called by the Nation of Islam and is informed that his suspension has been extended and Ali will not go to Africa. However, Ali takes the trip to Africa where he finds Malcolm X, but later refuses to speak to him, honoring the wishes of Elijah Muhammad. He is extremely distraught when Malcolm is later assassinated.
Upon returning to America, Ali goes against Sonny Liston a second time and knocks him out in the first round. He and Sonji divorce after she continually objects to certain obligations Muslim women have, notably wearing a hijab.
After being officially called to fight in the Vietnam War with the U.S. Army, Ali refuses, and is subsequently stripped of his boxing license, passport and title, additionally facing five years in prison. Ali marries 17-year-old Belinda Boyd. After a three-year hiatus, his conviction is overturned and in his comeback fight, he goes against Jerry Quarry and wins by technical knockout in three rounds when Quarry gets a cut in his eye.
Ali attempts to regain the Heavyweight Championship against Joe Frazier. Dubbed the Fight of the Century, Frazier has the upper hand against Ali for most of the rounds. In the fifteenth round, he defeats Ali by decision, giving Ali the first loss of his career. When Frazier loses the championship to George Foreman, Ali makes a decision to fight Foreman and become the first boxer to win his title a second time.
Foreman and Ali go to Kinshasa, Zaire for the Rumble in the Jungle fight. While there, Ali meets a woman named Veronica Porché, and has an affair with her. After reading rumors of his infidelity through newspapers, his wife Belinda travels to Zaire to confront him about this. Ali says he is unsure as to whether he really loves Veronica or not, and just wants to focus on his upcoming title shot.
For a good portion of the fight against Foreman, Ali leans back against the ropes and covers up, letting Foreman wildly throw punches at him. During the fight, Ali realizes that he has to react sooner or else he will be knocked out or possibly die in the ring. As the rounds go on, Foreman tires himself out and Ali takes advantage. He quickly knocks out the tired Foreman, and the film ends with Ali regaining the Heavyweight Championship of which he was previously stripped. | violence, murder | train | wikipedia | This film has characters galore: from Jamie Foxx as Bundini Brown, who keeps chanting "float like a butterfly, sting like a beeee!" when everyone in the world thought Ali was going to die at the hands of Sonny Liston; Jada PinkettSmith as Ali's devoutly religious and adoring first wife; MichaelMichele playing Veronica Porche, a beautiful jet set model with whomAli had an affair, to a strong performance by Mario Van Peebles as Ali's conscience; Malcolm X, who forces Ali to think against himself and his adoring Black Muslim following in the interests of right and wrong.This film has irony, choreography, conflict, humor, drama; and accurately portrays the highest highs of any public figure I've seen in my lifetime, as well as some of the most bitter defeats.This is about male psychology.
I've watched his boxing films dozens of times, and I'll tell you that the scenes in this movie are perfect reenactments of what actually happened in the ring.
There's just something boring about "Ali." It tells Muhammad Ali's story, and it does so with what could be mistaken for passion, but it just felt rote and lifeless to me, and far too long.Will Smith and Jon Voight were honored with Academy Award nominations for playing Ali and Howard Cosell, respectively, but clearly I'm not the only one to be underwhelmed by the film, as it bombed with audiences and couldn't even crack 7.0 here at IMDb.Grade: B-.
The first thing that I am prepared to acknowledge is Will Smith's performance in this film; he was impressive and seemed to really get into the character of Ali. Although his acting was excellent in this film, I don't believe that he should have been Oscar nominated.
I'm sure a lot of what I describe as 'melodrama' and 'soap opera' type events did occur in Ali's life, but these elements don't make for an entertaining film and should have been kept to a minimum.All of the above isn't helped by the fact that the screenplay felt like it was put together in a haphazard way - the writers would shift from one aspect of Ali's life to another in quick succession barely giving you chance to digest what you've just seen.Although from a technical perspective this film was generally well put together and polished I did feel that the camera work during the boxing matches was pretty poor and as a result I didn't feel quite as involved in the action as I did when I've watched other boxing films.
If you want to see a good boxing biopic then I would recommend Cinderella Man. Muhammad Ali may be the Greatest, but this film certainly isn't..
Well, 'Ali' is based on a real legend and not a super-hero and so it is hell of a job to portray such a personality on big screen and make it so entertaining to watch.The only downside of the movie was to focus a little longer on effect of Africa on him.
But the "Loud mouth" CHAMPs witty and "punchy" remarks in his real life along, with his big blows inside the ring, will keep you glued for more.Overall, Will Smith's hard-work, Mann's adaptation and Mohammad Ali's legendary life makes 'Ali' a must watch for movie goers..
His life since retiring from boxing is equally interesting, in my opinion, but since Mann wanted to depict the most dramatic and challenging aspects of the Ali legend, I can't blame him for his choice of time frame.The cast is very strong.
Smith doesn't really look anything like Ali, and you are occasionally aware (mainly through Smith's imitation of the greatest's very unique speech) that you are watching an imitation, but this does not in any way detract from the film.Highly recommended for those interested in real-life drama and heroism, the civil rights movement in the 1960s and 1970s, and the intelligent and political side of American sports.
Although Will Smith's performance in the film was hypnotically amazing, I must say the real star of the movie for me was Michael Mann.
Muhammad Ali always did it his way, and from the brilliant opening sequence (which breaks all kinds of rules of time and space) to the last scene, that's what Mann does, and with great style, as ever.
Yes, the fight scenes are boring, I never thought I'd say that about a movie, but I did, for Ali.The fact that Will Smith was nominated for an Oscar for this movie is offensive.
Because Ali's life can be told in a very Beautiful Mind'esque way.Show how Ali became the greatest, then let his world fall, show how he begins suffering from his disease, until he has to stop boxing, and end the movie with some sort of heroic end moment, maybe an award show, where Ali get's an award like, sportsman of the decade/century whatever (I don't actually know if he ever got something like that, but it's just an example).
Whoever was responsible (I guess director Michael Mann, who also directed the great film 'The Insider') must have just got so swept up in the life of Ali that it slipped his mind.The film is so long and boring I found it hard to keep my eyes open.
At times it is like we are seeing a 'best of' of Ali's life, and those reviews that praise how authentically the scenes of the movie recreate those from news footage of Ali only go to back up this point.The film is obviously well-made, and all the actors do a pretty good job, but it's just so damn BORING!.
As always the problem of getting someone to play Muhammed Ali is that they don`t have the charisma to play the great man , hell not even Ali could play himself convincingly in THE GREATEST so I didn`t think Will Smith star of weak Summer blockbusters like WILD WILD WEST or the MIB films was going to be much cop in the title roleI do think Michael Mann is a good director and is rather underrated due to the fact he started out in television .
Mann does bring realism to the fight scenes in ALI , they`re maybe not as good as the ones in RAGING BULL but they still pack a punch ( Sorry couldn`t resist that one ) , compare the ring scenes here to the laughably bad ones seen in the ROCKY movies and you`ll notice a big difference .
My only criticism of Mann in this film is that a few of the scenes outside the ring lack narritive drive with one of the characters saying something to another character and having the camer a linger too long on the characters moody look , but this is a minor flawThe serious flaw is something everyone else has pointed out and is something that I quickly noticed while watching ALI - The script is too overlong .
I hadn`t read the readers comments untill I sat down to write this review so my views weren`t prejudiced but most of the reviewers are spot on , fight scenes feature as do politics , religion , Malcolm X , government spooks and Ali`s marital life and I can`t help thinking the whole film would have worked better if it had just focussed on Ali`s boxing career .
Probably Michael Mann intended to demystify Muhammad Ali; still I would appreciate if it were more fast-paced, more visually vivid, and more emotionally intense.While well-crafted cinematography seems over calculated at times, improvisational editing in the boxing game scenes properly recreates the jazzy atmosphere of the historic moments.
Director Michael Mann takes this individual and strips his life of heart and soul, making him so lacking in character that he's impossible to care for.Muhammad Ali is defined by his ego in this movie, not by his personality or any of the people in his life.
The omission of Clay being refused service in a diner upon his return from the Olympics and the 'Thrilla in Manila' leave huge holes in the make-up of the man and icon that is Muhammad Ali.The fight scenes are superbly choreographed using real boxers and this is part of another problem with the film is it a documentary or a movie?.
Not that it mattered, as Tyson was kayoed by Buster Douglas, the man he opted to face in lieu of Foreman.)There are moments of great beauty in this film, and any true boxing fan needs to see it (if only for the beautifully-choreographed fight scenes, which put to shame the lame-brained antics in the ROCKY movies), but anyone who doesn't follow The Sweet Science may find themselves outside looking in..
The movie is just a bunch of scenes which are put together with no real coherent story, You never know how much time has passed, at one time they say something like 'He finally got his title back which was taken from him in 1967' but it's not clear in which year he got his title back (Maybe unless you are a ali/boxing fan), it wasn't even really clear in what year his title got taken..
Some scenes are much too long and have no real relation to the movie (Like Malcom X being shot, you see a whole 5 minute or so on him being shot, but you only see 10 seconds of ali in mourn about his 'friend'..
Ali was fighting and all I could think to myself was, man, that guy looks a lot like Will Smith....
I have really looking forward to watching this film since I have been very interesting in boxing history and I am also finding Muhammad Ali as a great person.
It seemed like every time a new character was shown on screen, they were never introduced by exposition.The movie jumped around locations a lot, and the dialogue was confusing at times, unless you already knew the life story of Ali.Michael Mann can do better, but he seemed more interested in crafting the individual scenes instead of focusing on a coherent narrative.
Michael Mann, a director that is capable of making such good movies like Heat, The Insider, and Manhunter fell flat this time around.
I'm sure this movie left a lot out about Ali's life, but I don't think it left him looking like a champ.
It's the perfect opening sequence for this film.That's because that's exactly how this movie feels : long, drawn-out, and boring.How could someone make a film about Muhammad Ali's life & manage to make the film boring ?!?!?
I looked at my watch to see that nearly 2 HOURS had passed in the film !Even MORE bad pacing : Ali gets his fight with Frazier.
Still, while the fight itself looked boring, I will admit that Michael Mann did a brilliant job with showing the now-famous Foreman knockout punches by Ali. The angles he uses are different with each punch, and it is a very good perspective.Other aspects of this film bothered me.
Smith does indeed do everything that one can hope from someone who is portraying Ali. However, when you get right down to it, I think there are simply some people who it is more exciting to watch in a documentary or biography, rather than a Hollywood film production.So with that in mind, watch "When We Were Kings" for anything you would want to know about "The Rumble in the Jungle" or HBO's documentary on Ali-Frazier I.
I will say this though Will Smith was as good as any actor could be playing Muhammed Ali, he is excellent, unfortunately he's in the wrong film.
He's no doubt a fascinating character study, but the movie just seemed to miss the boat a bit.The cast is solid with Will Smith as Ali, putting in a decent performance, Jamie Foxx and Jon Voight.
Nobody is bad but I did think that the cast would have benefited from having fewer famous faces despite the fact that Silver, Wright, Williamson, Smith, Gaye, Michele, Morton, McGill and others were all fine (not sure about Van Peebles as Malcolm X or Williamson's Don King though).Overall this is a good film but it is at its best when it is just recreating the magic of Ali and his skills as a fighter and entertainer.
Sadly, this film, with bold aim and a careless hand largely missed the mark.Will Smith displays his best and most studied acting as Muhammad Ali himself, along side other great actors who play titan roles.
Unfortunately, much of what was shown of this decade focused less on boxing and more on personal affairs, as it spent much time on Ali being banned from the sport and scorned by the establishment for refusing to fight in the Vietnam War. And while (in real life) Ali's court case went on for years during his ban from the sport, the film didn't go the route of The People Versus Larry Flint, focusing on intellectual ventures surrounding the legal fight.Besides the great acting, the only high spike in Ali is the scene surrounding the Rumble in the Jungle fight that took place between Ali and George Foreman, in Zaire in 1975.
This problem is that though Smith is excellent in the role, thoroughly deserving his Oscar nomination, there's nobody on Earth who can ever be as interesting as the real Ali.For instance, the way in which the Rumble in the Jungle affair is recreated is highly impressive but watch "When We Were Kings" and you realise that the reality was so much better.Overall then a good film hampered by the fact that it deals with living-legend subject matter..
The fight scenes are so well acted Smith carries himself and boxes just like the champ, he looks like Ali in the ring.
In fact, at times it detracted from the drama when it was supposed to help support it.There are great performances by Will Smith as Ali, Jamie Foxx, and Jon Voight as Howard Cosell that make this movie worth seeing..
Will Smith steals every scene here as the title character, and you really should be watching this film for two reasons: Will Smith's interpretation of the legend, and Michael Mann's solid-as-always direction.The film's only drawbacks are its meandering pace at times, and how it often shows Ali's marriages like they were one-night stands.
I just purchased my copy of this film and watched it for the first time last night.This is a finely made film.I am a fan of just about everybody associated in the making of it.Will Smith,who I might add, actually deserved the recognition he received from the Academy as a nominee this year for best actor for his outstanding delivery of Muhammad Ali.Jon Voight,as usual,gives another unforgettable performance.I also found Mario Van Pebbles as Malcom X and Mykelti Williamson as Don King,both quite convincing.I almost didn't recognize Jada Pinkett Smith for a while,but she was quite good,having never seen her in such a mature role as this one.Others have spoken about how NOT this movie is about boxing,yet a look at the man Muhammad Ali,himself.His beliefs,his romantic interests,love for his religion,his comical interviews for the broadcast media.We are even shown his reflections on humanity and human injustices where he' s given an early lesson as a young boy riding in the 'colored' section in the rear of a bus.We see in this picture a Muhammad Ali who wants and needs to be a voice,a leader for the people,for black people.He proves this in his refusal of being inducted into military service,his choice not to fight in a war in Vietnam against a people he feels are of no threat to him,but rather a race of people who are suffering just like the oppressed in America.I am a Vietnam vet and I surely can understand his reasoning here,even though I went on to fight in that war.I enjoyed watching this movie and plan on watching it many more times.One thing that rather disturbed me about the film was the sound.I don't know if there are others here who have watched it at home and heard it through a surround sound system,but I found it difficult hearing dialogue at times.I kept adjusting my speakers but couldn't seem to find the right speaker level combo.At times the soundtrack was louder than the actors speaking.I wonder if anyonelse had this problem?All in all this again is a fine film..
this films is well made, it looks slick, will smith does well as ali and the boxing scenes are well done BUTthats it, the movie has nothing too say that we didnt already now about ali.
I love a good biography film and Ali is at times masterful in many ways and portrays all the parts of Muhammed Ali, not just the dazzling boxing life he led which is often used above his deep inner anguish at the prejudice in America.Will Smith is the only person in my opinion who could've played Muhammed, you can tell that he really wanted to play the part just by looking at his actions throughout the movie; it's deeply obvious that he's studied Muhammed in depth and this worked wonders on screen.
With an excellent performance from Will Smith, an impeccable director and enough time lapsed since the end of Ali's career to be objective, this should have been a great movie.But it's not.
As a result, large amounts of Ali's life and some of his key fights are never covered and after the film I felt I knew about as much about the man as before.I can't go as far as some people though and say `don't watch this film' as it is still a well made and thoughtful picture and worth seeing for Smith's take on Ali. Sadly, this could have been a great biopic though and isn't.
The best thing about the movie was the performance by Will Smith as Ali, and Jon Voight did a wonderful job of playing Howard Cosell. |
tt0037303 | The Spider Woman | Consulting detective Sherlock Holmes fakes his own death in Scotland in order to investigate a number of bizarre apparent suicides that he is convinced are part of an elaborate plot by "a female Moriarty". Returning to his assistant Watson in secret, Holmes notes that all the victims were wealthy gamblers, so disguised as "Rajni Singh", a distinguished Indian officer, he stalks London's gaming clubs.
It is not long before he encounters the villain of the piece, Adrea Spedding. Holmes discovers that she seeks out men short of money, persuades them to pawn their life insurance policies with her accomplices, then kills them. Holmes sets himself up as her next victim, discovering that she uses the deadly spider, Lycosa Carnivora, whose venom causes such excruciating pain that the victims kill themselves. Holmes also finds the footprint of a child nearby.
Searching for evidence Holmes and Watson visit eminent arachnologist Matthew Ordway, who may have supplied the deadly creatures. Holmes soon realizes that the man he is speaking to is an impostor, but the villain makes his escape. Searching the premises, Holmes finds the corpse of the real Ordway, as well as his journals, which allude to something or someone from Central Africa immune to the spider venom. This baffles Holmes until he finds the model skeleton of a child. However, Dr. Watson points out that the relation of the skull and the circumference of the chest prove it is not a child, and Holmes deduces that the Central African thing described in the journal is a pygmy.
Holmes and Watson continue their investigations at a nearby fairground, where Holmes allows himself to fall into the clutches of Spedding and her gang. Bound and gagged, Holmes is tied behind a moving target in a shooting gallery, at which Lestrade and Watson take pot shots with a .22 rifle. However Holmes manages to escape, and Lestrade and the police arrest Spedding, her gang, and the pygmy. | murder | train | wikipedia | This might rate as the most entertaining of all the Basil Rathbone Sherlock Holmes films, which I still think are the best renditions on film of the famous detective.This has a surprising amount of action and is simply a fun story to watch.
Packed into just one hour are such scenes as Holmes faking his death, a near-poisoning of he and Dr. Watson by gas, a strange little boy who hops around a room, tarantulas on the loose, on and on.Nigel Bruce is his normally funny Dr. Watson and Gale Sondergaard makes an excellent villain.
Sherlock Holmes matches wits with THE SPIDER WOMAN, a fiendish femme fatale responsible for a series of ingenious London murders.Holmes & Watson face one of their most dangerous enemies in this highly enjoyable little crime mystery.
The brief running time and abrupt conclusion are unfortunate, and the ultimate reason for all the murders is really not all that exciting, but the vivid characters and dangerous adventure more than compensate for the film's shortcomings.Basil Rathbone & Nigel Bruce remain perfect in their leading roles.
Bumbling Bruce only grows more lovable with each passing film, playing his part with fierce loyalty as well as charming naiveté.Oscar winning actress Gale Sondergaard portrays the title role with deadly feline guile, teasing Holmes the way a cat plays with a mouse.
Back for their recurring roles are Dennis Hoey as dogged Inspector Lestrade and dear Mary Gordon as Mrs. Hudson.This film -- which was based on wisps of plot from Conan Doyle'sThe Final Problem, The Empty House, The Speckled Band, The Sign of Four, and The Devil's Foot -- followed SHERLOCK HOLMES FACES DEATH (1943) and preceded THE SCARLET CLAW (1944).
The 1942-43 Holmes/Watson films are often pathetic nonsense involving Nazi spies and have Holmes dashing all over the place firing guns at all and sundry, which doesn't work at all.Yes, this is wartime, and the targets in the fairground shooting gallery are Hitler, Hirohito and Mussolini, but this is a proper detective story about mysterious murders.It's an amalgam of Conan Doyle's original stories The Sign of Four and The Final Problem rather than a farrago of cod secret agents, and it works pretty well as a mystery.Gale Sondergaard makes a marvellous villain, and plays excellently opposite Rathbone's Holmes.Well worth while.
One of the best in Universal's Sherlock Holmes series, The Spider Woman dispenses, for the most part, with the overt WWII subject matter (which was also reasonably sparse in the previous outing, Sherlock Holmes Faces Death).
Rather than battling Nazi agents, Rathbone's Sherlock is embroiled in a truly Holmesian mystery, surrounding several apparent suicides...which Holmes, naturally (and correctly), deduces to be homicides.Though the opening credits proclaim "Based on a Story by Arthur Conan Doyle," The Spider Woman adapts (quite freely) major incidents from no less than five of Conan Doyle's tales...The Sign of Four, The Speckled Band, The Final Problem, The Empty House (also referenced in Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon), and The Devil's Foot.
False advertising, maybe...but the script (courtesy of Bertram Millhauser) manages to weave them all into a framework that makes for a fun and intriguing mystery.Other assets include the performances, which are better than in some of the earlier films (though Rathbone and Bruce never disappointed), and the more sure-handed guidance of regular directer Roy William Neill...by this time, a vast improvement over the direction in his first Holmes outing, Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon.
The mannerisms, the voice and the screen presence of the great actor combine to create a fantastic representation of the eloquent detective and you really can't imagine anyone but Basil Rathbone playing Sherlock Holmes in these films.
With an involved, detailed mystery and an elegant adversary played by Gale Sondergaard, this is one of the most entertaining features in the Sherlock Holmes series of movies starring Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce.
It also features the usual pleasant camaraderie between Rathbone and Bruce, plus Dennis Hoey as Inspector Lestrade.As "The Spider Woman", Sondergaard creates a memorable opponent for Holmes.
"Spider Woman" finds Basil Rathbone matching wits with the enticing title character, superbly played by the beautiful Gale Sondergaard.
Adrea Spedding (Gale Sondergaard), the evil mastermind of The Spider Woman, concocts a particularly absurd scheme in order to make herself filthy rich: she convinces wealthy men with cash flow problems to use their life insurance policies as collateral against a loan; then she bumps them off, not with anything as simple as a gun or dagger, but by releasing a pygmy into the ventilation ducts where they live, and having him release a poisonous spider into their bedroom while they sleep.
With no clues as to why the men have killed themselves (the obedient spider obviously having wandered back into the vent having done his duty), the press report these mysterious deaths as 'pyjama suicides'.Holmes (Basil Rathbone) naturally suspects otherwise and cooks up with own crazy plan to discover the truth: whilst enjoying a relaxing fishing break in Scotland with trusty sidekick Watson (Nigel Bruce), the great detective fakes his own death, and then adopts a series of silly disguises to investigate the case, soon coming face to face with The Spider Woman, who proves to be every bit as devious and deadly as Holmes' old nemesis Moriarty, but better looking.This preposterous plot makes for one of the most entertaining films in the series, Holmes' sporting patently false facial hair for his roles as a rude postie and a down-on-his luck Indian Rajni Singh, Watson making a complete fool of himself with an eminent entomologist, and Spedding ordering pint-sized Obongo from the Congo, the Prancing Pygmy (Angelo Rossitto, one-half of Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome's Master Blaster) back into his case!
Hoey is always a welcome addition to the cast and he is a good comic relief that takes the pressure off Bruce somewhat.Overall, the plot didn't totally hang together for me and it lacked a little bit of logic as a result of the slightly unusal nature of the murders and the criminals involved but it is still very enjoyable and the conclusion in the fairground is a lot tenser than a B-movie deserves to be!.
Sherlock Holmes encounters his most formidable foe since Professor Moriarty in "The Spider Woman," among the best of Universal's Holmes series.
The fifth in Universal's Holmes series is all about Sherlock Holmes.One key to the film's success is Gale Sondergaard, an Oscar winner for "Anthony Adverse," who is perfect as the spider woman of the title.
Both Rathbone and Nigel Bruce, perhaps challenged by Sondergaard, rise to the occasion and are in top form as Holmes and Watson; the reliable Dennis Hoey and Mary Gordon are back as Inspector Lestrade and Mrs. Hudson, respectively.
Roy William Neill once again helms, and Charles Van Enger, who shot "Sherlock Holmes Faces Death," also returned to film this entry in the series with the appropriate atmosphere.
Stir a witty script with Rathbone and Bruce in fine form, add a clever plot, season with several close brushes with death, garnish with a diabolical villain and the result is "The Spider Woman," a top entry in the Sherlock Holmes series..
One of the best of the Basil Rathbone Sherlock Holmes series at Universal.
It's got many of the trademarks of the series, including the lovable buffoonery from Nigel Bruce's Watson, Holmes in disguises that shouldn't fool anyone, and Dennis Hoey's Inspector Lastrade, always a day late and a clue short on every case.
As the title suggests, this time Holmes has got to do with a TRUE 'spider woman' - not that she bears any resemblance to those not very charming creatures, but she's exactly as dangerous and reckless as them, and even 'works' with them (by the way, she's played by Gale Sondergaard, who specialized in mysterious and sometimes really fatal ladies)...But at the beginning of the story there's a mysterious series of 'pyjama suicides', where quite successful and seemingly happy people suddenly commit suicide in the middle of the night, without leaving even a note behind them; and for solving those very strange 'incidents - which aren't suicides, but MURDERS, as Holmes has already deduced - Holmes goes 'underground' in a very spectacular way.
And there he meets dark, beautiful Adrea Spedding - the 'spider woman'...So, of course, there's no great mystery there; we get to know very soon who's the instigator of those 'suicides', and how they're carried out - but that leads us to REAL, enormously poisonous spiders and other sudden, unexpected dangers and a lot of other features that render this movie REALLY suspenseful!
The Basil Rathbone Sherlock Holmes films are generally good(great in the case of Hound of the Baskervilles, Adventures of Sherlock Holmes and Scarlet Claw) films and Rathbone's Holmes is easily the best of the movie incarnations of the characters, second only to Jeremy Brett overall.
While not in the top 3 Rathbone/Holmes entries, The Spider Woman is one of the better and most entertaining films of the series.
The dialogue is both thought-provoking with Holmes and amusing with Watson and Lestrade, while the story is well-paced, suspenseful and easy to follow with a few far-fetched moments(though not enough to harm the film), fun-to-spot references to Sherlock Holmes stories and a tense and eerie climax.
The acting is very good, Gale Sondergaard's beautiful but chillingly and deliciously deadly performance steals the film but Basil Rathbone is still his usual brilliant self and Nigel Bruce(less of a bumbling fool than he can be in the role) and Dennis Hoey provide some amusing moments without jarring.
All in all, an extremely entertaining film, if you love Sherlock Holmes and Rathbone's portrayal you are most likely to really like The Spider Woman.
Sherlock Holmes in The Spider Woman faces a female master criminal, one as Basil Rathbone describes 'as deadly as Moriarty'.
Gale Sondergaard is in the infamous title role and she's got the brain of a Professor Moriarty and the charm of a Mata Hari.In fact as the film begins Holmes and Watson are finally on a long postponed fishing trip in Scotland and they are discussing a series of suicides of wealthy men, men dying with no apparent cause.
Then it's a battle of brains and wits.The Spider Woman is a good if not great Holmes feature totally dominated by Gale Sondergaard's evil character.
Poisonous gases, creepy crawlies, a delectably evil villainess, and a quite wonderful fairground finale, help to make The Spider Woman a very strong entry in the Rathbone/Bruce cannon of Sherlock Holmes pictures.
If anyone unfamiliar with the Basil Rathbone Sherlock Holmes films is looking for a good place to start his cinematic journey, I would exuberantly recommend THE SPIDER WOMAN.
In "The Spider Woman" Rathbone's Holmes is matched against arguably one of the finest actresses of her day, the sadly under- appreciated Gale Sondergaard.
As happened in the case of Basil Rathbone's portrayal of Sherlock Holmes, it seems that Sondergaard apparently played her part too effectively.
"The Spider Woman" is far from the best film of the 1940s, or even the best of the famous Sherlock Holmes series.
The Shortest (61min) of the Basil Rathbone-Nigel Bruce Sherlock Holmes Movies, it is Nonetheless Packed with Odd Characters and some Edgy Violence.
Also, Gale Sondergaard as the "Spider Woman" Adds a bit of Sultry Nefariousness to the Picture.The Actual Spider Murder Attempt on Holmes is Photographed in an Eerie, Realistic Bent of Horror and the Suicides at the Beginning are Violently Graphic for the Time.
There is a lot of Verbal Sparring between Rathbone and Sondergaard and She has a Mute, Hopping, Fly Catcher of a Nephew and Employs a Pygmy.Holmes and Watson Face Death a Number of Times and the Climax at a Carnival is a Standout of a Surreal Suspension of Disbelief.
THE SPIDER WOMAN (Universal, 1943), produced and directed by Roy William Neil, the seventh installment to the "Sherlock Holmes" franchise starring Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce, the fifth for Universal, ranks another agreeable entry as well as one of the shortest (62 minutes) in the series.The story begins with series of "pajama suicides" (spelled "pyjama" in the newspaper clipping montage) in the London district where numerous gamblers are found murdered in their beds.
When a woman asks her husband, Robert, regarding to these reported suicides, "Where is Sherlock Holmes?" the next scene finds Holmes (Basil Rathbone) on a holiday in Scotland accompanied by his colleague, Doctor Watson (Nigel Bruce).
Disguised as a Hindu named Raghni Singh, Holmes encounters the alluring Adrea Spedding (Gale Sondergaard) at the gambling tables, who turns out to be more of a challenge for Holmes than his arch enemy, Professor Moriarty.Though the first in the series to eliminate "Sherlock Holmes" in the opening titles, it's a wonder whether or not the movie was initially distributed as SHERLOCK HOLMES AND THE SPIDER WOMAN, considering an obvious inserted title, "The Spider Woman" super imposed over a different background, or possibly shortened prior to its theatrical release?
This seventh entry in the Sherlock Holmes series finds the lovable detective matching wits with an audacious and most deadly villainess, the titular Spider Woman, and her eight-legged pets.
This film, "The Spider Woman," is based on the Conan Doyle story "The Speckled Band." Holmes fakes his death in order to investigate some diabolical murders that appear to look like suicides, hoping to force the criminals out into the open.
it pits sherlock holmes against a woman with a deadly spider who commits these so called "pajama suicides." gale soundergard plays a great role in this movie, marking her down in the history books.
The fantastic Sherlock Holmes has solved yet another murdering mystery, in a nice '40's atmosphere and with fantastic performances by the cast especially Basil Rathbone as the legendary well known Sherlock Holmes is fantastic.It's a shame you can see that this movie has been based on a book.
As for me, I'm a HUGE fan of the stories but watch these Universal films and try to pretend the characters are NOT Holmes and Watson...just two dummies.In "The Spider Woman", once again the story seems to have been written by a lemur.
Here, Sherlock Holmes(played by Basil Rathbone) and Doctor Watson(played by Nigel Bruce) investigate mysterious deaths that the press have called "The Pajama Suicides", but are really cunning murders committed by the Spider Woman(played by Gale Sondergaard), whom Holmes calls a female Moriarty, who uses spiders to bite the men in their sleep, the venom driving them to suicide in a plot to collect on their life insurance policies.
Spider Woman, The (1944) *** (out of 4) Fast paced fifth entry in the series has London being hit with a wide range of suicides but Holmes (Basil Rathbone) thinks that murder is behind it.
I found Sondergaard to be good in her role but I wouldn't say she delivered a great performance, although she's certainly better here than the strange The Spider Woman Strikes Back, which was released two years after this.
As the villain of the piece and Spider Woman of the title, Gale Sondergaard actually brings an element of class and sophistication to the role, proving a formidable adversary along with her retinue of henchmen and underlings.The carnival atmosphere and shooting gallery location of the film's finale provides one of the more unusual backdrops to solving the mystery of the 'pyjama' murders (not a mis-spelling, I'm using the film's version), as Holmes thwarts the villains by escaping his bonds while the authorities descend to put away the Spider Woman once and for all.
Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce are excellent as always, but the film belongs to Sondergaard, who would play many similar characters, but none as deliciously deadly as this one.
When a wave of apparently inexplicable suicides strikes London, Sherlock Holmes sniffs a more sinister plot and uncovers a diabolical insurance scam masterminded by a femme fatale, Adrea Spedding, also known as The Spider Woman
This one is my personal favourite of the fourteen Basil Rathbone-Nigel Bruce Sherlock Holmes quickies of the forties, not least for the fabulous performance by the beautiful, charming, wildly talented Sondergaard as the arch-villainess.
Followed by a curio, The Spider Woman Strikes Back, which is a horror quickie with no relation to the Holmes movie, but also features Sondergaard as the villain.
The Spider Woman sees the worlds foremost detective Sherlock Holmes (Basil Rathbone) again trying to solve a baffling case.
The general public demand Sherlock Holmes investigate, however at this point in time Holmes is visiting Scotland with his trusty assistant Dr. Watson (Nigel Bruce) for a bit of fishing which also provides the perfect opportunity for him to fake his own death, Holmes suspects that a woman is behind the supposed suicides & that with himself appearing to be dead she will drop her guard.
Holmes feels he is on the right track especially when an attempt is made on his life using the world's deadliest spider...Produced & directed by Roy William Neill The Spider Woman was the seventh in a series of fourteen Sherlock Holmes films staring the duo of Rathbone & Bruce as Holmes & Watson.
Sondergaard makes a good villain & is quite nice to look at.The Spider Woman is a good Holmes murder mystery & if you like these types of films then I have no hesitation to recommend it.
Our hero Sherlock Holmes, Basil Rathbone, seems to want nothing to do with this in taking a vacation in jolly old Scotland to go fishing with his good friend and colleague, as well as room-mate, Dr. Watson, Nigel Bruce, while all his jumping, out of windows or in front of cars and trucks, is gong on.Within the first five minutes into the movie Sherlock gets a dizzy spell and falls off a cliff to his "death" in the stream below.
The Spider Woman is another fun and enjoyable outing for Sherlock Holmes and his sidekick Dr. Watson. |
tt0098967 | 3-4 x jûgatsu | This film opens with Treasury officer Jimmy Mercer (Wesley Snipes) and his partner Brady (Dan Hedaya) doing some undercover work, when Mercer's fellow agent is shot and killed by a new man, Ronnie (Viggo Mortensen) that criminal Red Diamond (Dennis Hopper) pulled out of jail. Now on a snap of anger and thoughts of revenge, Mercer wants to find the killer and take him down before he gets transferred to Newark. Although a cop and close colleague claims over dinner that Mercer must do it "by the book," Mercer replies that "when I'm done with this motherfucker, I'm gonna put him in a box..... by the book."
A background theme is the closing of a big band dance emporium called the Palace. Lonely, Red takes hooker Vicky (Lolita Davidovich) there for dancing. Lolita is also involved romantically with Mercer, who is estranged from his ex-wife.
Red continues to try to build a relationship with his old girlfriend, waitress Mona, (Valerie Perrine). Typically, he has manipulated and betrayed her in the past.
Red is under increasing pressure to repay mob debts to boss Tony Dio (Tony Lo Bianco). He manipulates Ronnie into a crime spree culminating in the murder of the boss and ransacking his apartment. He tells Ronnie to meet him at the palace at 9 PM to split up the money. He asks Mona to meet him there as well. Mercer is building his case against Red and arrives at the murder scene seconds too late. Red is soon arrested and a net is laid for Ronnie at the club
At the club Red again manipulates Ronnie in an attempt to escape, yelling gun as he ducks. Ronnie is shot by Mercer in the exchange and Red almost escapes. As Red is taken away in the police car Mona arrives, seeing him pass by. In the last scene Jimmy asks Vicky to leave with him.
The epilogue reports that they actually did move to Newark. | violence, revenge, comedy, murder, sadist | train | wikipedia | Takeshi Kitano's yakuza related trilogy consists of Violent Cop, Boiling Point and Sonatine.
All these films are very different together, but they still share the usual elements of Kitano: Violent Cop is the bleakest, Boiling Point is the funniest and also oddest and Sonatine is like the combination of these two previous films, and Sonatine is also the greatest in the trilogy and also one of Kitano's most beautiful and greatest films.
Boiling Point is very comic, but has also some Kitano elements of beauty and peace that we could see in his forthcoming films like Sonatine and Hana-Bi. Boiling Point tells the story of a baseball team and its relationship with the local ruthless yakuza gang.
When couple of the team members decide to get a gun and fight some justice to the situation, we meet Kitano's character, a little criminal, who also has troubles with the yakuza.
Kitano's character in this film is the most perverse and twisted I've ever seen!
What follows is tragic and comic happenings as these tragicomic people try to get rid of the greedy and exploiting yakuza criminals, and stay alive at the same time.There are many fine elements in this film, and this is pretty close to Sonatine, as both films have peaceful and incredibly beautiful scenes involving sea and flowers.
But Boiling Point is definitely not a mere comedy, it is a Japanese yakuza story with comical elements.
There is a brilliant scene involving flowers and two machine guns, as Kitano and his pal decide to finish the miserable life of one yakuza team!
In Kitano's films, usually guns are for men like extended penis: so important in order to "be someone." Violence is usually the only way Kitano's characters are able to communicate together.
And this was only the beginning as we witnessed the beauty and power of films like Sonatine and Hana-Bi couple of years later.
There is no comparison for his films, they are so personal and come straight from the heart of this man.Boiling Point is not Kitano's greatest film, but still more than noteworthy.
There are many great scenes and acts committed by the characters, and perhaps the only flaw in here is that the film is little too long and slow at the end part of the film.
But once the end scene comes, it is again something we could expect from Kitano, and is pretty similar to Sonatine's finale.Boiling Point deserves 8/10 rating as a very interesting piece of Kitano cinema, and this is a hint of what was to come from this man couple of years later!.
The second consecutive film by Takeshi Kitano with an outsider who goes against the system.
Uehara is the meanest and sadistic person in a Takeshi Kitano directed picture.
"Beat" Takeshi in Boiling Point(1990) follows in the footsteps of fellow tough guys, Lee Marvin, Robert Mitchum, Charles Bronson, Klaus Kinski, Richard Widmark, Harvey Keitel, Telly Savalas, and Lawrence Tierney.
Its scenes like this that gives the film a brutal and dark comic edge.
3-4x Jugatsu/Boiling Point(1990) is the first true Takeshi Kitano film that has his trademarks of off beat images, moments of dullness, and sudden violence more completely than in his debut, Violent Cop(1989).
Also the first film that Takeshi Kitano wrote and directed on his own.
Takeshi Kitano has a passion for the sport of baseball which is why the main character is a member of his local town's baseball team.
Takeshi Kitano films a flash forward sequence that reminds me of Point Blank(1967), the early films of Alain Resair and Nicolas Roeg, plus The Limey(1999).
A favorite motif of Takeshi Kitano is the scene of people hanging out and playing at the beach.
In his best films, there is a scene where the main characters go to the beach to relax and take it easy.
These scenes show the good nature of the characters of Uehara and his best friend when they are not doing bad things.
The beach motif in Boiling Point(1990) is for the main characters a place to find peace and tranquility with its calm waves, soft sands, and cool blue skies.
Violence in Boiling Point begins and ends quickly without any regards for the aftermath.
The violent behavior from the characters of the film is something that is in all of us human beings whether we like it or not.
3-4x Jugatsu/Boiling Point(1990) is the second chapter in the lifelong "Beat" Takeshi series.
It's a great movie if you like to sit back for a while and think deeper about what you're watching - it seems that throughout the film there's not much going on - the main character remains mute for most of the time, there is no music soundtrack in the background, the plot itself is not a straightforward one - you'll get the point right only after the last scene.In some moments "Jugatsu" seems to be telling a simple and seemingly a little boring story - but a second after it blows in your face with aggression so intense that you start to think were it came from.
This is the second film of Kitano, but the first which is really his, since "Violent Cop" was not initially to be directed by him.
Though not a real 'yakuza' film, they play a great role in it, and many scenes, are they shot in a bar, on the beach or in a flower field remind us of what Kitano will shoot later for Hana-Bi or Sonatine.
A very interesting film, very satirical towards the japanese society and the yakuzas that behave violently just to convince themselves they are tough guys; even if I personally prefer his other movies..
While not as good as some of Takeshi Kitano's other films like Violent Cop or Fireworks, this still has much to recommend it.
Having heard good things about Takeshi Kitano's films, I was looking forward seeing "Boiling Point", having purchased both this and "Sonatine" in the sales, even though it broke my Golden Rule of impulse buys: don't buy any film with quotes from un-named sources on the sleeve (especially if they've got spelling mistakes), in this case "A Genuine Original", "Beautifully directed, Indispensible viewing".Anyway, the quotes were more misleading than lying, as the film definitely is both original and beautifully directed, but only really indispensable for fans of Kitano's, who don't need me to tell them to watch it.
For everyone else, it probably isn't the best Kitano film to start with.
Marketed as an action movie, the film is much more and much less: it has more heart and intelligence, but much less in the way of action or excitement, feeling more like a slow-burning drama with a little bit of gun-play and one big explosion; John Woo this ain't.
However, the acting, from Kitano in particular, is excellent as is the stylish direction: Kitano fills the screen with beautiful images and twisted humour.Worth a look, if you keep in mind that's very slow moving tale, with more baseball action than there is action movie.
Boiling Point (1990) is about a goofy guy who works at a convince store and plays sandlot baseball in his spare time.
What's most remarkable about it is the way Takeshi Kitano shoots, his camera is always static, and hi has a very personal view of violence and humor.Not everyone will understand this story that deals with amateur baseball players and yakuzas, but I guess i's quite advisable for those who love the films of this Japanese director.*My rate: 6/10---------------- ---------------- ------------------ ------------------- -------------------.
I was challenged by this film I found myself wanting to know more about one actor in particular `beat' Takeshi.
This movie contains the classical elements of Kitano's movies: Long and comical silences followed by short violent scenes, a (little) romance and nice pictures.Paradoxically, what prevented me from REALLY REALLY enjoy the entire story of this candid boy seeking revenge were the parts with Kitano playing.
Super-creative mix of crazy (but "working") story, violence, humor etc.I can't really explain what it is that's soo good, but I will ll try:Silent Japanese gansters are SO MUCH TOUGHER than tough-mouthed western ones (I'm talking movie gansters/crooks NOT "Godfather" types.
Just seeing the Japanese guys interacting is much more interesting than seeing westeners (because I'm a westerner)Their humor is soo strange (but hilarious)What can I compare this movie with?
I have recently been going through Kitano's films, and upon seeing thing, I think it's probably the one I like the least.
It has it's moments, but as a whole is too slow and bizarre for it's own good.Just like most Kitano films, it has his signature style.
The sudden violence, the comedy, all those things, but in this film it just doesn't work.
One of the big issues seems to be that Kitano doesn't show up until that later point, and it just feels like not enough of Kitano's character.
But I will say that if you interpret it one specific way, it kind of explains the general odd-ness of the film.Kitano is known for including some strange things in his movies, but this one just kinda takes it over the top.
While the movie can be quite funny, such as a scene involving an M16 hidden in a bouquet of flowers accidentally going off and causing a funny reaction, it just feels like it delves too deep into the comedy and it makes any drama feel odd.
There's also some confusing things, like Kitano's character raping his male friend, and then him not really caring the next day.
There is also a scene where it appears like we are supposed to see the same event twice, but it is all done in one take, which makes it quite confusing, but kind of impressive at the same time.
(It sounds odd but when you see him hitting her, you can't help but laugh)Overall I think this is a weak Kitano film.
This precursor to Sonatine and Hana-bi (as well as Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown) has all the elements that become Kitano trademarks - the skewered dark humour, deadpan expressions, misogyny, long periods of everyday life suddenly punctured by explosions of brutality.
This quest brings them into contact with the violent and erratic Uehara, who himself is losing to those within the Yakuza holding all the power.I have been using my DVD rental club to catch up on some foreign films recently and part of this has been watching the films of Takeshi Kitano.
Instead we have the film generally moving in no specific direction in regards structure or characters and it is hard not to find it all a bit dull.
The cast don't help by not making that much of an impression at any point other than scenes involving Kitano.
As director and writer, Kitano may have been making cultural points (as some have suggested) and that context is required but, without the film helping me get it, I have no way to get this context and as a result the film just doesn't work for me.
I'm not sold on this "context" argument because it does come from those who will not have Kitano questioned but either way the film is not a success if it cannot even serve those who are familiar with Kitano.Boiling Point is not a total waste of time as it does have moments and things of interest but as a total product it is inaccessible, dull and built on a plot that is either uninteresting, incoherent or both.
If this was the first Beat Takeshi movie I'd ever watched I'm sure I would be absolutely baffled!
The first hour or so of 'Boiling Point' features an amateur baseball player who crosses some local Yakuza with disastrous results.
The movie really picks up when Beat Takeshi's character is introduced.
Even Kitano's previous movie 'Violent Cop', which was much less ambitious (and a little uneven) was more enjoyable for me than this.
So I say newcomers to Takeshi best steer clear of 'Boiling Point', but fans will find it to be fascinating albeit flawed viewing..
I saw "Hana-bi" and thought it was good so I rented this with a friend.It was going to be a comedy but after about 20-30 minutes we was wondering what we was watching.A weird film that is almost impossible to understand and IT´S NOT A COMEDY.
When the film had end I thought it was awful and bad but a couple of weeks later I started to think about it and I now I like the acting and some scenes but see "Hana-bi" instead.2/5.
I suppose that is supposed to indicate a mild-manner man reached his boiling point, but really it just felt contrived.I suppose maybe if you are a fan of Beat you will like this movie, but he is only in it for a portion of the second half.This is the lowest I have rated a film in a year and I have seen some really bad movies..
The movie starts out with a baseball game and focuses on this character and shows how he is apathetic towards life, a born loser.
Now, this movie doesn't have a lot of blood, but every scene of violence is brutally disturbing.
The whole middle of the movie deals with their adventures with Takeshi's completely sadistic, perverted, insane character.
I guess they put that whole part in as a way to show the two baseball players loss of innosense as they witness multiple acts of gratuitous sex, dismemeberment, murder and arms dealings.The two guys return to the outskirts of Tokyo and take the gun to the Yakuza headquarters.
Japanese filmmaker Takeshi Kitano directs, writes, and acts in this gangster comedy about the yakuza, the notorious criminal organization of Japan..
As always, Takeshi Kitano focuses on characters excluded from Japan's 'economic miracle'.
Although it gave Kitano his second director credit, Boiling Point has all the hallmarks of a film by a debut director determined to get every idea he has ever had about film, life, death and baseball up there on the screen.
This is just the beginning of a couple of days of violence.Considered one of Kitano's lesser films by many, Boiling Point is a slow paced movie that has some explosive bursts of violence.
Also this film displays the image of the sea that is a trademark of Kitano's films and like Sonatine, Hana-bi, and much later parodied in Takeshis', the sea is the locale of both play and violence.
Looking back, Boiling Point is indeed a flawed film, but one can see the elements that would one day make Kitano an internationally acclaimed director.
Recommended for fans of Japanese film, highly recommended for fans of Kitano Takeshi..
The yakuzas take the affront seriously, and there's a complicated multiple-layer plot, involving the main character's sudden improvement as a baseball-playerhe hits a home-run but overruns the slow runner ahead of himand somehow involving a friend and former gangster, Iguchi, who demands respect, and sends the guy to Okinawa to buy a gun.
In Okinawa with the slow runner he falls in with a pair of gangsters who party all night and get guns the next day; the main gangster, played by the director "Beat" Takeshi, is casually mean to his girlfriend, and he kills the gun merchant and the very formal yakuzas who are demanding money from him.
this is my 3rd Kitano movie (after Violent Cop & Brother), i enjoyed this as much as the other, Kitano's movies move at such a pace which you think would be boring but there's something about his movies which draws you in.This film was pretty much hilarious and brutal at the same time, i mean you wouldn't usually laugh at woman getting used for sex and getting slapped about harshly at every turn, but the way Takeshi's character does it makes it hilarious, especially the scene involing the ice lollies outside the store...bizarre humour.This movie had a strange story, it never goes into enough depth to make you get real sucked into the characters, so the final scene, whilst spectacular kind of leaves you thinking 'they all died?'.Other than a pretty shallow story i found this very entertaining...Takeshi's movies rule!
Takeshi appears in an extended cameo in the middle part of the film in a role that has little to do with the main plot; in fact, his thirty-minute turn is like a 'mini film' in itself, a portrait of an insane gangster who dishes out violence to one and all, whether it be his henchman, his girlfriend or the gangsters who formerly employed him.
This is Takeshi gone over the edge; he's a sadistic, vindictive character and incredibly his cruel exploits are played for laughs, particularly his repetitive violence towards his girlfriend.
Because watching this guy commit rape (on his own henchman in the film's most depraved moment) and casual violence isn't my idea of fun.
I liked Takeshi in VIOLENT COP and BATTLE ROYALE, but I couldn't stand him here.It's a shame, as the rest of the film is pretty damn good.
Although the film offers the Japanese style of taciturn acting – the male actors rarely show expression on their faces – Yanagi makes us sympathise with his character's plight and, indeed, actually like him.Although the film is essentially a slow-burning revenge flick, you'll be surprised to hear that the action and violence is limited.
There's only one shoot-out in the film, although there are quite a few beat-downs and other moments of crazy violence.
Many of the incidents within the film, such as the car and motorbike accidents and the casual violence meted out by Takeshi himself, are played for laughs but the humour value is intermittent, not always working.
But then Takeshi Kitano showed up and then all the fun started.
I think everyone who likes the Tarantino violence should see this movie. |
tt0096073 | The Seventh Sign | Around the world, unusual phenomena are occurring that bear resemblance to signs of the Biblical apocalypse; these include a mass death of sea life in Haiti and a devastating freeze in the Middle East, and at each of these locations, a mysterious traveler (Jürgen Prochnow) opens a sealed envelope just prior to the event taking place. The Vatican tasks Father Lucci (Peter Friedman) with investigating these events, though Lucci advises that they are all either hoaxes or have other explanations.
Concurrently to this, Abby Quinn (Demi Moore), a pregnant woman living in California, prepares for the birth of her child. Her husband, Russell (Michael Biehn), is the defense lawyer representing Jimmy Szaragosa (John Taylor), a mentally handicapped man dubbed the "Word of God Killer" after murdering his incestous parents and claiming he did so because of God's guidance. Jimmy is convicted of the crime; Russell hopes to convince the court that he should be spared the death penalty.
In order to raise additional money for when their child is born, Abby and Russell rent a room to the mysterious traveler, who identifies himself with the name David Bannon. Soon thereafter, the usually hopeless Abby begins to have terrible nightmares of a man resembling Bannon being struck down by a soldier, who then demands "would you die for him?" of her. Abby also learns of the apocalyptic signs that have occurred, and combined with her nightmares and Bannon's suspicious behavior, she begins to worry that something terrible is taking place. She snoops through Bannon's papers and discovers an ancient note that leads her to believe he intends to harm her child. When Abby confronts Bannon about this, he tells her that God's grace is empty and soon, no souls will remain to be given to newborn people. Abby panics and stabs Bannon, only for him to shrug off the injury and claim that he "cannot die again."
It becomes apparent that "David Bannon" is actually the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. Abby's nightmares are visions of his original crucifixion, and she is the reincarnation of Seraphia, the woman who offered Jesus water prior to his death only to be turned away by Cartaphilus, Pilate's porter who struck Jesus.
The signs of the apocalypse continue to unfold, eventually causing a giant storm. Abby connects with Avi (Manny Jacobs), a Jewish man who helps her understand these events and their meaning. Father Lucci, who has come to California as part of his investigation, finds her and hears her concerns. However, while meeting with Lucci, Abby spots a ring on his finger identical to the one Cartaphilus wore and learns that Lucci is Cartaphilus himself, cursed to wander the Earth until Christ's return to judge mankind. He intends to allow the apocalypse to take place so his curse will finally be broken, allowing him to die.
Abby flees from Lucci with Avi's aid, and together the two of them go to a motel to find a Bible and learn what will happen next. They discover that the sixth sign will be a solar eclipse that will take place the next day, meaning that the fifth sign — the tortured death of a martyr for God's cause — must take place very soon. Abby sees a television broadcast announcing that clemency has been denied to Jimmy, who will be immediately executed, and realizes that his death is the fifth sign. In a panic, she calls Russell and drives to the prison where the execution will take place in a desperate attempt to stop it. However, Lucci has already infiltrated the prison as a priest, intent on guaranteeing the apocalypse cannot be stopped. Abby manages to reach the others before the execution occurs, but when Lucci sees her, he steals a gun from one of the guards and attempts to kill Jimmy himself. Abby leaps in the way of his shots and is wounded, and the guards shoot Lucci, but they are unable to save Jimmy, who is killed by a shot to the head.
Almost immediately, the eclipse begins, triggering the sixth sign, a catastrophic earthquake. Despondent over her failure to save Jimmy and the rest of humanity, Abby goes into labor and is rushed through the disaster to a nearby hospital. Despite the best efforts of Russell and the doctors to help her, the child's heart stops beating as Abby gives birth, thus fulfilling the seventh and final sign, the birth of the soulless child. However, Abby has another vision of her past as Seraphia and remembers Cartaphilus' demand. Finally finding true hope, Abby answers the question in the affirmative — "I will die for him" — and reaches out to her child, who revives and holds her finger. Her soul is thus transferred to the child, saving him at the cost of her own life. This act of faith ends the apocalypse. Jesus appears in the hospital and tells Russell that Abby's sacrifice has refilled the Hall of Souls, ensuring that mankind will continue to survive. Jesus leaves, but not before telling Avi to remember the events he has witnessed and write them down for future generations. | cult, murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt5033000 | Jaws 19 | During a late-night beach party on Amity Island, a young woman goes swimming in the ocean. While treading water, she is violently pulled under. The next morning, her partial remains are found on shore. The medical examiner ruling the death a shark attack leads Police Chief Martin Brody to close the beaches. Mayor Larry Vaughn overrules him, fearing it will ruin the town's summer economy. The coroner now concurs with the mayor's theory that the girl was killed in a boating accident. Brody reluctantly accepts their conclusion until another fatal shark attack occurs shortly after. A bounty is then placed on the shark, resulting in an amateur shark-hunting frenzy. Local professional shark hunter Quint offers his services for $10,000. Meanwhile, consulting oceanographer Matt Hooper examines the first victim's remains and confirms the death was from a shark attack.
When local fishermen catch a large tiger shark, the mayor proclaims the beaches safe. Hooper disputes it being the same predator, confirming this after no human remains are found inside it. Hooper and Brody find a half-sunken vessel while searching the night waters in Hooper's boat. Underwater, Hooper retrieves a sizable great white shark's tooth embedded in the submerged hull. He drops it after finding a partial corpse. Vaughn discounts Brody and Hooper's claims that a huge great white shark is responsible and refuses to close the beaches, allowing only added safety precautions. On the Fourth of July weekend, tourists pack the beaches. Following a juvenile prank, the real shark enters a nearby estuary, killing a boater and causing Brody's son, Michael, to go into shock. Brody finally convinces a devastated Vaughn to hire Quint.
Quint, Brody, and Hooper set out on Quint's boat, the Orca, to hunt the shark. While Brody lays down a chum line, Quint waits for an opportunity to hook the shark. Without warning, it appears behind the boat. Quint estimates the shark to be 25 feet (7.6 m) long weighing 3 tons and harpoons a barrel into it, but it drags the barrel underwater and disappears.
At nightfall, as the three swap stories, the great white returns unexpectedly, ramming the boat's hull and killing the power. The men work through the night repairing the engine. In the morning, Brody attempts to call the Coast Guard, but Quint smashes the radio, enraging Brody. After a long chase, Quint harpoons another barrel into the shark. The line is tied to the stern, but the shark drags the boat backwards, swamping the deck and flooding the engine compartment, forcing Quint to sever the line to prevent the transom from being pulled out. He then heads toward shore, intending to lure the shark to shallower waters and suffocate it, but the overtaxed engine quits.
With the Orca slowly sinking, the trio attempt a riskier approach: Hooper dons scuba gear and enters the water in a shark-proof cage, intending to lethally inject the shark with strychnine using a hypodermic spear. The shark demolishes the cage before Hooper can inject it, but he manages to escape to the seabed. The shark then attacks the boat directly, killing Quint. Trapped on the sinking vessel, Brody stuffs a pressurized scuba tank into the shark's mouth, and, climbing the mast, shoots the tank with Quint's rifle, destroying it. The resulting explosion obliterates the shark. Hooper resurfaces, and he and Brody paddle to Amity Island clinging to boat wreckage. | violence, murder | train | wikipedia | Feeding this movie to sharks would be cruelty to sharks.
Yes, this movie exists.
It has people in it, and things happen in it.
And it's an insult to Jaws 4, which isn't a very good movie, but it's miles ahead of this one.
Some nitwits with far too much time (and apparently alcohol) on their hands in Ufa, in the Republic of Bashkortostan, in south central Russia, near Kazakhstan, came up with this putrid Jaws satire, obviously titled after the joke in Back To The Future part II, and obviously filmed on someone's cell phone.
And allegedly on a budget of 100 Rubles, which, as of this writing, converts to exactly US$1.62.Absolutely worthless, this opens with poor cell phone-quality shots of people in a lake being swallowed whole by a caricature of a shark, superimposed over the footage.
There's not even stock footage of a shark, just this stupid caricature.
The shark caricature can attack those on land, jump through the air to get people by surprise, attack some Russian cupcake on her driveway, and even get some guy on the toilet.
This could be taken as a satire of the declining quality of Jaws sequels, and sequels in general, but yet there is no discernible plot or story, and it never climaxes, so much as it just stops after 58 excruciating minutes, followed by five minutes of closing credits.
Even with a run time of only 63 minutes, there is a lot of padding, with one goofball stumbling through the woods for more than eleven minutes before the shark caricature and terrible blood splatter effects get him, and several scenes of a Russian watching Putin on television for several minutes at a time.
But I wonder how long it will be before some village idiot will give this ten stars and say it's the greatest movie ever, without really having watched it?
Or how long will it take until that worthless little troll with two accounts rates down my comment, and any other comment he/ she finds on this page?
"0 out of 2 people found this comment useful"..
Best thrash from Russia.
This movie really genius.
I never saw so cheep shark movie.
The story is talking about ghost shark, whose killing a lot of random people.
Genius!
I never saw stories about ghost shark, whose killing random peoples!
Special effects so bad, that good.
The shark is flat!
Total flat!
Only the Russian hardcore photocopy and 2D!
The blood is stock footage, whose directors downloaded on YouTube searched: "free green screen effects" The best scenes are murder of Andrey Demianskiy and explosion of train with crash (whose didn't recorded on camera).Actors are good.
Ivan Yakovidish played the Russian Chuck Norris – Ivan Kuznetsov.
He is former policeman, whose need to save lives in his city of Ufa. Another good actor is Sergey A., whose played the typical Russian video-blogger, whose want for views photograph the ghost shark.
Where is Oscar for Sergey A.?
He is the best actor in the universe!
So, I recommend this movie for fans of trash and b-movie.
So bad, that good..
First Russian shark movie!.
This movie is first Russian shark movie.
It's very funny!
"Jaws 19" is the cheepest movie I have ever seen.
After watching this "Oscar movie" I had a fountain of emotions.
One question repeated in my head.
How could this stupid Russians film this stupid movie?
Flat flying ghost shark kills random people.
Actors from russian villages aren't actors!
Some special effects downloaded and edited in this movie from YouTube.It's total ATAC..
How is this getting a better rating then Jaws The Revenge?.
Jaws 19.
From Russia...without love.
Horrible is the too nice of a word to explain this mess.
Mess is too nice of a word to explain this....oh, CAN'T I JUST SAY IT, IMDB!?
Jaws 19 is about the shark finally being "Neutralized" by the military.
Neutralized means they killed it, but they still didn't kill it.
The waters got struck by lightening, and brought up the ghost shark.
Now, the ghost shark can not only attack on the beach, but land too!
So, is everyone safe.
Of course.
Don't panic.
Nothing but computer graphics that look like cut out stickers from the class of Kindergarten.
Think I'm joking?
Then just accept that I'm not, and stay away from this atrocity of a...I'm not even going to call it a movie or a film.
Trash is too nice of a word.
The word I want to use would get this review banned..
I'm interesting, whose drugs Sergey A.
was smoked for filming this total microblockbuster.
Only for 100 Russian rubles this movie has greatful action scenes with flying 2D ghost shark.
The ghost shark looks very scary and angry.
Other characters of movie also looks very good.
Some episodes are really funny.
It's good horror comedy.I'll recommend this genius movie for everybody.
You must watch this cool movie..
Best shark movie in 2015!.
Jaws 19 - a real godsend for fans of films about sharks.
Nothing of the kind in the world.
Let's start with the plot.
The Baltic Sea coast shark terrorizing.
Military shark manages to win, and it became a ghost.
Incredible plot twist.
Next - better.
Ghost shark begins to kill all who stand in her way.
Killings delivered perfectly.
Of particular note are times when the shark leaps out of the toilet and garbage.
These scenes are very creative and unique can not be found.Actors played well.
Anyone who even accidentally hit the shot, played at.
That only is the cry of a girl that kills the shark on the road.
Locations in the film varied.
The action takes place in Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, Abkhazia.
This is a huge plus.We should also mention the very shark - it is delicious!
All American films sharks draw three-dimensional.
Shark Jaws of 19 - flat.
Directors have to be very creative people to come up with that.Overall Jaws 19 is a film that should be shown at the universities of novice filmmakers.
New directors should take an example from Sergei A.
and Ivy Crap..
This Is The Worst Jaws Film Ever.
(WARNING: MY REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS.
AND A LOT) I Don't Care If People Say This Is Creative.
Its Just Like Any Other Shark Film But With A Ghost Shark.
That's It. All The Deaths Are Very Garbage And Too Gory For My Taste.
And When The Shark Shows Up Out Of No Were At A Person, You Know What Type Of Death Its Gonna Do. So Yeah.
The Film Is Complete Garbage And No One Should See It. Also I Have To Add More Cause Of IMDb.
:/ So One Death Contains Some Girl Getting Eaten By The Shark.
Doesn't Sound That Bad Does It?
Well Guess What.
A lot OF GORE AND BLOOD FLYS ALL OVER THE PLACE.
And To Make Matters Worse They Add Blood On The Camera, And The Blood Looks So Much Like CGI It Looks Like Some 12 Year Old Was Making A Movie And Just Used Windows Paint And Edited It With Some CGI Crap And Called That Real Looking Blood.
Now You Can Say "Oh Thats Not THAT Bad :P".
This Movie Is Down Right Terrible.
Too Much Blood And Guts And A lot Of Nudity And Teen Drama.
If You Look At JAWS: The Revenge And Jaws 5 Jaws 6 etc You Would Say Those Are MASTER PIECES Compared To This.
I Give This Film A 1/10. |
tt0326672 | Chobits | The series centers on the life of Hideki Motosuwa, a held-back student attempting to qualify for university by studying at Seki prep school in Tokyo. Besides a girlfriend, he dreams of having a persocom (パソコン): an android used as a personal computer, which is expensive. On his way home one evening, he stumbles across a persocom in the form of a beautiful girl with floor-length hair lying against a pile of trash bags, and he carries her home, not noticing that a disk fell on the ground. Upon turning her on, she instantly regards Hideki with adoration. The only word the persocom seems capable of saying is "chi" (ちぃ, Chii), thus he names her that. Hideki assumes that there must be something wrong with her, and so the following morning he has his neighbor Hiromu Shinbo analyze her with his mobile persocom Sumomo. After Sumomo crashes during the attempt they conclude that she must be custom-built.
Shinbo introduces Hideki to Minoru Kokubunji, a twelve-year-old prodigy who specializes in the field of custom-built persocoms. Minoru's persocoms, including Yuzuki, a fairly exceptional custom-built persocom, are not able to analyze Chi either, and thus they conclude that she may be one of the Chobits, a legendary series of persocoms rumoured to have free will and emotions. Although this is a possibility, Minoru is confident that it is only rumour. Yuzuki also adds that she does not resemble any persocom model in any available database and so she must be custom made after all.
A major part of the plot involves Hideki attempting to teach Chi words, concepts, and appropriate behaviours, in between his crammed schedule of school and work. At the same time, Chi seems to be developing feelings for Hideki, at an emotional depth she is not supposed to possess, and Hideki struggles with his feelings for her. The need to figure out more about Chi and her mysterious functions and past becomes a pull for the characters in the series.
Hideki's feelings intensify for Chi regardless of her being a persocom and despite his friends' painful experiences involving other persocoms. Chi becomes aware of her purpose through a picture book series called A City with No People which she finds in a bookstore. The books speak about many different things involving human and persocom relationships: persocoms and their convenience as friends and lovers, how there are things that they cannot do and questioning whether a relationship between a persocom and a human is really one-sided. It also speaks about the Chobits series; that they are different from other persocoms, and what they are incapable of doing unlike other persocoms. These picture books awaken Chi's other self, her sibling Freya who is aware of their past and helps Chi realize what she must do when she decides who her "person just for me" is. Together, Chi and Hideki explore the relationship between human beings and persocoms, as well as their friends' and their own. | psychedelic, romantic | train | wikipedia | The jokes are hilarious, the characters are lovable, and the obviousness of the fan service rivals that of Evangelion.I have to admit, I get very involved with anime.
She makes a great pair with Sumomo, a mobile persocon who belongs to Hideki's best friend.Before I get too far ahead of myself, let me explain a little about Chobits since the majority of even anime fans probably don't know much about it.
The gist of the Chobits story is about a farm boy turn city slicker named Hideki.
There's extremely little out right nudity, mostly just a ton of cute fan service.One thing I really like about Chobits is that it's very upbeat.
CLAMP is great at this kind of overall upbeat anime, and Chobits is no exception.
The story revolves around a farm-boy, Hideki, who has come to the big city of Tokyo to try to raise his grades so that he may enter college.
It soon becomes obvious that Chii hides a great secret within that cute little body.The series has a nice naivistic feel to it, sometimes the story-line of an episode is almost at grade-school level.
His problem with shamefulness is of course extra strong in sexual matters.There are some deeper questions raised in the series too, such as the question if love of technology and might be keeping people apart.
Interestingly questions like these are actually given at least a little bit of depth, rather than just picking one of the possible answers as the truth!This anime series is more of a very long story, it doesn't meander around too much like series sometimes do.
There is a clear beginning and an end (after 26 episodes) and the whole main story has obviously been thought out before the series was made.
Superb anime series, gets a bit uneven at times but delivers 100%.
More particularly - man falls in love with found machine and, behold, it's vice versa.I stumbled upon these series by accident on the french MCM channel; the french dubs are perfect (Chii is exquisitely dubbed), but after a few episodes I got me the subbed originals - and found out that MCM messed up the episode sequencing.
The underlying storyline (who/what is Chii, what will happen between Hideki & Chii) gets hinted at once in a while, but all in all the first half of the series focuses on the problems that arise when Hideki tries to educate his persocon Chii and the embarrassing situations Chii gets her prude master in, all in your typical "harem" anime setting.The main thing is: it's so well-done!
The first say 8 episodes are often hilarious observations of masculine fears and obsessions as we get to know Hideki's thoughts every step of the way.
Through the parts of the comic-in-comic (Chii reads a favorite comic that seems to be especially designed for her and is a key element the overarching story) you occasionally get the idea that more is about to come.Of course, you can't keep Hideki as constipated throughout and as the often sexual jokes wear out, the series drifts towards fan-servicing with unfortunately pretty sexist undertones (not that I care).
At that point, despite the fact the the manga script lay there waiting to be developed, the series seems a bit lost, and the build-up of tension between Chii and Hideki comes to a halt, as do the other plot lines (Hideki and Yumi...), culminating in the low (plotwise) or high (imagewise *grin*) of #14, where all characters spend a day at the beach.
This wondering is only augmented by the following two episodes where Chii is hardly seen and the plot focuses on Shimbo and the Sensei...***Spoiler-laden paragraphs below***But in fact (though you only find out later) this is where they (finally) start developing the actual story about relationships between man and machine, and what machine is/can be, what it means to be human.
It's a bit of a mystery why the next 2 episodes again seem to fall to the earlier level, and nothing much is added, except for a hint at what the plot will turn out to be.But, in episodes 20-26 suddenly the stakes are raised and we get an entirely different anime, with all the depth and beauty that we've come to expect from this Japanese art form.
And then of course there's the final two episodes where a lot of questions are answered and the series DELIVERS.
Love DOES conquer all and after a series of emotional lefts and rights in the final episode, you get positively uppercutted by the rare 1% solution: the relationship between man and machine is a fact.
Bingo this is heaven.***SPOILER ENDS - but don't look an inch upward from this line***So, despite the fact that the series seems a bit lost in the middle, the absolutely charming and hilarious first third plus the final third with its deep issues, superb plot and magnificent denouement make this series a solid 9 for me.
I would have given it a 10, but it is a fact that the whole could have been better 1) had they from the start opted for a continuous story (like the final eps) with the story lines more mixed like in the manga, rather than more or less separate episodes focusing on one topic or even gimmick, 2) had made a better mix of humor & drama and developed the Chii character a bit better (like in the manga).
Presto!!!O, and don't forget to have a box of Kleenex within reach once you start on the final episode...PS: if you buy the DVD's (6+1 bonus), disc 1 and 2 are really worthwhile (though 2 has quite a bit of sexual/sexist fan-servicing), while disc 3 may be the least interesting.
Within a few episodes, I had fallen in love with Chii, one of the main characters.
Within minuets you feel as though you know Hideki and his persocom Chii.
"Chobits" is the best anime I have ever seen!.
Chobits hasn't been officially subtitled, but I have seen fansubbed episodes and I must say, since I was first introduced to manga and anime at the age of 13, I have never seen anything this cool!
No other anime series is as funny, and none as addictive.Every ninth episode seems to be a long set of memories so that new viewers can get updated on what they have missed in previous episodes.
Good idea, but bad for those of us who have seen all the previous episodes, and want to see more of Hideki and his quest to find out wether Chii really is a Chobit.I hope I will never have to see a final episode of Chobits..
(26 if you count the filler episodes.) Any fan of anime needs to watch this immediately..
As those characters in the series keep mentioning about relationships between computers and humans, i asked myself a couple time - do i support them?Despite chi's "specialness" and the fact that she is the cutest girl in the world, she is - although i don't want to admit, a computer.
It is cute and weird, but not to the point where you want to vomit though."Chobits" is about a farmboy named Hideki, who finds a persocon (Humanoid-Computers) on the street and as she is ressurected, she is revealed as a total sweetheart named 'Chii' and at first, she repeats her name alot, but after a while, she learns more speech and learns what is right and wrong and so on.Sure Chobits is not for everyone.
I do not hear it or see it as much as Clamps other works.If you wish for Clamp to change their face, and tired of their usual over-cutness, or if you want an ARTISTIC anime outside of Studio Ghibli, "Chobits" is for you..
not many things has made me laugh as much as chobits and the episodes gets after a while so very exciting u don´t know what to do.
All the other characters in the anime have their own interesting personas which makes the anime even more interesting past it's cutesiness.Overall I would definitely recommend watching Chobits if you are looking for something light and fun with still a good story behind it..
Holy cow.Anyways, The story is about a poor 18 year old boy named Hideki who wants his own personal persicon, a robot that can do menial tasks and help out around the house.
I only discovered this anime last night, after a friend told me about it, and i got to say, Clamp had a good idea right here.
All I could I say about this series, is that when I had heard the name it sounded like "hobbits" with a "c." Actually this great anime series, which is based on a manga, is about "persocoms."Persocoms are attractive female-type robots who often look younger than they ought to.
One man named Hideki Motosuwa (the male lead character of the show), finds a cute persocom in the trash and decided to take her for himself.
Some time later the series was finally re-released here on DVD so I could watch the whole thing.
The rest of the series was just as good as the opening episodes although the tone does shift somewhat midway through; the earlier episodes are light hearted and while never explicit often feature situations that suggest that that Hideki; the main character, is a bit of a pervert!
Later on things get much darker when the 'person' he cares for disappears.To summarise the plot; Chobits is set in a world where instead of using personal computers people use Persicoms; robots that fulfil the roles of computers but look almost human.
As the story progresses it becomes apparent that Chi isn't like other persicoms; she may be a 'Chobits', this is a persicom capable of genuine emotion
if so other people may want to get their hands on her.This was a really fun series with plenty of laughs as well as one or two genuinely tear-jerking moments.
While I watched the whole series in Japanese with English subtitles I saw enough of the English dub to say that is sounded pretty good; so dub-fans shouldn't be disappointed.
personal computer?"Chobits" is an unusual Anime' (Japanese animation) series that I took a wild gamble with earlier this year, having never seen or heard of it before, but nonetheless liked the concept because I found it very interesting.
"Chobits" is a romantic sci-fi/comedy series from the all-woman Manga-writing team CLAMP, who also did another Anime' series I've always liked: "X." Basically in "Chobits," you'll find yourself wondering if it's possible or not to have a meaningful relationship with your personal computer.In its storyline, "Chobits" seems to borrow heavily from cyberpunk, the computer-tech and hacker subcultures, and the cult-classic science fiction film "Blade Runner" (1982).
Set more or less in the present (the early 21st century, most likely between 2001-2002 when the Manga was still being serialized in Japan), the protagonist of the series is a socially clumsy/technologically inept 18-year-old country bumpkin named Hideki Motosuwa, who has just moved from his family's farm to the big city of Tokyo.
To help make ends meet, he gets a job at a local restaurant simply called My Pleasure.So far, "Chobits" sounds a lot like any run-of-the-mill, fish-out-of-water comedy you've come across (whether it be in Japan or the United States), but I've only described what happens in the first 10 minutes of the first episode!
On his way home from work one night, Hideki stumbles across a discarded "Persocom" in the trash, the human-looking androids made to resemble attractive young girls/women.
(So yeah, they're basically an iPhone, PC, and telephone/cell phone all rolled up in one!)Hideki thus names his new Persocom "Chi," after the only word she knows how to say.
He discovers, with help from his new neighbor/classmate/best friend Shinbo Hiromu (who also has his own cute little "mobile" Persocom named Sumomo) and wealthy 12-year-old computer genius Minoru Kokubunji, that Chi has absolutely no data and only one program installed on her CPU.
Kokubunji suspects that Chi is actually a "chobit," referring to an urban legend that states that certain Persocoms were programmed with free will and the ability to feel a full set of human emotions.
Hilarity ensues pretty much as Hideki tries to teach Chi common sense, manners and how to properly act in the larger Japanese society, but he soon comes to realize that she is harboring a dark secret somewhere in the depths of her (supposedly) blank CPU - a secret that could prove dangerous if it's truly possible for a Persocom to ever truly find happiness by coming to love a human being."Chobits" is a nice romantic comedy series with a neat sci-fi twist that asks us an important fundamental question: Is it ever really possible for a person to love his computer?
And "Blade Runner" seems even more prescient now that you think about it.)For the first half of this 24-episode Anime' series, it's pretty funny and sweet with the interactions between Hideki, who despite his social and technological ineptitude, is a really nice guy who actually cares about other people and helping them out (he's another one of the many great shy-guys common in Anime'), and Chi. Chi is basically like a child who has to be taught proper manners and the such.
But things start to take a dark turn in the second half, as the dark secrets surrounding Chi's past start to arise and the implications it has for her burgeoning love for Hideki, as well as all other Persocoms in Tokyo.
It all begins with the arrival of some very well-thought-out cyberpunk elements in the story."Chobits" is a great Anime' series that will definitely put a big happy smile on your face.
Despite some of the darker elements in the second half of the series, be rest assured that things end on a good note.
Yes we see a sexually frustrated guy finding a girl robot with cute elephant like ears among the trash bags outside of his student apartment .
It makes you kinda think this is like a hentai or ecchi wanna be anime and I decided to just not bother watching the second episode.
Yeah you may think that i should give the anime a second chance but for me, I give only the first episode a chance before watching the second episode and until I'm really satisfied that I can continue watching the series.
Just how I roll and I'm proud of that!Overall I would recommend it if you like cutesy robot inspired anime but for me, I wouldn't go back watching it again and rather forget about it.
Can be fun, extremely fun...the first half of the story is a naive good guy (Hideki) dealing with his new lifestyle (a very hard way o life for anybody, you must admire him to resist that much) and struggling to make his new acquired persocom, Chii, to understand and learn form the world.
ALL of the characters start to show their hidden secrets, one by one they shock us to the point of taking a moment to understand "what the f**k just happen".To really understand their feelings, the story has its sub-context: technology alienating people.
While in other shows, this means "the director didn't want to provide an answer" in this "the answer is extremely personal, the story ends, everything is solved, but the context don't" that's quite nice.Sadly, the quality of this anime has decreased by his original run, but that's no obstacle to enjoy it.
As another great anime, Serial Experiments Lain, it can be watched, and the story became so timeless, that you will enjoy it any year of your life..
This Show Is Really Good, But Because I'm From The UK I Had To Watch It On Youtube, But It's One Of My Favourite Anime's Of All Time, It Has Lots Of Humour In It Which Makes It Very Amusing!
I Would Strongly Recommend Watching This, You'll Like It. I Dislike The Dodgy Names In This Anime, They're Kinda Hard To Remember And Pronounce.
As I've said many times, I'm not really a fan of anime since it seems most of the series seem to go on and on without any definite conclusions, and forget trying to watch a random episode out of sequence since you won't know what the hell is going on without the proper context of the previous episodes.
*winks*)It turns out that the persocom lacks any programming except for an operating system that allows her to slowly learn stuff and it is up to Hideki to teach her the ways of the world.
He has his work cut out for him since at first she is only able to say "chii", a word that would later become her name.Basically, the series is broken roughly into two parts.
Obviously, this turned out to be quite messy.The second half of the series gets to the nut of the problem presented by the availability of human-like computers who are able to interact like normal people.
Chi seems to expect the latter due to her readings of a series of depressing "Lonely City" picture books she has purchased in which an anonymous woman seems doomed to search in vain for her one true love.Finally, there is the question that traditionalists have been fighting against for centuries: is it right for humans and persocoms to even fall in love?
The answer the series gives is that as long as the love is sincere and does not hurt other people, then it's sanctified.Although the overall story is quite solid, especially the end where it almost made macho-me shed tears, there are some draw backs.
Like the fact that they have no less than three clip shows for a series with only 27 episodes (plus a six-minute epilogue special).
The excitement and love present whenever Chi cries out "Hideki!
Also a character, a persocom called Sumomo that is owned by Hideki's friend and neighbor Shinbo, is not properly portrayed in the English version. |
tt0063811 | Will Penny | Will Penny (Charlton Heston) is an aging cowhand who at the end of a long trail hires on to ride the boundary of a ranch over the winter. He immediately comes across a woman, Catherine Allen (Joan Hackett), and her son Horace (Jon Gries) using one of the remote cabins to over-winter, having been deserted by the guide that her husband paid in advance to lead her and her son over the mountains. Despite his boss' instructions Penny lets them stay in the cabin and gives them a week to move out.
Later, Penny runs afoul of a sadistic family called the Quints, led by Preacher Quint (Donald Pleasence) who is after him for killing one of the Quint sons some time before, defending his comrades. While out checking the territory, Penny is ambushed and savagely beaten up by the Quints, who leave him for dead. Penny manages to drag himself back to the cabin, where he is slowly nursed back to health by Catherine, with whom he has little choice but to stay afterward.
As Christmas and winter pass, the lonely Penny and sexually repressed Catherine fall in love, and Penny begins to develop fatherly feelings towards the young boy Horace. The three have lived together as a family unit, during which Penny has caught poignant glimpses of everything that has been missing from his own nomadic, rootless life. For a while it seems there is a possibility that he can settle down with the woman and child and continue this happy arrangement. Around this time the Quint family bursts into the cabin, forces Penny into hard labor and coerces Catherine into marrying one of the ruthless Quint sons. When two of his fellow ranchers appear just in time to aid his escape from the Quints, they return to the cabin to free Catherine and Horace from their tormentors. At last it seems a happy ending may arrive at the appropriate moment. For part of Penny desperately wants to put down roots and end his lonely existence as an itinerant cow hand. Ultimately, however, Penny realizes that he is simply too old to keep on living like he used to (he is around 50) and too set in his ways to ever settle down in a domestic setting. Deeply regretful about what he is leaving behind, he rides away from the woman and child, never to return. | revenge, violence | train | wikipedia | The tough, lonely life of the cattle drover (as it really was) is briefly related in the ideal opening scene of Tom Gries' "Will Penny" with an aching Charlton Heston compelled, at the end of an exhausting cattle drive, to take a humble winter job in the cold bleak hillside...
He is a "good steady hand" concerned for Mrs. Allen and her son but "bad scared before, and bad sorry after." He is also a helpless man with uncertain future, a sincere cowboy extremely sensitive..."Will Penny" is an extraordinary film...
Not only does it feature Heston's most sincere and sensitive performance, it has a fine supporting cast and is one of the most adult Western scripts ever written...Joan Hackett portrays Mrs. Allen with strength and dignity, never collapsing beneath the strain of her tribulations...
Bruce Dern is equally effective as one of his sons, the psychotic who "handles a knife just fine."Realistically spared, "Will Penny" is a straightforward and honest film, a sincere attempt to recreate the Old West, and, more important, the "mighty good men" who lived therein....
The Inyo County, California locations are wonderful and the cowboys at work scenes are refreshingly honest.The basic storyline serves as a template to work more on character development and the cast (full of western stalwarts) do not disappoint.Charlton Heston as Will Penny is on great form as the vulnerable, middle aged man of the plains.
He and his friends "Blue" and "Dutchy" represent the best principles of old west comradeship and his approach to Mrs Allen and her son "H.G" shows with tenderness what he has craved to have all his life but knows it is too late to embrace.I found Donald Pleasence a bit over the top as the evil "Preacher Quint", but his portrayal is entertaining if nothing else.
Ben Johnson, Slim Pickens and Lee majors all do a good job in support and Joan Hackett is completely convincing as the lone mother in search of a better life.Very much a film for those viewers who like to experience, feel and be touched by a well written story and its characters..
When one of Quint's sons is killed, the preacher vows revenge and we know we haven't seen the last of him.When Will inquires at a roadside inn about the nearest doctor for Dutchy who accidentally shoots himself, he meets Catherine Allen (Joan Hackett) and her young son Horace known as Button (Jon Gries), on their way to Oregon to find her husband.
This outstanding ensemble cast produces a Western that is authentic and intelligent and is probably Heston's best performance of his career.Interestingly, the film opened in the New York's R.K.O. Coliseum at Broadway and 181st Street, a neighborhood theater in which I spent many boyhood afternoons and even worked as an usher.
Joan Hackett is very good as the woman squatter Penny befriends (her on screen son is played by Tom Gries real life son, who is also excellent).
These guys could give the Hammond Brothers ("Ride the High Country") a run for their money.There's also Joan Hackett, in a lovely, subtle, yet solid performance as Catherine Allen , a woman travelling across country w/ her young son, in search of her husband, who had gone on ahead ...through whom Will sees a life he never had..& never thought possible.
A simple tale of an aging cowboy (Charlton Heston) being nursed back to health by a woman (Joan Hackett), and then having to protect her and her young son (Jon Gries, son of the director) from the slimy characters who left him to die, the film is headlined by a wonderful, understated performance from screen veteran Heston, undoubtedly one of his finest.
Donald Pleasence is a delight as always as the sadistic Preacher Quint, and there's good support from Lee Majors (in his major film role), Anthony Zerbe and Ben Johnson (both of whom, sadly, never really get to do much), character actor Slim Pickens in a small role, and Bruce Dern in one of his countless villain parts.
Even more than his Oscar-winning role in BEN-HUR, Charlton Heston's performance in the terribly underrated 1968 western WILL PENNY may stand out as his best.
Zerbe accidentally wounds himself in the shootout; and Pleasance vows to get revenge on Heston after Heston shoots and kills one of his sons (Matt Clark).Separating from Zerbe and Majors, Heston finds employment at the Flatiron spread, led by Ben Johnson, and, unintentionally, winds up protecting a lone woman (Joan Hackett) and her son (John Gries) during the harsh Montana winter and Pleasance's subsequent revenge quest.Superbly directed and written by Tom Gries, who died too soon in 1977, WILL PENNY is a very well made western, albeit somewhat sad in the end (Heston can't marry Hackett in the end, because his age and his sudden, but lamentably too late, realization of what life should be like stand in the way).
Featuring solid performances from other fine actors like Slim Pickens, Bruce Dern, Luke Askew, and Roy Jenson, WILL PENNY is easily one of the best westerns ever made--which somehow seemed to escape Paramount Pictures' notice back in 1968..
She gives a good performance in her role fighting for herself and her child to survive in a rugged winter.Look for some realistic western portrayals from veterans like Ben Johnson, G.D. Spradlin, Slim Pickens, Anthony Zerbe, Lee Majors, Bruce Dern, and William Schallert.Will Penny is very similar to Lee Marvin's classic Monte Walsh.
A mature range-wandering loner named Will Penny (Charlton Heston) gets a job as cattle drive cowboy when he encounters his isolated cabin in high mountains is already occupied by a love-hungry mother (Joan Hackett) and her young son , they have appropriated when their guide to Oregon has deserted them.
But when Penny offends a family of outlaws (Donald Pleasence , Bruce Dern) they seek vengeance , come after him and menace his happiness along with the mother and her son.Wonderful performance by Charlton Heston as aging cowboy , he considers this movie his personal best giving a realistic portrayal .
Middle-aged Montana cowboy Charlton Heston (as Will Penny) and his two young partners, Lee Majors (as Blue) and Anthony Zerbe (as Dutchy), are attacked by maniacal preacher Donald Pleasence (as Quint) while hunting elk.
An conceptually interesting ending leaves too much unsaid, and "The Lonely Rider" song lyrics don't help.****** Will Penny (2/16/68) Tom Gries ~ Charlton Heston, Joan Hackett, Donald Pleasence, Jon Gries.
Unfortunately, into this nice little world come Donald Pleasance (as "the Preacher") and his insane children who are hell-bent on revenge and terrorizing Heston and company.This is an exceptional Western because it is unique and defies the usual silly clichés associated with the genre (such as a "perfect" happy ending).
Visually, the film is a standout with gorgeous vistas of snowy landscapes and the chill of winter felt inside the cabin as the man and woman gradually fall in love.JOAN HACKETT is fine as the strong-hearted woman with the boy clinging to her, left behind by her husband and glad for some company when Heston lets them stay with him.
The plot pits Heston, the woman and the boy against these intruders intent on holding them hostage while his sons have their way with Hackett.CHARLTON HESTON and JOAN HACKETT both give strong, believable performances under Tom Gries' direction--and I understand Heston considers it one of his favorite roles.
LEE MAJORS, BEN JOHNSON and SLIM PICKENS round out the supporting cast.The climactic scenes have the sort of resolution that reminds one of SHANE, another great western about a loner who decides he has to be true to his own nature, leaving the story without the usual conventional Hollywood ending.Well worth watching..
A scant two months after the February 1968 release of "Planet of the Apes," Hollywood legend Charlton Heston was back on the big screen in the lesser-known film "Will Penny." Since 1959's "The Big Country" (one of this viewer's all-time faves, though it does not seem to be highly regarded), Heston had only appeared in one other Western, 1965's "Major Dundee," but his work in the '68 oater seems to be generally viewed as some of the finest that he ever gave us.
At loose ends for work, Penny takes a job as a "line rider" for the Flat Iron Ranch, only to find that his lonely winter cabin has been invaded by squatters: a young married mother (Joan Hackett) and her 8-year-old son (Jon Gries, real-life son of the film's director, Tom Gries).
In addition, Lucien Ballard's cinematography and David Raksin's score complement the film nicely.Charlton Heston was at perhaps the most satisfying phase of his acting career: other films of the period include THE WAR LORD (1965), KHARTOUM (1966), COUNTERPOINT (1967) and PLANET OF THE APES (1968); he made a number of Westerns, but three in particular stand out from the lot - William Wyler's THE BIG COUNTRY (1958), Sam Peckinpah's MAJOR DUNDEE (1965) and this one.
Incidentally, the relationship depicted here between a cowboy and a lonely woman living with her young son (who comes to idolize him) was also at the centre of two other fine Westerns I've just watched - HONDO (1953) and THE TIN STAR (1957)!Unfortunately, Gries died at a relatively young age; this was his most substantial feature film, though he later collaborated twice more with Heston on NUMBER ONE (1969) and THE HAWAIIANS (1970)..
Charlton Heston,(Will Penny),"Solar Crisis",'90, made this film a great classic, he portrayed a man in his 50's who never married and worked hard all his life with cattle and was down on his luck.
Familiar western faces in the supporting roles include Joan Hackett and Lee Majors and a who's who of westerns character actors (Ben Johnson, Slim Pickens, Anthony Zerbe, Bruce Dern to name just a few).
Aging cowboy Will Penny gets a line camp job on a large cattle spread and finds his isolated cabin is already occupied by a husbandless woman and her young son.The picture was based upon an episode of the 1960 Sam Peckinpah television series "The Westerner" called "Line Camp," which was also written and directed by Tom Gries.
Please watch this movie and see for yourself why Charlton Heston's "Will Penny" is quite possibly the most authentic and true to the "old west" western ever made..
YEAR OF RELEASE: 1968 WRITER/DIRECTOR: Tom Gries COUNTRY: USA RUNTIME: 1 Hour 50 minutes LOCATIONS: Bishop & Inyo County, CaliforniaTHE PLOT: Charleton Heston plays loner Will Penny, an aging cowboy who takes a winter job riding line on a vast ranch.
Penny discovers love and a sense of family for the first time in his nigh fifty years of life."Will Penny" gives the viewer a good peek at what it must have really been like to be a cowboy out West in the late 1800s.
Lonesome cowboy Will Penny (Charlton Heston), along with traveling companions Lee Majors and Anthony Zerbe, repel an unprovoked attack by crazed preacher man Donald Pleasance and his grimy sons.
With Zerbe seriously injured, Heston rides on alone followed by the vengeful Pleasance.Will Penny starts off with excellent, picturesque scenes of a cattle drive and rugged outdoor adventure, giving way to tender drama between Penny, young mother Joan Hackett and her boy, that is until the loonies show up again for more action and an exciting, satisfying climax.Pleasance is always a great heavy, as is Bruce Dern who plays one of his sons.
This film was one of Charlton Heston's personal favorites, a change-of-pace drama dwelling on character development and self-preservation instead of the usual shoot 'em ups in western movies.
Heston shows great skill in making this believable.On his way to another job, Penny crosses a truly horrible family, and later, runs into a vulnerable woman, Catherine Allen (Joan Hackett) on her way west with her son.
Until Years Late When it Was Rediscovered and Acknowledged as a Hidden Gem.Charlton Heston's Great Underplayed Performance Enhances the Film Along with Authentic Recreations of Cowboys and Settings that are Unpretentiously Displayed and the Movie Makes No Attempt to Make the Story Mythical.It is Bare Bones Realism with Interesting Folks Placed in a Hostile Environment and Explores the Human Condition of Survival Instincts.
The Villains, Donald Pleasence and Bruce Dern Make Their Presence Felt, and Ben Johnson and Slim Pickens Add Some Gravitas with Not More Than Cameos.There are Other Familiar Faces Like Anthony Zerbe and Lee Majors, but it is Heston, Hackett, and a the Sharply Written Script that Defies Conventionality in Both Story and Structure that Makes This One Special.
Stunningly photographed in widescreen and colour by the great Lucian Ballard the picture was also buoyed by a haunting score from veteran composer David Raksin ("Laura").Aging and illiterate cowboy Will Penny (Charlton Heston) has just finished up helping to bring in the last herd of cattle before winter sets in.
PLOT: Will Penny (Charlton Heston) is an aging cowpoke who runs afoul of a sadistic family of frontier drifters, the Quints (Donald Pleasance, Bruce Dern and Gene Rutherford when he kills one of their clan (Matt Clark) to protect his friends Blue (Lee Majors) and Dutchy (Anthony Zerbe) after the end of a long cattle driver.
Aging and illiterate cowpoke Will Penny (a fine and credible performance by Charlton Heston) gets left out in the wilderness to die by a gang of ruthless outlaws led by the crazed Preacher Quint (a perfectly slimy portrayal by Donald Pleasence).
The excellent acting by the top-drawer cast holds the picture together: Heston brings a touching dignity and resolute conviction to the deeply tragic and sympathetic character of Will Penny; he receives sterling support from Bruce Dern as Quint's no-count son Rafe, Ben Johnson as tough trail boss Alex, Anthony Zerbe as the amiable Dutchy, Lee Majors as eager young buck Blue, Slim Pickens as irascible cook Ike, Clifton James as crude farmer Catron, and Roy Jenson as mean bully Boetius Sullivan.
Tom Gries directs "Will Penny", an underrated Western which features Charlton Heston in what he cites as his own favourite performance.
Elsewhere Gries focuses less on his plot than he does on Penny's dead-end existence, the cowboy's dim future married to sequences which stress the sheer drudgery and loneliness of life on the plains.7.9/10 – This film is at its best when Heston is brooding on screen.
Writer-Director Tom Gries had a mostly undistinguished and uninspiring career on TV and film,but WILL PENNY is the notable exception.It is all the more surprising that Gries before and after never really approached the depth,style and intelligence associated with this rather splendidly elegiac Western.An ageing,illiterate cowhand,Will Penny (Charlton Heston) approaches the end of typically gruelling contract work before the excesses of Winter draw in,with his immediate future uncertain.He makes friends with some younger workmates,Blue and Dutchy(Lee Majors,Anthony Zerbe),but they become embroiled in a gunfight with some particularly vicious raw-hiders,led by the vengeful Preacher Quint(Donald Pleasence).After managing to find more low-paid work,Will becomes romantically involved with a young mother (Joan Hackett) and her son,with the unpleasant intentions of Quint's brood never far away.WILL PENNY has been rightly praised for it's plausible,realistic details of the harsh,isolated,nomadic life on wilderness-type open plains,beautifully photographed by one of Hollywood's best colour cameramen,Lucien Ballard,one of many Westerns he worked on.There are no shootouts in in sanitised frontier towns here,or pristine-looking saloons,just a few flimsy-seeming wooden buildings with the barest of facilities.Despite these and and other mundane,authentic depictions,Gries successfully makes them mostly engaging,with a solidly laconic,sometimes acerbic script.The granite-jawed Heston made around a dozen or so Westerns (notably Wyler's THE BIG COUNTRY and Peckinpah's MAJOR DUNDEE),but this is probably his best in this genre,and maybe even his greatest film performance.Free of the theatrical,overblown excesses that were prevalent in some of his other big screen vehicles,Heston underplays his role superbly here and produces many effective dramatic moments.He is matched by dignified and equally sensitive performances by Ms Hackett and young Jon Francis (actually Jon Gries,the director's son),with a romance that is convincingly and touchingly developed.Westerners like Slim Pickens and Ben Johnson provide further reliability,with Zerbe and even the usually rather stolid Majors giving fine support as Heston's colleagues.As has been documented by other reviewers,the film's only real negative point is the somewhat miscast Briton Donald Pleasance's overbearing performance as Preacher Quint.This is in curious contrast to Pleasance's other portrayal of villainy around the same time as Blofeld in the James Bond epic YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE.His minimalistic,brooding menace there was far more effective than his rolling-eyed,Southern-accented histrionics in WILL PENNY.In the midst of such meticulously believable incident,Gries comes close to unbalancing all his good work by providing such hackneyed,stereotyped rascals (one of whom includes Bruce Dern in rather over-typical mode),and further strains credulity by a very visible wire when a knife is hurled at Penny.Yet Gries redeems these errors of judgement with a genuinely moving finale,similar to SHANE and in some ways more effective for being done so low-key.The climactic song (performed by Don Cherry) played alongside this coda is by no means at all bad,but a trifle misjudged ;David Raksin's modest yet effective score would've been more apposite.Despite it's minor faults,WILL PENNY is a Western of the top drawer,it's realistic account of the desolate,difficult lives of hard working cowboys and their bleak surroundings always honest,compelling and never dull,and barely lapsing into self-pity.Charlton Heston is said to be very proud of his work here with considerable justification;and we can be grateful Tom Gries made at least one near classic before his untimely death.RATING:7 and a half out of 10..
When he is forced to winter in a snowed-in cabin with a pioneer woman (the wonderful Joan Hackett) and her son, he finds love for the first time in his life, but the tender moments are short-lived as he must fight off the evil "Preacher Quinn," one of the creepiest villains in screen history, played with demonic ferocity by Donald Pleasence (Bruce Dern is one of his sons).
Nevertheless, Penny realizes he could not adapt to another way of life and rides off into the sunset.As a long-time fan of Westerns and Charleston Heston, I was disappointed by this film. |
tt2375692 | Black Sails | Black Sails is set roughly two decades before the events of Treasure Island and during the Golden Age of Piracy. Feared Captain Flint brings on a younger crew member as they fight for the survival of New Providence island. According to the first episode, "In 1715 West Indies, the pirates of New Providence Island threaten maritime trade in the region. The laws of every civilized nation declare them hostis humani generis, enemies of all mankind. In response, the pirates adhere to a doctrine of their own....war against the world." Real life pirates who are fictionalized in the show include Anne Bonny, Benjamin Hornigold, Jack Rackham, Charles Vane, Ned Low, Israel Hands and Blackbeard.
The plot of the first season focuses on the hunt for the Spanish treasure galleon Urca de Lima. At the beginning of the second season, the treasure from the Urca de Lima has been stranded on the shores of Florida with Spanish soldiers guarding it, but by the conclusion of the second season, the treasure has been taken by Jack Rackham and his crew and brought to New Providence Island. During the second season, the questions of how and why Flint—a man who was a navy officer and London gentleman—turned to piracy are answered. The third and the fourth seasons focus on the war for the control of New Providence between the pirates and the British Empire, represented by Captain Woodes Rogers. | action, historical fiction | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0317042 | One Point O | Adam Cassidy is a low-level inventor who works for a corporation run by Nicholas Wyatt. After being fired for insubordination, Adam uses the company's credit card to pay for bottle service for his friends at a club. Wyatt and his enforcer, Miles Meachum, blackmail Adam into becoming a corporate spy for Wyatt by threatening to have him arrested for fraud.
Adam is trained by Judith Bolton and infiltrates a company run by Wyatt's former mentor, Jock Goddard. He provides Goddard, who stole several of Wyatt's ideas, with an advanced software able to hack into cellphones, with potential military applications. FBI Agent Gamble interrogates Adam, revealing that three other employees of Wyatt who transferred to Goddard's company were found dead, but Adam ignores him.
Adam finds out Emma Jennings, a woman he met during the party, is the Director of Marketing of Goddard's company. He initiates a relationship with Emma in order to steal files about Goddard's upcoming projects. Wyatt threatens to kill Adam's father, Frank Cassidy, if Adam doesn't steal a revolutionary prototype cellphone developed by Goddard. Adam later finds out Meachum and Bolton are monitoring him, so he destroys the cameras in his apartment. In retaliation, Meachum runs over Adam's friend, Kevin, with a car, nearly killing him. Adam is given 48 hours to steal the prototype.
Adam uses Emma's thumbprint lifted from a spoon to gain security access to the company's vault. He is confronted there by Goddard, who intends to take over Wyatt's company with evidence that Adam was acting as Wyatt's spy. Emma finds out Adam used her. Adam recruits Kevin to help him. A meeting is set with Wyatt and Goddard, where it is revealed that Bolton has spied against Wyatt on Goddard's behalf. Both men speak of the crimes they have committed to sabotage each other's companies.
Adam has secretly used software to transmit their conversation to Kevin, whose computer recordings are turned over to the FBI. Goddard, Wyatt, Bolton and Meachum are arrested by Gamble, while Adam is released for contributing to the FBI's investigation. He reconciles with Emma and opens a small startup company in Brooklyn with Kevin and their friends. | sci-fi | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0371060 | Pajama Sam 3: You Are What You Eat from Your Head to Your Feet | Just before dinner, Pajama Sam is whisked away by his Choc Amok cookies to the sugar, sweets and fats party in Mop Top Island. After devouring the huge piece of cake in front of the doorway, Sam decides to finally leave the party saying he doesn't want to spoil his dinner. All the sugar, sweets and fats, while referring to him as "healthy boy", are immediately offended, as they have to send him off to the candy-cane jail until releasing him on his trial set for later next month.
While in the candy-cane jail, Pajama Sam meets a broccoli named Florette and a delegate of the food group peace conference. Pajama Sam manages to free Florette and himself from the sweet's prison. Pajama Sam follows Florette to the food pyramid and meets his familiar friend Carrot (from Pajama Sam 1), who was leading the peace conference. Carrot explains to Pajama Sam that General Beetfoot will declare war unless the conference goes on. Unfortunately, four other delegates are missing. Pajama Sam needs to locate these other delegates and get them out of trouble before the General notices they are missing and declares war.
After all the delegates are rescued, Sam goes to the peace conference, but instead of finding the six delegates working together, he finds them arguing over which food group is better, and then after hearing enough of the delegates arguing, Sam yells and then gives an inspiring speech about working together. | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0034370 | The Wagons Roll at Night | From a traveling carnival managed by Nick Coster (Humphrey Bogart), an aggressive lion named Caesar escapes, but is cornered in a grocery store by clerk Matt Varney (Eddie Albert). Seeing that Matt has become an instant celebrity with the town's residents, Nick hires the farm boy to work with his current lion tamer, Hoffman the Great (Sig Ruman), who drinks alcohol before his shows. When Hoffman is passed out after being inebriated and is unable to perform, Nick convinces Matt that he is ready to run the show. After a successful performance in the lion cage, Nick replaces Hoffman with Matt as his lion tamer.
At a bar in the city, Matt unsuccessfully tries to apologize to Hoffman for taking over his job. Hoffman follows Matt back to the circus and engages him into a fight next to the lion cages. Hoffman is killed by Caesar after he is pushed up next to the lion's cage. Nick's girlfriend, Flo Lorraine (Sylvia Sidney), a fortune teller at the circus, spirits Matt away to Nick's farm so to prevent him from being accused by the police for Hoffman's death. Unknowing to Flo, Nick's younger sister Mary (Joan Leslie) had just returned from schooling at a convent. Nick has purposely kept carnival people away from her, because he feels they are inferior. Matt and Flo end up falling in love. When Nick returns from a business trip, he learns that Matt is at his farm in the company of his sister. He travels to the farm and orders Matt to leave with him and to never see Mary again. Matt reluctantly agrees to Nick's demand.
During a break between circus shows, Matt becomes increasingly worried that he cannot contact Mary because of his promise to Nick. At the suggestion of a fellow circus member, Flo believes that Matt is in love with her, but she becomes heartbroken when Matt tells her that he is in love with Mary. Flo then persuades Matt to ignore Nick's warning not to see Mary. Once Nick returns from another trip, he learns that Matt is back at the farm. He arrives there, and, during an argument, he slaps Mary for being disrespectful. Matt then slugs him to the ground.
After their fight, Nick plans to have Matt killed in the lion cage. He convinces Matt to perform with Caesar in order to earn a great reputation as a lion tamer. He then gives Matt an unloaded lion tamer's gun. As Matt is in the cage with the mad lion, Flo and Mary arrive at the circus. Matt uses his skills against Caesar, but is seen fighting a losing battle, as the unloaded gun has no effect in scaring the lion. Nick is persuaded by Mary to go into the cage to rescue Matt. He distracts the lion away from Matt, but is subsequently attacked and killed by the mad lion. | romantic | train | wikipedia | In this film, Bogart received top-star billing for the first time.
The film was nothing more than a remake of "Kid Galahad," with the hero (Eddie Albert) as a lion tamer instead of a boxer
Bogart walked indifferently through his role as the owner of a traveling carnival whose plot was borrowed from Howard Hawks' "Tiger Shark." Sylvia Sidney appeared in the Bette Davis as Bogart's troubled girlfriend, a fortuneteller with the carnival
The film was a very disappointing follow-up to Bogart's triumph in "High Sierra," but better things lay immediately ahead as Bogart was now ready for a new image, an image which was to dominate the screen for the next years, an image which found its basic construction in John Huston's "The Maltese Falcon.".
Wagons Roll at Night, The (1941)** (out of 4) Circus promoter Nick Coaster (Humphrey Bogart) finds himself in trouble when a dangerous lion escapes his act but a grocery clerk (Eddie Albert) ends up saving the day.
Nick, seeing the possibility for money, hires the kid on as a lion trainer but soon jealously gets involved as Nick's girlfriend (Sylvia Sidney) starts to fall for the kid but even worse is when his sister (Joan Leslie) falls for him.
This film really comes off as a watered down version of Kid Galahad, which also featured Bogart in a supporting role.
Robinson and Bette Davis (or the later Elvis remake) then you're going to know all the twists and turns that this film offers.
The one thing this film has going for it is seeing the pre-fame Bogart playing this type of role so fans of the actor might get a kick out of this thing.
He certainly isn't giving a classic performance but he does a good job showing off his tough side and again, it's always fun seeing him in this type of role.
Sidney ends up stealing the film as his troubled girlfriend who wants a better life outside the circus.
Albert is also very good in his role and really comes across well as that bright eyed kid who is about to learn a lesson in life.
There are some nice touches of humor thrown in including a great sequence when the lion escapes and wonders into Albert's grocery store.
It's also worth noting that this is the first film in which Bogart received top-billing so that's one historic reason, which might draw people to watch this..
A Lion escapes from Humphrey Bogart's circus during a performance in a small town.
He manages to trap the lion behind a counter and gets a lot of plaudits and an offer from Bogart to work in his circus.But jealousy rears its ugly head as Bogart's sister Joan Leslie and his girl friend Sylvia Sidney both fall for who Bogart considers a nice kid, but a hick.The Wagons Roll at Night was a transitional film between two acclaimed Bogart productions High Sierra and The Maltese Falcon.
But with the acclaim he got from High Sierra, Jack Warner put him in this before the highly touted Dashiell Hammett adaption, I guess as a trial run.The plot is based on Kid Galahad where oddly enough Bogart had a supporting role.
Sylvia Sidney does well as the love lost carnival fortune teller with eyes for both Bogart and Albert.Personally though I've always liked what Sig Ruman did in this film as the drunken lion tamer whose place Albert took.
Humphrey Bogart runs a circus but doesn't want his kid sister Joan Leslie to have anything to do with circus men.
Enter grocery clerk-turned-lion tamer Eddie Albert, who "aww shucks" his way to Joan's heart while also making an impression on Bogie's woman Sylvia Sidney.
It's essentially a remake of 1937's Kid Galahad, a boxing film with the same plot.
While a little predictable and such, it did offer Bogart and Sylvia Sidney, both of whom I admire a great deal.
Humphrey Bogart, Sylvia Sidney, Joan Leslie, Eddie Albert, and Sig Ruman star in "The Wagons Roll at Night," a 1941 film from Bogart, most likely made before Bogart really hit the big time with High Sierra and Maltese Falcon.
1941 was certainly an important year for him.Bogart plays Nick Coaster, the head of a traveling carnival.
When a lion escapes, he ends up in a grocery store where the clerk, Matt (Albert) saves the day and becomes a local hero.
Coaster thinks the kid's a natural and talks him into learning the lion tamer trade.
He needs him - his usual lion tamer, Hoffman the Great (Ruman) is usually drunk.One night, Hoffman is too drunk to go on and despite objections from other members of the carnival, Coaster sends the novice Matt into the ring.
This is a big no-no because Nick is determined that his sister (Leslie) not mix with carnival people.
Bogart is terrific as Nick, a tough as nails guy who considers all carnival people, including Flo and himself, the scum of the earth.
Sidney shows her vulnerability here, as a woman who's been hurt by Nick but still cares for him, even while she's attracted to Matt.Entertaining and predictable, and I have to make a disclosure here that Eddie Albert holds a special place in my heart.
The remake of ''Kid Galahad'', set in a circus.
In 1941 Humphrey Bogart was near to stardom, he starred also in ''High Sierra'' and his first classic, ''The Maltese Falcon''.
I consider this a bit of a remake of ''Kid Galahad'', but instead of boxing it's set in the circus world.
His co-stars here are Eddie Albert, Sylvia Sidney, Joan Leslie and Sig Ruman.
The direction is by Ray Enright, the same who directed in 1936 ''China Clipper'' with BogartIt begins when Matt Varney (a grocery store's clerk) saves a baby from an escaped lion and suddenly Nick Coaster, the circus manager makes him a star although Matt had never experienced lion-taming, and this because the other lion tamer, Hoffman the Great, is always drunk.
One night Hoffman has a brawl with Varney and ends up mauled by a lion, and Flo (Coaster's girlfriend), tries to help Matt sending him to Nick's farmhouse.
But trouble follows because Matt falls in love with Nick's sister, and Nick don't want her sibling mixed with circus people because they are the scum of the Earth!
It ends with Coaster killed by Caesar, the fiercest of all the circus lions, after he wanted to punish Varney for his bad behavior.Although Humphrey Bogart received top- billing Albert is the real star of the movie, as the grocery clerk- turned-lion tamer who suddenly becomes the circus star.
The leading lady is Sylvia Sidney, as Bogart's girlfriend, torn between repulsion and love, and Joan Leslie in a supporting role, as Bogart's sister who falls in love with Albert's character.
The always great Sig Ruman as Hoffman the Great, in a brief but interesting supporting role!This movie is recommended to: (1) Humphrey Bogart fans (2) fans of movies set in carnivals..
In fact, I always enjoy watching Eddie Albert in films just because, to me, it's like seeing "Oliver Wendell Douglas" perform in movies (you know, his character from GREEN ACRES).
The problem with the film, though, is that it is a VERY CLOSE remake of Kid Galahad--which was only made a few years earlier.
I guess for this one, the only reasons would be to see Eddie Albert or Humphrey Bogart or because the plot is so unusual, with the theme being Lion Taming and not Boxing!
A variation of Kid Galahad but without the Bogart character and the boxing.
Humphrey Bogart plays the owner of a circus and Sylvia Sidney is his girl.
The circus isn't very big and their lion tamer is always drunk.
When a lion escapes and goes into a town, Eddie Albert winds up holding the lion back until Bogart shows up to get it.
The lion that escapes is very vicious and winds up killing a guy and when Albert goes to stay with Bogart's family after he is injured, Bogart gets an idea in his dead.
Yes of course this is a remake of the earlier 1937 boxing film Kid Galahad starring Edward G Robinson and Wayne Morris but The Wagons Roll at Night is even a better film than the earlier version.
Humphrey Bogart was lucky enough to appear in both films but in my humble opinion it is the natural on screen chemistry between love interests 35 year old Eddie Albert and the then young and beautiful 16 year old Joan Leslie which made this drama film a special and memorable one.The storyline is the same in both films which is a young and naive farm boy has a god given skill (the original film as a boxer, and the remake as a lion tamer) and he falls in love with his bosses young and beautiful sister while visiting the family farm and they fall madly in love.
So the boss has a decision to make does he allow his meal ticket to marry his little sister, or does he deliberately set his young star up for a duel to the death in the ring?Although the ending in both films is predictable none the less The Wagons Roll at Night is a TCM film classic that must be seen.
While you are at it, may I suggest you first watch the original 1937 Kid Galahad to see if you agree that this latter version, The Wagons Roll at Night, has a bit more more depth.
Eddie Albert as the young and earnest lion tamer is a more favorable performance than the pugilistic skills of Wayne Morris in the inferior and earlier version Kid Galahad.I give The Wagons Roll at Night a deserving 8 out 10 rating.
Adapting a magazine story about the circus, they first filmed it as a boxing story- "Kid Galahad"- in 1937 with Edward G.
Chester Morris returned in the same role for a loose (and uncredited, I think) comedy remake, "The Kid From Kokomo", exactly two years later in 1939.
In 1941 Bogart returned in a semi-villainous version of Robinson's role for this one, and the original circus setting was restored.
(And Gig Young, who narrated the trailer for this one, returned in 1962 for the Elvis Presley boxing version)."The Wagons Roll At Night" works because of the crisp pacing, lots of fireworks (and lions!) and especially the great cast.
Eddie Albert plays the Chester Morris role- a lion-tamer this time- with his usual aw-shucks simplicity, and it works fine.
Joan Leslie- hands off Bogie's sister!- in a girl-next-door role isn't going to miss- Warner Brothers hadn't yet begun to fully misunderstand and derail her promising career.
You'll always know where this one is going, especially if you've seen any of the many other versions, but you'll never be bored as Bogie builds to a boil.Deduct one star for the casual animal cruelty of 1941, but give it back just for casting Sig Ruman.
I would wager that given the choice, Humphrey Bogart wouldn't have bothered making "The Wagons Roll at Night." I daresay he hadn't any option, since he had only just become a star when the film went out on general release and hadn't signed a new contract when he could have more of a say in his choice of films.
Joan Leslie was worthy of being in better films as well.
Then by accident, a young fellow proves he has what it takes to be a lion tamer (Eddie Albert).
In 1941 Bogart was on the threshold of stardom with a few good roles in his pocket ("Roaring 20s", "They Drive by Night", High Sierra") but his best films were in front of him.
So this film is a unique look at the pre A list Bogart, and you'll never guess that he had such a luminous future ahead of him.The film is set in a circus, which was a popular venue in the 20s through the 50s.
Bogart is a circus owner, so it's one of his rare non-gangster or detective roles.
He's joined by sultry Sylvia Sydney, a young Eddie Albert, and the always funny Sig Ruman.The film has little to recommend it.My favorite films featuring a circus are Freaks, Dumbo, The Magician, and The Greatest Show on Earth..
First, because although I really like Humphrey Bogart, I grew tired of his many gangster roles, and for some reason, in my mind, this was just another gangster film.
The second reason was because although Eddie Albert was a fine actor, the emphasis was on "was"; I never forgave him for "Green Acres", and in that role I lost all respect for him.I recently recorded this film on my DVR and figured I'd watch it for a few minutes, and then probably delete it.
Humphrey Bogart does play a less than stellar character -- the owner and manager of a circus-carnival, but here he is driven to an evil deed by a desire to prevent his younger sister from getting romantically involved with a "carnie".
Second, Eddie Albert really is good here as a local who becomes a lion-tamer and then falls in love with Bogart's sister.
The female leads in the film are Sylvia Sydney (who does very nicely) and, in the lighter role, Joan Leslie as Bogart's sister.
Cliff Clark is very good as one of the workers at the circus.I see this film only gets a rating in the low-6 range, but I think it's better than that.
The original theatrical trailer for "The Wagons Roll at Night" compares it favorably to Humphrey Bogart's prior two releases, "They Drive By Night" and "High Sierra"; in it, Bogie finds himself in a non traditional role as the hard driving owner of "Coaster's Combined Circus and Carnival".
His character is Nick Coaster, a con man in his own right, always looking for the angle that will make his circus a top attraction.
As his alcoholic lion tamer Hoffman the Great (Sig Ruman) becomes increasingly unreliable, the chance escape of Caesar the Lion results in his being subdued by a local grocery clerk, Matt Varney (Eddie Albert).
Sensing the excitement that a home town hero would bring to his operation, Nick whets Varney's appetite for fame under the Big Top as his next major attraction.Eddie Albert brings all the laid back corn pone demeanor to a role that would be a fitting rehearsal for his future "Green Acres" character.
However "Varney of the Lions" hits a brick wall when he meets and falls in love with Nick's sister Mary (Joan Leslie); she's all starry eyed and hungry for romance, fresh from graduation yet stuck on Nick's country farm.
This Nick Coaster is not a nice guy, and his plan to take Matt out of the picture sinks him to a new level.Rounding out the main cast is Sylvia Sidney as Nick's erstwhile girl friend and circus psychic, Madame Florina.
Leslie looks like she could have been a natural for that role as well.If nothing else, the film is memorable as one of the few in which Bogie's character cashes in his chips at the end.
Coming to his senses at the provocation of Flo and Mary, Nick enters the circus cage that would have been Matt's death trap while facing down the killer Caesar.
**SPOILERS** Having his sweet and innocent kid sister Mary, Joan Leslie, kept out of his business by having her put away in a convent for the first 18 years of her life carnival manager Nick Coaster, Humphrey Bogart, got the surprise of his life when sweet little Mary fell in love with one of his workers; Nick's young & handsome star lion tamer Matt Varney, Eddie Albert.Matt a former grocery stock boy got the chance to strut his stuff when killer lion Caesar broke out of his cage-at Nick's Carnival-and almost ripped up the entire town.
With his star lion tamer "The Great Hoffman" Gig Ruman always drunk on and off the job Nick's hired Matt as Hoffman's understudy until the old guy got so drunk that his booze breath actually attracted the wild cats more to attack and feast on him then his whip chair and pistol were able to keep them in their places!It's when Matt achieved top billing at the carnival , or circus, that he accidentally got involved with Mary who was home visiting from collage.
Nick in wanting to keep Mary away from the riff-raft, I guess like himself, that worked at his carnival then blew a fuse when he found that she was deeply in love with Matt and about to marry him.
Trying to beak up the romance between Matt & Mary Nick came up with this sinister and diabolical plan to put Matt in a cage with killer lion Caesar and have the big cat do him in.Caesar had already killed the other lion tamer-Bundy-at the carnival and with his taste for human blood now fully confirmed Nick knew that Matt , no matter how good he is, wouldn't stand a chance against the wild and blood thirsty, for human blood, Caesar.
That's until Mary and and carnival fortune teller Flo Lorraine, Slivia Sidney, got wind of Nicks plan for Matt and then tried to stop the slaughter before it started!***SPOILERS*** Even though he played a heavy Humphrey Bogart, or Nick Coaster, was anything but unlikable in the movie.
(Bogart had actually appeared in the previous version, Kid Galahad, playing a character who is not represented in this remake).
True, the story has undergone a considerable metamorphosis with a change in setting from a boxing ring to a circus, and its principal character from a boxer to a lion tamer, but it's still a disappointingly familiar plot – and in this new setting, it strains credibility even more!
Eddie Albert is a natural and performs his own stunts with the lions.
a lion is nothing but a big chipmunk," Eddie Albert's amateur lion tamer "Matt" tells his boss, Humphrey Bogart's "Nick," early in THE WAGONS ROLL AT NIGHT. |
tt0417299 | Avatar: The Last Airbender | ==== Book One: Water ====
Katara, a fourteen-year-old Southern Tribe Waterbender, and her older brother, Sokka, find and revive Aang and Appa. Aang learns of the war occurring in his absence, and the siblings join him to reach the Northern Water Tribe at the North Pole, so that he and Katara can learn Waterbending from a master. Aang's return attracts the attention of prince Zuko, the exiled son of Ozai, who pursues the three thereafter. Aang is also pursued by Zhao, a Fire Nation militant who intends to win Ozai's favor and rob Zuko of his redemption.
En route to the North Pole, Aang meets the Kyoshi Warriors (established by an eponymous previous Avatar) and his childhood friend, King Bumi, attempts to learn Firebending from the deserter Firebending master, Jeong Jeong, and gains a traveling companion in a winged lemur he names Momo. Aang discovers the genocide of his people while visiting the Southern Air Temple. During the winter solstice, Aang meets his predecessor, Avatar Roku, who was a firebender.
At the Northern Water Tribe, Aang and Katara learn advanced Waterbending from its Master, Pakku, while Sokka falls in love with Princess Yue, the tribal chief's daughter. Zhao lays siege to the Northern Water Tribe, seizing the mortal forms of the Ocean and Moon Spirits, the source of waterbending, and thus causing a lunar eclipse. Zhao kills the moon spirit to render the Waterbenders powerless. Aang uses his Avatar State and combines with the Ocean Spirit to drive off the enemy's fleet while Princess Yue sacrifices her life to revive the Moon Spirit. When Ozai hears of Iroh's resistance to Zhao, he sends his daughter, Azula, to capture Iroh and Zuko.
==== Book Two: Earth ====
After leaving the Northern Water Tribe, Aang continues to master Waterbending under Katara's tutelage as the group searches for an Earthbending teacher. Their search brings them to Toph Beifong, a twelve-year-old blind tomboy and Earthbending prodigy who wants independence from her upper-class family. Pursued by Azula, Zuko and Iroh lead new lives in the Earth Kingdom, first as wanderers and later as refugees in the capital of Ba Sing Se. At a library guarded by the spirit Wan Shi Tong, Aang and his group learn that an imminent solar eclipse could allow them to stop the Fire Nation before Sozin's Comet arrives. Their journey to Ba Sing Se to inform the Earth King of this is complicated when Appa is kidnapped. At the city, they find the Earth King Kuei and Ba Sing Se manipulated by Long Feng, the leader of the Dai Li secret police.
After Aang's group finds Appa and exposes Long Feng, Toph is captured, but escapes by "Metalbending", while Aang attempts to consciously access the Avatar state. The Dai Li join Azula to instigate a coup d'état of Ba Sing Se; and Zuko, having tried to ignore his past obsession, relapses when the Avatar appears to rescue Katara. As Aang tries to enter the Avatar state, Azula nearly kills him. With Ba Sing Se and the Earth Kingdom now under Fire Nation rule, the group escapes thanks to Iroh, who is imprisoned for betraying the Fire Nation, and Kuei goes into hiding.
==== Book Three: Fire ====
Aang recovers from a long coma to find his friends and allies disguised as soldiers on a Fire Nation ship, preparing invasion of the Fire Nation. Despite receiving credit for the Avatar's apparent death, Zuko regrets his role therein. Although the invasion meets great success at first, Aang and his friends are unable to find Ozai and are forced to retreat with many of their allies captured. At the same time, having learned of his father's intention to destroy the Earth Kingdom at the time of Sozin's Comet, Zuko leaves the palace to teach Aang Firebending.
As the comet approaches, Aang becomes reluctant to kill Ozai, and goes alone to consult his predecessors' spirits. Katara and the others unsuccessfully search for Aang, and find the newly escaped Iroh, joined by the other members of a secret society called the Order of the White Lotus: Bumi, Master Pakku, Jeong-Jeong, and Master Piandao (a master swordsman who taught Sokka). Together, the Order of the White Lotus liberates Ba Sing Se. Sokka, Toph, and Kyoshi Warrior Suki hinder the Fire Nation's airships, while Zuko and Katara prevent Azula from becoming the new Fire Lord. As Sozin's Comet arrives, Aang confronts Ozai, but finds himself in a losing battle until Ozai mistakenly re-establishes Aang's connection to the Avatar State. Thus enabled, Aang strips Ozai of his firebending powers, instead of killing him.
Soon after, Zuko is crowned the new Fire Lord and initiates an armistice. The series ends in a meeting of all the protagonists at Ba Sing Se in Iroh's tea shop, the Jasmine Dragon, where Aang and Katara hug and then kiss beneath the sunset. The camera then zooms up and into the sunset, displaying the words "The End" with their Chinese counterparts above them. | good versus evil, psychedelic, violence | train | wikipedia | Avatar has strength in all the major areas of film and story, starting at ground level with an exceptionally believable world setting where war is taking place among the different nations.
The main characters who find themselves caught in this struggle are three teens named Katara, Sokka, and Aang (the Avatar) who have set forth to bring harmony to the world through their influence and through the powers of the still developing Avatar.
Each episode usually introduces a new and genuinely interesting opposition and/or characters to be overcome by the end of the show, and visually there is plenty of awe inspiring backgrounds and quality animation.
Aside from sweeping and moving visuals, Avatar also offers fast paced and unbelievably well choreographed action scenes (once again, second to none) and well timed slapstick comedy.
I just rewatched the whole series top to bottom and currently have a nice endorphin buzz going because this astonishing series just gets better as you go, and the final episode just plants a big smile on your face.Perfect writing, direction, story, dialog, animation, characters.
The character development and writing can match even some of the best television writers out there, it may even be able to stand toe-to-toe with the works of Joss Whedon.I give the show an easy 10/10, especially if you watch all the shows in order..
Don't get me wrong, nick has some good animated shows, like Spongebob, Fairly Oddparents, Danny Phantom is one of my favorites.
I think that it is good that they have a program with this kind of look that isn't from an established Nickelodeon company (like frederator for fairly oddparents).Anyway, I think that Avatar: The Last Airbender is a good program, and is sure to be a hit as long as Nick doesn't screw it up.
I like the animation, and the characters are right on...great idea to have the fate of the nations resting in the hands of a 12 year old boy, who wants to be a kid, but at the same time realizes he has a lot of responsibility resting on his shoulders.
It seems rare for Nickelodeon to turn out a good new show these days, and even more rare for me to like an anime style cartoon, which is why I'm baffled as to why I love this show so much.
Some of the story lines are predictable, but that doesn't turn me off of Avatar as it might some other things, which just adds more to my confusion as to why I love this show so much.
That, and when I watched the first Avatar episode, I noticed that it wasn't a 'true' anime.
Yet the fire nation has its own morals too, and we occasionally see things from their side, a technique that helps us gain better understanding for the fire nation, and even creates pathos for character's like Prince Zuko.
A series anime show with some laughs mixed in while the world literally is on the brink of destruction.So far, Nick has outdone themselves this time and if they can keep it up, Nick is going to have a brand new name for itself..
For a TV station like Nickelodeon, best known for its wacky shows like SpongeBob, Rocko's Modern Life and their sitcoms like Drake and Josh, to suddenly come out with this anime-inspired animated series with deep philosophical themes as well as tackling genocide and war, this was a massive step forward.Of course, this isn't the first form of media that has incorporated the power of the elements, but their method of how they do it here is remarkable.
Sure, you get the occasional filler episode, but every episode (leaving out The Great Divide) has a purpose and adds more layers to this intriguing story and the world it is set in.Again, for a children's show to incorporate seriously heavy topics and still have a silly sense of humour is just impressive.
Every new episode only adds to the legend of the Avatar, and if you haven't seen it, I suggest you see it soon, because you are missing something great.
I predict that "Avatar: The Last Airbender" will become the best cartoon in Nickelodeon history, if it isn't already.
The plot begins as a simple coming of age story, but quickly takes to tackling far more mature themes from the deeds of Aang's past life to struggling acceptance that not everyone can be saved, in thought provoking greying morality where right and wrong are nothing more than tidal forces.
Each season introduces a new element for Aang to master until finally he must retake the responsibilities of the Avatar and bring balance to the world.This show has so many layers that there is without doubt a character for everyone.
There are powerful, well defined story arcs, but within episodes, there are simple adventures that let each character grow and develop into almost real people.
I finished the episodes by the fistful, completing 3 complete seasons in 3 days.I never thought I would miss my friends so much because by the end of this series thats what the characters will be to you.
I would no longer get to see the wonderful lives of all characters I had grown to adore & take into confidence.Watching & experiencing this series has been one the most affirming moments of my life.I beg you not to go without experiencing the brilliant epic that is Avatar : The Last Airbender..
I've always seen this show as Nickelodeon's Harry Potter, an enthralling series with outstanding characters and an unbelievably remarkable plot line.
The world of Avatar draws heavily from various Asian cultures to create an environment for the story that, if not entirely original, is fully realized and feels like a real place with real history and culture.
The effects of elemental bending and spirit entities on the societies of Avatar are well thought-out and serve to distinguish Avatar from other Asian themed shows, giving it a unique feel (it is definitely not Anime).
Its basically about a child prodigy with unique air bending powers, who is the Avatar master of all 4 elements, who must save the world from the Fire Nation along with his friends.
I'll be turning 21 on the 12th of next month; 13 years ago around this time at the age of 7, I remember that Nickelodeon had some of the best of children's programming on cable television.
But "Avatar: The Last Airbender," what I presume is an attempt to add a little pseudo-Anime'-style animation to its lineup in order to catch stragglers from other cultures (and perhaps Nick-weary adults like myself), is a breath of fresh air for this once-tired soul.
While I don't think today's kids may completely understand the overall significance of some of this show's philosophy, subtext and terms (how many 5-year-olds know what an "avatar" is?), they may not have to be versed in Eastern Thought to get everything.
Two Water Tribe teenagers, a brother and sister named Sokka and Katara, respectively, make the discovery of a lifetime when they find that Aang, a 12-year-old Airbender who was frozen in a block of ice and also happens to be the last of his kind, is the new Avatar.
I think I've already watched it about 5 times through because the storyline and characters are ones you yearn to revisit like old friends.
The voice acting was excellent, each voice actor blending emotions into their respective character and making us truly feel for them when they get hurt, when they experience sadness or happiness and so forth, and make us really come to care for them in time.
With an incredible story, beautiful animation, amazing characters, great villains and awesome action sequences, it's simply flawless in every way possible.Season 1 starts off slowly but only because of the terrific character introductions and world building, introducing the lovable team of protagonists, Aang, Katara and Sokka, being chased by the angsty Prince Zuko, accompanied by his adorable and wise uncle.Season 2 is probably the best of the three, and introduces an awesome new character, Toph, and a perfect new villain, Azula.
The animation also improves and is packed with action, emotion and epicness.The Final Season is also magnificent and the characters are at their best at this point, and so is the animation quality.Overall this show is a must!
Korra & Avatar are both amazing, story driven shows, with some of the best characters out there.
I might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that by the end of Avatar and the last season of Korra, both shows were getting into trouble.
It has lovable characters, real dangers, plot development, perfectly-timed comedy and a really well thought out storyline.This series is perfectly suited to adults and children alike.
Don't kid yourself there are serious issues dealt with but many children will miss those themes and will just appreciate the comedy.If you find yourself enjoying this series then I also recommend you watch The Legend of Korra too.
We waited patiently, watching Aang on a long adventure with his friends, Katara (voiced by Mae Whitman), Sokka (voiced by Jack De Sena), Appa (voiced by Dee Bradley Baker) and Toph, until the huge, climactic finale which ended everything satisfyingly.So, as you can tell from my review, this is a brilliant series.
Avatar the Last Airbender was a strong show with good writing, acting, storytelling, art/animation, music, pretty much everything.
There definitely is a simple reason this show is as recognized and praised at it is: It's a masterpiece.Revolutionary to it's genre in every single way and filled with deep, complex and meaningful messages and themes that are carried through some of the most engaging, well-rounded and well developed characters I've seen in any animated series, A:TLA certainly stands out not only in the long list of Nickelodeon shows, but it also holds a special place in the history of animation itself.The setting is simply magical.
Avatar carries it in a FRESH way, unlike most "mindless action" shows out there (like most of it's elements) and with enhancing touches of Asia all over it.
Gorgeous and detailed background art and beautiful animation in a unique mix of eastern and western style bring said world to life, and surprisingly clever dialog seal the deal and turn this show into an epic adventure with a solid plot executed as close to perfection as this humble reviewer has ever seen..
I was looking for something good to watch and was expecting Avatar to be average at best, but I was so wrong.
Watching Avatar truly felt like a going on a journey, with these characters and this world.
Watch Avatar if you love fantasy, animation, East Asian culture, and epic Lord of the Rings-esque stories..
Avatar: The Last Airbender is one of the best shows I've ever watched.
I ignored everyone's comments for YEARS, whenever they hear that I never watched a single episode of avatar in my life.
He said he would re-watch the whole avatar episodes with me just to get me started.
It tells the stories of Aang, the last of his race who must come to terms with his loneliness and realize his purpose in life and bring peace to the world, and Zuko, the banished prince of the Fire Nation, who goes on an Odyssey to capture the Avatar and regain his honor.
Avatar: The Last Airbender is one of my favourite animated TV Shows.
Awesome Characters, a fantastic World and an great Storyline awaits you in Nicks best and standout Series..
I watched this series when I was 14 years old and I liked it a lot.
I thought watching the cartoon series was over but Nickelodeon always came unexpectedly and better
Avatar: the Last Airbender stands head and shoulders above any other children's programming, and mostly only contends against Batman: the Animated Series for top seat.
If you enjoy action, romance, comedy, adventure or all of the above, Avatar is a much watch.
When I first heard of this show, I was a bit skeptical as it was commonly referred to as a kids show, but after watching this I can confidently say that despite some shoddy writing (I suppose used to appeal better to a younger audience) this is the best show I have seen.Character development is superb and you get to feel each major character in the show and what their viewpoints are.
The animation is impressive, despite being only available in DVD quality, the art is well detailed and animation smoothness is superior to many Anime I have seen, this is truly on- par or better than Japanese shows I have seen which is surprising considering American animation is generally thought as not being that great.All this with a solid ending makes this a truly superb show and I highly recommend watching this if you are looking for a good TV show to watch or want to get into Anime as this is a good sort-of introduction into the art style..
Also the character of Ang its very charismatic and forward going, which makes a great leading and backbone to the story.I really liked apa too he is a very good friend and has those big eyes to see his good spirit and soul.the four nations are well explained and You get a understanding of the power of the elements in our life.
With a mix of beautiful writing, memorable characters, and very funny moments, this show makes me want to bow to Michael Dante DiMartino and Bryan Konietzko.Yes, it's that good.You need to watch the entire show.
Now that I have said that, I would like to thank Michael Dante DiMartino and Bryan Konietzko endlessly for the unparalleled thought, work, effort, love, and genuineness that you put into this masterpiece, and to everyone involved.I started watching this show when I was 8 years old in February of 2005 when Nickelodeon was hyping it up just as they do with all of their new shows.
I'm extremely grateful I had avatar growing up and watching new episodes live from the very beginning to the very end.
Though for some reason we don't get to see that a lot, especially on TV, but Avatar hosts a wide selection of dynamic and relatable characters as well as a creative, well thought through storyline.The premise sets us in a world filled with humans, amazing creatures, and spirits.
I also enjoy the amazingly accurate Japanese cultural referencing, like for example the martial arts moves used in the action sequences, if you look it up you would find that a lot of those moves actually exist.You can't go wrong with Avatar, it's a story of war mixed with heart and comedy supported by awesome characters and excellent animation.
Turns out the people I heard the word from weren't kidding: the saga of Aang, the last airbender and Avatar, who masters the four elements (air, earth, water, fire) and has to save the world by stopping the power-hungry fire lord, Ozai, is as epic as anything I've ever seen.
Everything he went through was just so full of suspense and tragedy you'll really enjoy watching his journey even though it's not always turning out good for him.Avatar: The Last Airbender is not just a cartoon, it's an expirience I'll recommend to anyone who likes engaging storytelling and creative world building..
I cant write every single thing that is FANTASTIC about this Animated series, you only have to watched it, it have many life lessons, and an art of history, this should been more popular than violence animated shows in this days, kids prefers absurd violence, and the sad thing is that the adults also like violence, but this show has violence, because sometimes is necessary, but not all the time, this show always try to make a peaceful treat, its sad that the today animated series only try to put violence and stupid jokes, and make kids dumb, showing them a fake view of what is life, this shows give you the true view of LIFE, and the best part is that you connect with his characters, and the kids can understand it, this makes this series even more special, no other show can explain a complicated topic to kids, but this show is the exception..
This is honestly one of the best shows ive ever seen it has a beautiful animation style that is a mix between western and Japanese animation, a wonderful cast of characters who all grow throughout thee series and a great story.
It is the only show I feel like connected emotionally and I think the best cartoon / anime series ever.
I would say "The Last Airbender" is one of the best animation series that I have ever seen and reviewed over and over.
As well as funny and complicated all in all I think Avatar is an amazing series and I highly recommend it.
But The Last Airbender, isn't just Nickelodeon's best show, it is a shining example of great storytelling, great nuanced characters, outstanding voice-acting and beautiful stylish animation.
Avatar: The Last Air Bender is one of my favorite TV shows of all time, and not just animated shows, among all TV shows!
But when the world needed him most he vanished." The story begins with the emergence of Avatar Aang, a 8 year old Avatar whose hands holds the fate of the World.Anyhow a must watch TC series.
Best Animated Series of All Time.
When I was about to watch Avatar: The Last Airbender, I wasn't sure it would be even good and just another Anime-wannabe.
For now, this series is again a Masterpiece, an art that will stand in time and heart of people, the pinnacle for storytelling in American Cartoon Story and the rise of a new amazing fictional world.
My Verdict: A masterpiece series with amazing story, characters, music and how simple it is.
The character development is superb, the animation is fantastic and the story is both sound and believable. |
tt0041699 | Nora inu | The film takes place during a heatwave in post-war Tokyo. Rookie homicide detective Murakami (Toshiro Mifune) has his Colt pistol stolen during a trolley ride. He chases the pickpocket, but loses him. Filled with shame, he reports the theft at headquarters. He prowls the city backstreets undercover for days, looking for suspects and picking up leads. He eventually picks up the trail of a gun racket.
When the stolen gun is used in a crime, Murakami partners up with the veteran detective Satō (Takashi Shimura). After questioning a suspect, Satō and Murakami end up at a baseball game looking for a gun dealer named Honda. He points them to Yusa, a disenchanted war veteran who has resorted to crime. They investigate Yusa's sister's house and his sweetheart, showgirl Harumi Namiki (Keiko Awaji), to no avail.
Murakami's gun is used again, this time as a murder weapon. They question Namiki at her mother's house. She is still reticent to talk, so Satō leaves to investigate Yusa's trail, while Murakami remains behind. Satō comes across Yusa's last hideout. He places a call for Murakami, but, just as he is about to reveal Yusa's location, the criminal makes a run for it. Satō gives chase, but is shot in the rain and left for dead. A desperate Murakami arrives soon enough to donate blood to his friend at the hospital.
The following morning, Namiki has a change of heart and informs Murakami at the hospital that she had an appointment with Yusa at a train station nearby. Murakami races to the meeting and deduces who Yusa is from his mud spattered clothing. He pursues his quarry into a forest and is wounded in the arm, but manages to take Yusa into custody. Back at the hospital, Satō has recovered and congratulates Murakami on his first citation. Murakami reflects on Yusa's plight and on the parallels between him and the criminal. Satō tells him to forget about Yusa and get ready for the cases he will solve in the future. | bleak, suspenseful, murder, atmospheric, flashback | train | wikipedia | I have long regarded the 1952 "Ikiru" as his greatest achievement, with the three modern day day films starring Toshiro Mifune that precede it, "Drunken Angel", "The Quiet Duel" and "Stray Dog", fascinating consolidations of his skill as a director.
Music, also is great.Toshiro Mifune, looking young and handsome, is quite marvellous as the central character, a detective whose gun is stolen on a bus.
The suspense and detective-story plot are well developed in Stray Dog, but what really makes the story captivating is the revelation of the central character's feeling of guilt throughout, and his learning about crime, criminals, and that what is important is to make good come of your mistakes..
STRAY DOG stands as the legendary Akira Kurosawa's first real masterpiece, noteworthy for at least two big reasons: the style - classic American film noir (rich, velvety b&w atmospheres), enhanced with a touch of Italian neo-realism (great use of diverse locations, which provide a great view of day-to-day postwar Japan), and the star, a young Toshiro Mifune, whose truly collaborative association with Kurosawa was cemented here, and would grow in spectacular fashion during the subsequent 16 years.
As an example of film noir, STRAY DOG offers plenty of gripping suspense and moral complexity, and holds up well alongside classics like THE BIG HEAT, THE KILLING or THE MALTESE FALCON.
Here, Kurosawa doesn't quite have the sureness of touch which would characterize most of his career, but Stray Dog is nevertheless a fine film noir and an effective exploration of Kurosawa's ideas about postwar Japan in particular and the human condition in general.As you might expect from such a genius, Kurosawa is not satisfied with a simple good-guys/bad-guys cops-and-robbers story.
Indeed, a series of mistakes by the hero, rookie detective Murakami (Toshiro Mifune), are one factor behind Yusa's crimes.But neither is Stray Dog a facile blame-society message film, either.
That he chose differently is his responsibility.But even more interesting to me is the character of chief detective Sato (Takashi Shimura), Murakami's superior officer, mentor, and friend.Sato is the wise elder figure in this film, and in the hands of a lesser artist than Kurosawa, such a character generally ends up as a mouthpiece for the director's own viewpoint.
In ravished, Post-War Tokyo, rookie Detective Murakami's (Young Toshiro Mifune) gun is stolen.
The man-hunt is on, while Tokyo goes through a devastating heatwave, and Mifune goes through an equally devastating change ("A Stray Dog sees only what it chases" a detective warns him.) Made well before Akira Kurosawa became famous for "Rashomon", "Stray Dog" is a roaring classic!
Akira Kurosawa's STRAY DOG (English title) is a riveting, poetic vision of a young Tokyo officer (Toshiro Mifune) who's handgun is stolen from him on a bus.
His basic premise is deceptively simple- a nervous but completely professional and slightly worn-down cop, played by a young & trim Toshiro Mifune, gets his gun pick-pocketed on the subway, and he spends at least half of the film on his own looking for it.
Like De Sica, to a degree, Kurosawa uses the post-war streets and real locations (it's not all just Toho this time), and it adds that layer of heightened realism for our main characters on the prowl; in fact one could look at this film as being like the Bicycle Thief (looking for a lost item in the dark places of the city) had it been written with a fair amount less sentiment and more grit.When the suspense comes forth, it's really a knockout, especially when it comes time for he final confrontation with the thief, where it becomes such a struggle that the two are like, well, dogs, very primal as it boils down to the law versus the criminal.
There's a certain sense of time and structure that sets apart Stray Dog from the numerous 'film-noirs' of American cinema of the period- while it contains the kind of determined edge and wit of those films, it also relies on portraying the people in this world as honestly as possible, however downtrodden things are (like Kurosawa's later film High & Low, location adds to the mood greatly).
This early Kurosawa effort floats stylistically somewhere between the film noir and neo-realism, incorporating the best from both worlds to elaborately craft a landscape (both physical and social) of post-war Japan.
War veterans return home to find a country torn by poverty and as the saying goes, desperate conditions demand desperate measures.A very young Toshiro Mifune plays the greenhorn detective who has his gun stolen and spends the rest of the movie trying to track down the culprit.
As it turns out the culprit is a war veteran just like Mifune's character, only where the latter tried to do good and found an honest job, the former opted for the easy way out and became a criminal, using the stolen gun to rob and kill.
What makes matters worse for him is that every time his stolen gun is fired someone dies or gets injured, which adds another burden of guilt on the shoulders of the young detective.The story might appear too moralistic and convenient (both antagonist and protagonist share a common background, being war veterans, making the distinction of good and bad all too easy), but it has to be seen in the context of the times.
Kurosawa here neatly balances the social climate of post-war Japan and the conditions of the times with personal responsibility.Story-wise it's a worthy effort, but like Rashomon, it sounds a little bit better than it actually is.
There's also a silent 10 minute montage of location footage shot in rundown neighborhoods as Sato searches the black market for his gun, which serves as a poignant snapshot of Japanese history.Kurosawa would go on to achieve international acclaim with his next movie, Rashomon, but Stray Dog already shows that he was destined for great things.
And while some moments feel overlong, such as the cop's undercover work, there are nice bits like his dogging a suspect or that suspect's later interrogation by an older and wiser cop.The movie hits high Kurosawa in its fantastic forth.
The gun has seven bullets, and by the end of the film, all of them have been fired.Director Akira Kurosawa delivers a high quality effort in capturing a tense atmosphere and stifling Tokyo heat.
As usual, Toshiro Mifune and Takashi Shimura once again gave great performances as the main characters in the movie.Highly recommended for Kurosawa fans as well as fans of crime films in general.7/10.
Finally, my drought has been broken, as I sat down last night to enjoy 'Nora inu / Stray Dog (1949).' A police procedural in the classic film-noir tradition, the film stars Kurosawa-regular Toshirô Mifune as a young homicide detective whose firearm is pick-pocketed while on a bus.
Though it is not quite the masterpiece I had {probably unreasonably} been anticipating, I can only promise that my first Kurosawa will certainly not be my last.Surprisingly, 'Stray Dog' is similar in many regards to Vittorio De Sica's neorealist masterpiece 'The Bicycle Thief (1948).' Both films concern a disillusioned man's seemingly-futile search for an essential stolen object, in a city of poor and pitiable individuals, where, in the aftermath of World War Two, widespread economic difficulties have forced many towards a life of crime.
In the story's climactic chase sequence, the two men tussle violently in the undergrowth, their faces becoming coated in a layer of mud; for a decisive few moments, detective and criminal are practically indistinguishable from each other.One component of film-making that Kurosawa had evidently mastered by 1949 was creating intensity, and, in many ways, 'Stray Dog' is simply discomforting to watch.
STRAY DOG is a relatively early crime film in the career of Japanese auteur Akira Kurosawa.
What really drives this steady progression of overwhelming heat is the simple act in the beginning of the film of Det. Murakami's (Toshiro Mifune) pistol being stolen, triggering an intense and labouring journey through the city, where every moment in which the gun is clutched in the hands of a criminal, and every time it's used for some crime, the anxiety is increased immeasurably.
Kurosawa loved the master/pupil dynamic, and this is employed brilliantly in the police procedural format, so as the two detectives scour the city through blood and sweat, dirt and shimmering heat, from a Baseball game to a Burlesque show, getting closer to the man with the gun, the final confrontation itself rests purely on the shoulders of Mifune, in what is a beautiful unburdening of all that accumulated tension.
What is special about Stray Dog is the story, in the action you feel the summer heat and Mifune's self-loathing, but emphasis is cleverly put on the goodness of ordinary people and the world's beauty.
I remember Ali and his sister Zahra, in permanent anxiety about the tennis shoes worn they share.And behold, with its immense sensitivity to the common people and humanistic lyricism that flowed constantly, also the master Akira Kurosawa was busy making a film where, for a rookie detective, your weapon becomes endowment constant goal, when it was stolen on a bus.
Stray Dog is the other detective noir film by Kurosawa along with High and Low. In this film a rookie homicide detective has his gun stolen which leads to a string of crimes each more violent than the previous.
Stray Dog together with Rashomon are the two films that boosted Kurosawa into international popularity as a great filmmaker.Murakami (Toshiro Mifune) is a young police detective.
In particular, there are portraits of two women from the sleazy underworld that stand out - he really lavishes attention on them and it does the film the world of good because the cops have long become tiresome.The weather is close and the tension is building (way too much mopping of the brow from Shimura) - an old trick to build atmosphere, but it does provide the opportunity for several climactic scenes that run concurrently as the storm breaks.The story is worthless, but watch it for the technique..
As one might have expected, it's also happened in the case of Stray Dog. Although the picture is greatly influenced by the western noir genre and it looks but that way, it clearly possess this mesmerizing Japanese touch, making it even more astounding and provoking than many classic American crime pictures.
What's fascinating about Stray Dog is the fact that it starts with such a seemingly trivial matter like a stolen gun, but proceeds to develop a mostly riveting intrigue filled with unnecessary murder and deep obsession.The storyline closely follows Detective Murakami (Toshiro Mifune) who – along with Detective Sato (Takashi Shimura) – embarks on a dangerous journey in order to find his precious Colt.
Apart from creating a visually stunning masterpiece and a truly compelling detective story, Kurosawa also skillfully persuaded the audience that behind most violent acts hides a purpose, even when it all seems like the work of a titular stray dog.
They're on the hunt for a killer who has, by various means and routes, gotten hold of Mifune's gun, pick-pocketed from him on a bus.That stray dog could also possibly be seen as the desperate cop trying to pick up on any lead possible, walking miles in the heat, his sweated, frustrated brow superimposed onto shots of a bustling postwar Tokyo.I watched this from the BFI's very nice Kurosawa Crime Collection and is an early Kurosawa, from 1949.
Like many others, my first Kurosawa film was "The Seven Samurai." I enjoyed his films, but until watching Stray Dog I thought that his work all took place in feudal Japan.
This was one of Kurosawa's first films and was set in modern Japan.Kurosawa regular Toshiro Mifune plays a rookie police officer whose gun is stolen on a hot summer day.
From there, he an a veteran detective track down his gun as it is used to commit armed robberies and a murder.The focal point of this film is really Mifune's character.
I really liked him in Stray Dog because, in the way he smoothly extracts information from shady characters and efficiently makes use of his time and effort, he is the perfect contrast to Mifune, who lashes out in all directions to recover his stolen gun.
So you know Kurosawa is into more, he's a filmmaker who announces at the beginning of his film, though his narrator, that this story is set during a heat wave, and who will remark you that all the time and even occupy like 3 minutes to simply show that (that scene when we see the dancers sweat).
Stray Dog. Stray Dog (1949) *** (out of 4) Kurosawa's film noir about a rookie detective (Toshiro Mifune) who suffers great humiliation after a pickpocket steals his gun.
I just finished watching the Criterion edition of Akira Kurosawa's "Stray Dog," and I honestly cannot think of a better thing to say than, "Oh, my God!" This movie, clocking in at just over two hours, so mesmerized me with its story, naturalistic acting and technique, I honestly did not notice the time.
One of his earlier efforts, Stray Dog is nevertheless a masterful weaving of what we would come to expect from a film by the Japanese Maestro.The legendary Toshiro Mifune stars as a police detective who gets his gun stolen on a crowded city bus.
A detective whose gun is stolen; he sets out on an odyssey to reclaim his weapon, and to seek out a killer.Not Kurosawas best but here you see a young Toshiro Mifune acts great.I must say that this film has aged a bit and overall it´s not perfect but still very exciting and the acting is superb.4,5 out of 5.
Fearing for his job, and fuelled by embarrassment he sets out to find his pistol, which has been used in two crimes by the thief, in Tokyo during a sweltering heatwave...Kurosawa's western influences are as clear as ever in Stray Dog, as for all intents and purposes it plays like a conventional American police story.
The symmetry of the shot creates a parallel between the two characters which is further explored in the rest of the movie, revealing that the two men are of the same kind.The acting is wonderful, Takashi Shimura does a great job in portraying his veteran/mentor character and a young Mifune does a great job in showing Murukami's shame and lack of self confidence.It's a shame the quality of the picture isn't as good as other black and white films but the movie's from 1949 so you can't really blame Kurosawa.
Turns out the criminal is of the same generation as Mifune, a veteran like Mifune, and they have simply taken different paths in the squalor and chaos (meticulously depicted) of postwar Japan.Mifune ends up seconding a wily veteran cop on the case (Takashi Shimura, who played Mifune's doctor/mentor in the star's first film for Kurosawa, "Drunken Angel"), and a series of mounting climaxes follows.
This is one of those times when a sensibility profoundly Japanese (the young cop's sense of personal responsibility and shame) figures in a Kurosawa film, and yet we westerners are able to identify strongly with it -- even as Shimura and the partners' superiors act as voices of reason and experience, and tell Mifune at every turn that it's useless, no matter what the circumstances, to blame anyone but the fugitive.The gun had seven bullets when it was stolen, and the movie makes Mifune (and us) conscious of the remaining number after each occasion the gun is used.
Stray Dog is directed by Akira Kurosawa, is written by Kurosawa and Ryuzo Kikushima,has music by Fumio Hayasaka and stars Toshiro Mifune and Takashi Shimura.During a heatwave young detective Murakami(Toshiro Mifune)is devastated when his police gun is stolen while he is on a bus.
Kurosawa's 'film noir' about a rookie police officer (Toshiro Mifune) who loses his gun, and then endures shame and guilt as it's used in robberies and murder while he tries to track it down with a more seasoned officer (Takashi Shimura).
Take the untouchables like "Rashomon", "Ran", "The Seven Samurai", "Yojinbo" or "Ikiru", then consider "Sanjuro", "Kagemusha", "Throne of Blood", "Red-Beard", and when you explore with more depth the Master's oeuvre, you find some great movies, hardly mentioned by the critics or discussed by the fans, underrated gems such as "The Bad Sleep Well", "The Idiot", "I Live in Fear", "Scandal", the epitaphic "Madadayo" and the movie I will review now, "Stray Dog"."Stray Dog" is probably the ancestor of the buddy cop and it features the greatest tandem one could dream of in a Kurosawa film, a youngish and quite handsome looking Toshiro Mifune as the rookie Detective homicide cop Murakami, and Takashi Shimura as Sato, the veteran cop.
In addition to these basic film noir elements, Stray Dog deals with common themes for Kurosawa, honor, morality and responsibility.A gun, colt has been pick pocketed from a new policeman, Murakami (Toshiro Mifune).
However, unlike Kurosawa's greater films (Dodes'ka-den and Rashomon), Stray Dog still feels like a young man's work.
Shot in black and white, it tells the story of a young detective in post-war Japan, who gets his gun stolen.
But then again, this film is not about Japan's post-war-era of reconstruction.) During a sweltering summer heatwave, a pistol belonging to young Detective Murakami (a young Toshiro Mifune, one of Kurosawa's cinematic regulars) is stolen by a pickpocket while riding on a crowded city bus one day.
During this time, he is also partnered up with an older, more experienced homicide detective, Sato (Takashi Shimura, another Kurosawa regular, most famous for "Ikiru" and "Seven Samurai," perhaps), to nab Yusa, the so-called "stray dog" of the title.
With the assistance of veteran cop, Detective Sato (Takashi Shimura), Murakami delves into the seamy underworld of black market dealers and desperate criminals in a race against time to recover the weapon.Made before Kurosawa's famed Rashomon, STRAY DOG is a noir-style examination of responsibility and the chain of destruction and harm generated by the material cause of one moments inattention.
This film is a must see for fans of kurosawa, mifune, noir, or detective procedurals. |
tt0362808 | Koroshiya 1: The Animation Episode 0 | In a flashback, Ichi masturbates on an apartment balcony while watching a pimp assault a prostitute within.
Off-camera, sadistic crime underboss Anjo is brutally murdered. An expert cleaning crew run by Jijii (Shinya Tsukamoto) immediately removes any trace of Anjo's remains, and credits Ichi for the kill. Later, Kakihara (Tadanobu Asano), Anjo's sadomasochistic enforcer, and other crime lords visit the spotless apartment, concluding that Anjo fled town with the prostitute and ¥3 million of the gang's money.
Kakihara visits an underworld night club with other gang members. He tells Anjo's girlfriend, an English-speaking Chinese prostitute named Karen (Alien Sun) that Anjo must still be alive, though perhaps kidnapped by a rival gang. He also greets Jijii and the cleaning crew at another table, unaware they were in town, and asking them to contact him if they learn anything of Anjo's status.
Jijii feeds Kakihara rumors suggesting that Suzuki (Susumu Terajima), a member of the rival Funaki clan, has kidnapped Anjo. Kakihara captures Suzuki and tortures him with suspension and piercing, but when Suzuki turns out to be innocent, Kakihara slices off the end of his own tongue and offers it to Suzuki's boss (Jun Kunimura) as penance.
Kakihara and gang members raid a hotel room and capture Kano, a drug-addled member of the cleaning crew who has had facial plastic surgery since Kakihara last saw him, but admits his identity and past acquaintance with Kakihara when he believes he will be killed. He reveals that although he helped clean up the murder scene, it was Ichi who killed Anjo, and Kakihara has now been targeted.
Returning to the opening flashback, Ichi is stepping in from the balcony to kill the pimp brutalizing Sailor, a prostitute whom Ichi patronizes. Afterwards, he tells her that he will be the one beating her up now. When Sailor assaults him, Ichi reflexively kills her as well.
At Suzuki's prompting, Kakihara is kicked out of the syndicate, but the entire Anjo gang defects with him. Suzuki then promises Jijii a million yen to 'squash' Kakihara. Jijii, it is revealed, is secretly orchestrating events in order to pit yakuza clans against one another, with the help of Ichi. Though a normally unassuming and cowardly young man, Ichi becomes homicidal and sexually aroused when enraged. Jijii is able to manipulate Ichi's weak personality by implanting several false memories — a high school rape in particular — and uses the unstable Ichi as an assassin.
While bicycling in the evening, Ichi assaults one of three boys bullying a fourth named Takeshi. Takeshi is the son of Kaneko, one of Kakihara's henchmen. Jijii incites Ichi to enter an apartment containing several criminals of the old Anjo gang, and slaughter them all. Afterward Ichi sees Takeshi, who thanks him for the earlier protection. Kaneko finds a brothel-keeper assaulting Ichi in an alley and, remembering his own long-ago rescue by a member of the Anjo gang, helps Ichi out.
Kakihara enlists the help of corrupt twin police detectives, Jirô and Saburô (Suzuki Matsuo), to find Myu-Myu, a prostitute connected with Ryu Long, a member of Jijii's gang. When Jirô fails to get information from her through torture, Saburô sniffs her body to get Long's scent and tracks him down. Though Long outruns the brothers, Kakihara captures him and with the twins tortures him for leads to Jijii.
To turn Ichi into a complete killer, Jijii has Karen, Anjo's woman and Jijii's friend, seduce Ichi by pretending to be the woman in his false memory. When Ichi becomes confused by Karen's claims that she desired for him to rape her, he kills her. Jijii calls Kakihara to let him know Ichi is coming to kill him but is spotted by one of Kakihara's men, whom he then maims and kills.
Kaneko, Kakihara and Ichi chase each other to a rooftop. Due to Jijii's psychological manipulation, Ichi believes that Kaneko is his brother and confronts him. Kaneko shoots the side of Ichi's leg, causing Ichi to slit Kaneko's throat in front of Takeshi. Takeshi attacks Ichi as he lies on the roof begging for forgiveness. Kakihara realizes Ichi cannot hurt him and inserts skewers into his ears to drown out Ichi's cries. Suddenly he sees that Ichi has chopped off Takeshi's head. Ichi charges Kakihara, embedding one of his razor-bladed boots in the center of his head. Kakihara falls from the roof to his death. However, when Jijii finds him, Kakihara has no wound in his head; he hallucinated Ichi's attack as he jumped to his death while Ichi cried.
Years later, Jijii's corpse hangs from a tree in a park. A young man resembling an older Takeshi leaves the park with a group of schoolchildren. | violence | train | wikipedia | Purists are unhappy with the dollops of SM orientated sex.
I realise Ichi hardcore fans were disappointed with this short animated feature that depicts the killer's early years, but I rather enjoyed it.
Purists are unhappy with the dollops of SM orientated sex that peppers the film and whilst I can understand that I rather liked the links made with the sex and violence.
It may come over a little pat here but it is rare enough that the link is even touched on in most mafia/yakuza movies, when the link is surely undeniable.
Some have also criticised the muddy and occasionally ugly animation, but again all seemed well suited to the subject matter.
I liked the domestic scenes and the inevitable references to school qualifications and bullying and overall thought that a very decent job had been done.
I see no sign of a sequel that would take us into the same time frame as the original live action film and this presumably reflects that not everyone felt as well disposed to this as I..
Only watch it if you've read the manga.
Do not be confused because ICHI THE KILLER: THE ANIMATION EPISODE 0 is not the prequel to Takashi Miike's 'live-action' version of Hideo Yamamoto's infamous manga, it is the prequel to Hideo Yamamoto's infamous manga.It's about Ichi when he was a student in high school and how he was bullied, what he was like when he was with his family and friends and how he became a twisted and sadistic assassin.This prequel is really cool: good animation, a well-written script and a hardcore soundtrack make this film worth a watch.
Although some people may find this film too short or too much like a big music video.
Other than that, it's worth watching, but read the comic book before watching it..
too short for hardcore ichi fans.
I saw this anime as an add on to the sensory overload that was ichi the killer.
I have to say i did not like the anime.
As well as i believe it has been done it seems like just another way of squeezing another drop of crimson fluid from a franchise that is already swimming in it.The takeshi miike voiced kakihara is just not even worth mentioning as he hardly even manages any lines.
The same set of animation occurs several times in the cartoon which isnt a good sign as the animation is only 45 minutes long.the dub is in an english accent which means no self respecting fan of the live action could sit through it.
A must see for ichi fans but a must not buy..
Very cool backstory.
This animation is actually based on the manga origins of Ichi the Killer but could still plausibly coincide with the movie.
It's well made and VERY GORY.
Even worse than the live action because it's animated.
Currently this is the only Ichi animation made but more should be coming soon.
If you liked the live action movie diffenetly pick this up..
definitely NOT for kids, first off, and with its flaws, but I liked it in its demented way.
Keep this in mind: this isn't some of the slightly more sanitized Adult Swim material on Cartoon Network.
Ichi the Killer Episode 0 is hardcore anime, meant for probably some of the sickest f****s digging around for whatever they can in the most gritty video bins in some dump of a store.
In its 40 minute running time the filmmakers backtrack into the life of Ichi, the memorable sadist from Takashi Miike's film.
It's basically all about Ichi coming back from repressed teenage years where he's got the mind of a six year old trapped in a body that's half psycho-libido, and half just psycho killer, the two merging most of the time.
Ichi is, of course, trained this way, or rather controlled by forces that use him as a killing machine.
But we also see a side to an anti-hero that we might never ever see, which makes him so much of a crazy bird that we almost try and move away from the screen as killings go on, loaded with harsh sexual connotations that would probably scar for life some small children if seen.It's a violent, insane spectacle, filled with the kind of imagery that only comes out of a comic book that has the reputation to still shock in the 21st century.
Lots of sick martial arts moments tinged with just that extra over-the-top belt of surreal mania, as Ichi cries and cries and grows aroused all the more from one killing to the next.
I recommend it probably more to those who would already be seeking out anime that's a little more than what would usually be used to seeing; the drawbacks are kinda glaring for most though, including an overbearing soundtrack (sometimes used would have been alright, but this constant starts to take a toll on the narrative, and such awful techno-pop carp), and an ending that seems to cut short just as a whole other narrative seems to start up.
It goes without saying I can't see why a show like this wouldn't be picked up - you'd need an exec with the guts of a Tarantino or, for that matter Miike, to see it through without damning the creators to hell and starting a religion to repress this trash.
But as trash it is, there's some art stuck in the middle: abstractions done and fashioned as if out of the most deranged fever dream ever conceived in anime..
Deserving of much more of the bad rep that it's received.
I've noticed a lot of people don't like this OVA for the fact that it doesn't stand up to the Miike film that was released a year before this OVA.
This review is from someone who has read half the manga currently and has seen the Miike film three times and is currently watching it for a fourth as I write this review.
Although I can see their point, I think it's important to take this at face value as a different form and new look into a series.
This isn't meant to be related to the movie in any way, and going into it expecting it to be similar will ruin the experience for you.-- Story --So this isn't so much of a retelling of the manga as much of a sort of backstory into Ichi himself.
If you're coming into this expecting the gore and slasher themes of the film or manga, you're going to be disappointed.
Although some of the depraved aspects of the franchise are present, this isn' the ultimate gore fest that many people are used to and I think that really has to be kept in mind before watching.
Aspects of the manga and film are present to a small degree but in reality, this is its own work with no ties.
I cannot emphasise that enough.
It has enough of the dark and gritty aspects of the franchise to keep some hooked; this is more of a character study, however.
It's an interesting look into Ichi himself as a person and how he became to be.
It's more of a somewhat psychological take behind a character which is something I did hope for in the franchise - the characters are so twisted and dark, there's an underlying questions as to why they've become the way they have and the people they are in the franchise at the current time.
Frankly, I'd quite like an anime like this surrounding Kakihara and his backstory.-- Art --The art isn't as good as you'd expect for an anime franchise of something as famous in the horror scene as Ichi the Killer and that is a letdown.
Although the use of colouring is well done and fits the mood, there's a lot of repeated frames and even some repeated scenes that have been copied and pasted into the final edit.
It makes it feel like the OVA was slightly rushed through nearer the end as if they were panicked about a time schedule and had to just do with what they had to make the best they could.
If that's the case, I can forgive the repetition, but if it's not then it's a shame and it could have been done better.
I haven't found evidence to support either so I'm unsure where I fully stand on the art.-- Sound --The sound work in this was excellent.
The voice actors were perfect for their characters and the use of sounds in specific scenes was spot on.
Some of the sounds really made me squirm and it was really well done from a sound aspect.
I did get a curious knock on the door from my neighbour checking everything was alright after I had the volume on this too loud whilst watching.-- Character --It's hard to review this from a character aspect, truly.
Although we see glimpses of other characters this is more around Ichi than anyone else.
It would be best described as a character case study.
For that, I was going to rate this less than I gave it until I sat back and wrote this.
For a character study arc, of sorts, this did really well with Ichi.
It really dug into him and his character, the things that have made him who he has become in the franchise we know.
It took a new eye to him then the base knowledge we knew and showed his development over a period of time to become the depraved maniac everyone knows from the franchise.
The voice acting was spot on and Ichi's reactions felt so realistic.
The characterisation was really well done and it really allowed a better look into Ichi and a new look into the franchise.-- Enjoyment --I really did enjoy this.
I was a little let down with the fact that not all characters were present and that the story wasn't the same - but I did get to adapt and realise this wasn't another retelling of the story.
That really boosted my enjoyment of the OVA and allowed me to settle back and just enjoy the full OVA.
It was reminiscent enough of the original story for that small thrill, but not enough to feel like it was just another retelling of what I'd already watched or read and I liked that a lot.-- Overall --Overall, I'm going to be honest.
I think this was given a bad rep by people that were too occupied with the movie and compared it instead of taking it for what it is.
It's reminiscent of the story but in a new way that's been adapted to not be another retelling and I think that took a lot of guts on the creators part.
To create something like this and add in a lot of new information not present in a franchise with such a large cult following takes a lot of balls.
It's a fresh new take and it was refreshing, to say the least, knowing I wasn't going to be watching the full story once again.Does Ichi the Killer deserve a full R-Rate anime series?
More than likely, everyone will say yes, and I agree.
Is this anime OVA that series?
Is this worth a chance with fresh eyes?
In my opinion, it definitely does..
Dreadful.
This anime was dreadful.
Poor script, shockingly amateur animation and a bland and pointless story.
It starts well, the DVD menu is colourful and music seems cool.
But as soon as you start watching the film it becomes obvious how cheap it is.
The plot is predictable; boy is bullied and his anger is suppressed, he eventually becomes a killer.
Triggered by a few events, one including a pointless brutal sex scene.
So badly done, that no emotions are stirred at all.
You just couldn't care less about any of the characters.There are plenty better anime films out there.
Watch anything by Studio Ghibli and you will never want to watch anything this bad ever again.
1 Star..
Before Ichi was a killer.
*Minor Spoilers Herein*This Japanese Anime begins during Kekihara and Ichi's duel from the film Ichi the Killer (Although i have a feeling that this is drawn in a way that is more similar to the Ichi the Killer Manga than the film...) before flashing back to explain how it was that Ichi became a killer.The story itself begins interesting enough, but the excessive use of nudity (Ichi's parents are big into S&M, as is apparently everyone in Ichi and Kekihara's world) and bizarre cell shading techniques gives this anime an almost childish feeling.
The story comes across as rather forced and unrealistic (not unrealistic in the same way that the film was) with Ichi growing up in a school that is more like a prison, coming home to listen to the moans of his parents next door.
The low budget is what really hurts this film,and more focus on actual story substance, rather than trying to 'shocking' would have helped this prequel.
It's okay, and if you've seen Ichi the Killer you'll have to see this, but i expected a lot more.
Hopefully more Ichi the Killer animation (with a bigger) budget will be released.
Let's just hope it's better written and better directed..
Just when I thought it was safe to pull out my Ichi The Killer DVD again....
As a fan of Koroshiya 1 (or Ichi the Killer, as the English title is), the I knew this was going to rock.
Unfourtanately I was wrong.
The story is boring and predictable, it could have been something written in 10 minutes by some high school student Here's what else is wrong: 1.
It's way too short, 40 minutes long, and Like ICHI-1 (which I also own and hated), does not advance the story well.
Could have been an extra on the IchI The Killer Uncut DVD.2.
Too many things in the plot you don't even care about, including pointless sex scenes (EG.
Hajime's (Ichi) parents talking, then all of a sudden, random S&M scene!).3.
Muddy animation 4.
Voice acting is irritatingly terrible.
I am an Anime fan, but the acting was stupid.
Even the English voice acting sucked.5.
Like one person said, It's like a stupid Ichi Fanfiction, just in anime form.6.
The music sucks.
Ergo, when Ichi accidentally kills the rabbit, instead of suspenseful music you just get lame techno music with some chick writhing as if she's having an orgasm.So avoid this at all costs.
It's for your own good. |
tt0302640 | The Hot Chick | In the palace of the Abyssinian King (Ozman Sirgood) in 50 BC, Princess Nawa (Shazia Ali) uses a pair of enchanted earrings to escape an arranged marriage by swapping bodies with a slave girl (Vivian Corado). When each woman wears one of the earrings, their bodies magically trade places while their minds remain where they were.
In the present day, Jessica Spencer (Rachel McAdams) is a popular high school girl in suburban California with her friends April (Anna Faris), Keecia (Maritza Murray), and Lulu (Alexandra Holden). April is Jessica's best friend, and all four girls are cheerleaders. At school one day, Jessica makes fun of an overweight girl named Hildenburg (Megan Kuhlmann) and a wiccan girl named Eden (Sam Doumit). After that, Jessica and her friends visit the local mall, where Jessica frames her rival Bianca (Maria-Elena Laas) for shoplifting, and finds the earrings in an African-themed store. The earrings are not for sale, so Jessica steals them.
Shortly afterward, a small-time criminal named Clive Maxtone (Rob Schneider) robs a nearby gas station. When Jessica and her friends stop there and mistake him for an employee, he services their car to avoid raising suspicion. Jessica accidentally drops one of the earrings on the ground, and Clive picks it up after the girls drive away. That evening, Jessica and Clive put on their earrings. When they wake up the next morning, each of them is trapped in the other's body. This is especially difficult for Jessica, who has a cheerleading competition and the school prom coming up soon. While at first difficult, Jessica convinces April, Keecia, and Lulu of her true identity.
The girls write a list of suspects of who could be responsible. They first seek Hildenburg, where Jessica apologizes for humiliating her in front of the entire school during the basketball game earlier, and the two make amends. They soon seek Eden, where Jessica also apologizes for her jealousy of Eden getting the only "A" on a report of the Salem witch trials. Eden reveals an ancient Latin witchcraft called "Santeria", which originated in Africa, and found its way into Cuba and Brazil. Lulu ties this connection to Bianca, but Eden reveals that only a tattoo of a scorpion on her back could confirm this. While investigating at a dance club called 'Instant Tang', Bianca is proven innocent after Jessica rips her shirt to see if she has the tattoo, which she doesn't.
The girls then find a picture of the earrings on the internet, and the girls post fliers all over town. They also get help from Keecia's awkward mother (Jodi Long) and Venetia and Sissie (Tia Mowry and Tamera Mowry), twin sisters who are on Jessica's cheerleading squad. The girls tell this to Madame Mambuza (Angie Stone), the owner of the African store at the mall. Madame Mambuza tells the girls the story of Princess Nawa, who, after switching bodies, was unaware that she had to bring the earrings back together. Nawa lived the rest of her life in the slave's body. Jessica could suffer the same fate if she does not unite the earrings before the end of the full moon.
Meanwhile, Jessica is hired for two jobs while secretly living with April. At her home, where she works as a gardener named Taquito, her parents tell her about their marital problems and she helps them rekindle their sex life. At school, while cleaning the boys' locker room as a janitor, she spies on her boyfriend Billy (Matthew Lawrence), who truly loves her and April's boyfriend Jake (Eric Christian Olsen), who secretly has another girlfriend named Monique (Ashlee Simpson). Faced with Jake's infidelity, April breaks up with him, and Jessica agrees to take her to the prom. At the cheerleading competition, Jessica signals romantically to Billy while disguised as the school mascot, but when the head of her suit falls off, he becomes confused and leaves with Bianca.
During this time, Clive has been using Jessica's body to make money from men, including Billy, who gives him his money and car, believing he is Jessica. On the evening of the prom, Hildenburg sees a video of Clive robbing a man on the television news and goes to the scene of the crime. After finding a business card for the club where Clive works as a pole dancer, she informs Jessica at the prom, and the girls go to the club. When they find Clive, Jessica steals his earring and puts it on herself along with the other one. With the two earrings now on the same person, Jessica's and Clive's bodies return to their original owners.
After Jessica makes up with Billy, the film ends with the school's graduation ceremony, where Keecia and her mother reconcile. The previous night, Clive, running from the law and still dressed in lingerie, jumps into the car of the same bartender (Scott Dolezal) Jessica encountered in the body of Clive. The bartender smiles and locks the car door. The movie ends with the car speeding away, and Clive turning around and screaming. | comedy, humor, adult comedy | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0043086 | Under the Gun | At a Miami nightclub, gangster Bert Galvin offers to take singer Ruth Williams under his wing and to New York, helping her career. She agrees once it is made clear that their relationship will be strictly business.
On the road, they stop for dinner at Claude's Restaurant, where Bert knows the owner. The local sheriff, Bill Langley, recognizes Bert and tips off a revenge-minded man whose brother Bert killed. But given a warning by Claude what's about to happen, Bert shoots and kills the man.
Charged with murder, Bert is defended by Milo Bragg, a smooth-talking Southern lawyer. Claude testifies that the killing was in self-defense. Ruth is expected to do the same, but when district attorney Arthur Sherbourne reminds her that she's under oath, Ruth breaks down and tells the truth.
Bert is convicted and sentenced to 20 years in a prison farm. There, prisoners are all literally "under the gun" of a ruthless trustee, Nugent, who is a convict like themselves but carries a rifle. Bert intends to escape, but fellow inmate Sam Gower befriends him and explains that a trustee is promised an immediate pardon if he should kill any prisoner who tries to flee.
As a test, Bert lies to a gullible con called Five Shot that there's $25,000 waiting for him if he can break out. Five Shot is killed by Nugent, who does indeed immediately receive his parole. Bert seizes the opportunity to take his place as trustee.
Bragg, the lawyer, pays a visit, now a drunk, disbarred and desperate for money. Bert has him dig up information about Gower, his fellow inmate. He learns that Gower's family was left in dire financial straits. Bert makes a proposition, saying he will pay the family $25,000 if Gower will try to escape. Guilt-ridden about his family, Gower agrees. He nearly makes it out safely before Bert kills him.
Now paroled, Bert immediately tracks down Ruth, seeking vengeance for her testimony. Sheriff Langley is following, though, as they take a speedboat, then end up on foot in a swamp. Ruth gets her hands on Bert's gun, but cannot bring herself to shoot him. Langley has no such hesitation, taking aim and shooting Bert dead. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0058414 | Nothing But a Man | Duff Anderson works on a railroad section gang near Birmingham, Alabama, earning a good wage and living an itinerant life with his black co-workers. On their night off, while the other men drink and visit a pool hall, Duff decides to walk into the nearby small town, and ends up at a church meeting featuring good food and lively gospel music. There, Duff meets the pretty and genteel schoolteacher Josie, the daughter of Preacher Dawson. They begin to date against the wishes of Josie's father and stepmother, who think the relatively uneducated, non-religious, and (to them) arrogant Duff is not good enough for Josie. Despite her parents' objections, Josie continues to see Duff, partly because Duff shows himself willing to resist and challenge the social conventions that oppress black people, rather than just accepting the status quo in order to get along with white people, as Josie's father has done.
Initially, Duff is just looking for a sexual relationship, and tells Josie he doesn't want to get married. But after Duff visits his four-year-old illegitimate son who has been abandoned to the care of an indifferent, unloving foster mother, and his emotionally abusive, drunken father who is barely functioning under the care of Duff's stepmother Lee, Duff realizes that he prefers the stability of a family to the life of a drifter. Duff and Josie marry with bright hopes for the future, but then begin to face a series of challenges as a married couple.
Duff quits the section gang and takes a lower paying job at the local sawmill in order to have a stable home life. Being on the move had given Duff the illusion of freedom, but living in the town makes Duff subject to the town's social rules, and he immediately starts to have problems. Unlike his peers, Duff refuses to pretend to be friendly to white people who treat him obnoxiously or patronize him. Duff tries to encourage his black co-workers at the mill to stick together and stand up for their rights, but one of them informs on him to the white mill bosses, who suspect him of being a union organizer and troublemaker. After Duff refuses to follow his white boss's order to retract his statements to the other men, Duff is fired, and subsequently finds himself blacklisted at other area mills. Despite diligently searching for work, he is unable to find another job that is not humiliating and that also pays enough to support his family, now including a baby on the way.
Duff hates his preacher father-in-law, whom he sees as having sold out to the white people in return for social status and economic gain, and he hurtfully says to his wife, "You've never really been a nigger, living with them, in that house." Nevertheless, out of concern for Josie, Preacher Dawson uses his connections in the town to get Duff a job at a white-owned gas station. Soon, white customers who find Duff too proud for a black "boy" threaten to cause trouble if the boss keeps him on, and he loses that job as well. Although Josie is understanding, Duff, under emotional pressure and in a rage, shoves his pregnant wife to the floor when she tries to comfort him. Duff packs his bag and leaves their house, telling Josie that he will write her when he is on his feet again.
Duff storms off to his father, and finds him so inebriated that he dies as Duff and Lee are driving him to the hospital. Neither Duff nor Lee know where Duff's father was born or how old he was, and the only possessions he has handed down to Duff are the contents of his pockets. Duff decides to return home with his young son, whom Josie had been wanting to adopt. Duff and Josie tearfully embrace as he reassures her that "everything is gonna be all right”. | romantic, melodrama | train | wikipedia | I thoroughly enjoyed "Nothing But a Man." Unlike other films before it, it shows black men and casts them in lead roles instead of sticking them in white circles.
This film also focuses on black masculinity and what being a black man is about, and it highlights the struggle and contrast of being free and easy and not tied down as opposed to being married and struggling for one's dignity.
Unlike the race films of Micheaux and Williams who used this documentary-style depiction to push their messages, Roemer fearlesssly shows the brutality and bleakness of African-American life, with an ending reminiscent of Orwell's 1984.
Ivan Dixon as Duff gives one of the greatest performances in the history of cinema and Abbey Lincoln as Josie, the preacher's daughter he tries to settle down with, is just about perfect in control of nuance.
These characters are extraordinary "ordinary" people, truly heroic; yet the tragedy that stalks them may or may not be hopeless at this time in history, due to an apparent shift in black consciousness, a general "fed-up-with-it-all" attitude that needs men like Duff to inspire itself.
"Little Fugitive" and "Medium Cool" are the only other pre-70s American films I've seen that feel this real.
In terms of the subtlety with which racial politics and power relations are exposed through simple gestures and acts rather than rhetoric and melodrama, Martin Ritt's "Sounder" and Paul Schrader's "Blue Collar" are the only films I've seen that come close.
There are a lot of lessons to be learned here, especially by directors like Spike Lee, who I'm sure has seen this movie, and who has made decent films in the past (Do the Right Thing, She's gotta have it), but now wastes his time making laughable, "really hardcore," "I want to transcend puny barriers with overloads of style" cartoons like "Summer of Sam." "Nothing but a Man" is light years away from the nonsense they call "realism" these days.
Unlike other well-intentioned films of the period, NOTHING BUT A MAN presents the main character as neither saint nor scoundrel, but as a complex man with human contradictions.
Ivan Dixon gives one of the best performances of his career as the lead character of Duff.
An exceptional movie, especially given the period in which it was made, about a young black man trying to "do the right thing" and make a life for himself in the South.
Beautifully acted by everyone involved, Nothing But a Man lets you live the struggles that black men live(d) every day.
This is not a particularly uplifting film...you never get sense that everything will work out in the end, but because of this, the movie is all the more realistic.
The DVD version includes interviews with the cast and film makers 40 years later.
In her interview, Abbey Lincoln seems to come undone while reflecting on the movie, the Struggle, and how little real progress has been made..
This film reminds me of the problem that heavily exists in the black community today.
Ivan Dixon's performance wasn't over done, making his portrayal of Duff one of the most memorable I had ever seen.
The writers were able to make me empathize with all the characters, and Duff was written with a certain complexity seen in few other films about African-Americans.
The thing that most gratified me about the film is the fact that it is about redemption, showing our main character making certain sacrifices to live a normal and moral life in the end.
I strongly recommend this film, especially to other African-American filmmakers who plan on sugarcoating the black experience in America.
I said it once and I'll say it again, "Nothing But a Man" is one of the greatest black films ever made in the world....
This movie is really honest about the relationships between a man and woman and family (esp.
I remember seeing this along time ago in the mid 80's on one of the Black History Months, but watching it on DVD last night again
just left me speechless.
The Defining Movie about a black man's struggles in the south.
Over the years the struggles of blacks in the racist south have been rendered in fiction by books like Faulkner's "Light in August" and films like "Hurry Sundown," (though blacks were relatively minor characters in this film), "Sounder," "The Autobiography of Miss Jane Pittman," "A Woman Called Moses" and "Ragtime." "Nothing But a Man" predates the other films and broke new ground by depicting the plight of a young black man who refuses to knuckle under to the times and the expectations placed on him.Duff Anderson is a section hand earning good money on a railroad construction gang in the south of the 1960's.
Duff's life changes dramatically when he falls in love with Josie, whose minister father "gets along" by accommodating the white man and who wants nothing to do with rootless Duff.
In spite of the minister's objections Josie and Duff are married, but Duff's attempt to unionize at his new job gets him fired and local whites threaten his life when he refuses to cow-tow to bigots.
At the end of the story Duff's father dies after rejecting his son yet again, prompting Duff to admit "I'm just like him." But Duff is a far better man than his father could ever be, for at a time when nonstop adversity would have broken a lesser person, he takes custody of his little son and returns to Josie determined to be a husband and parent, the two roles at which his own father failed so miserably.Everything in this film rings true, from the opening scenes with the railroad gang to the tearful reunion with his family at the end.
The dialog is almost unrelentingly cynical, as Duff comes to see his courtship of Josie through the eyes of his railroad pals and his disapproving father-in-law and views his prospects for employment and success in the light of bitter experiences with back-stabbing co-workers, unsympathetic employers and white racists.Ivan Dixon is superb as Duff and Abbey Lincoln is equally fine as the supportive wife who must share her husband's fate.
The black-and-white filming underscores the seriousness of the subject matter and the bleakness of Duff's life.
This movie was no doubt completed with at most a very modest budget, but the finished product is so strong and moving--thanks to a very intelligent script and great acting.
Although the film stars no "big names", it is chock full of some of the better Black character actors of the 1960s.
The leading man, Ivan Dixon, proved he was a fine and competent actor--far better than the role he played on HOGAN'S HEROES.
In addition, there are subplots concerning fatherhood and responsibility that greatly enhance the movie's message.This film would be wonderful for anyone--in particular kids, as they will realize in watching this just how far we have come.
Most young kids today just don't realize how tough things were for Black Americans in this country and how acceptable this maltreatment was.
The film apprehends the simple existence of an ordinary couple in difficult circumstance, and the performances of Ivan Dixon and lovely jazz singer Abbey Lincoln are superbly naturalistic, and a well chosen and evocative supporting cast lends absolute credibility.
Part social commentary, this film depicts a touching, often sad portrait of Americana during a challenging historical period.Heading the talented cast is Ivan Dixon as Duff, who nicely underplays his role, letting his expression emerge from within.
Singer Abbey Lincoln is seen in a nice dramatic turn as his girlfriend turned wife, Josie.
In the early 1960's during the unfolding of the civil rights movement, when Martin Luther King marched on Washington, when three northern civil rights workers were murdered in the south, and when four children died in a Birmingham church bombing, Michael Roemer and Robert Young, two Jewish guys from Harvard, headed south and crafted, in the opinion of many, the most authentic film ever made of the black experience in America.
Although racial relations have since altered, the film depicts the essence of racism, including the subtle and less than subtle forms of oppression still present in President Obama's America.Roemer and Young have expressed some embarrassment at the naiveté and pure chutzpah they demonstrated in their attempt to make a film that truly represented the black experience.
Set in early 1960's Alabama, it tells the story of Duff Anderson, played by Ivan Dixon, a proud black man who won't submit to his expected role.
"I don't get on so well in most places," he tells Josie, the preacher's daughter played by Abbey Lincoln.
It shows to best advantage the stunning black and white high- contrast low-light style of co-writer Young, who also doubled as cameraman due to an absurdly limited budget.
But the film wouldn't be the same without Dixon and Lincoln, who are stellar in their powerhouse performances as Duff and Josie, the couple struggling for dignity in a racist world.
Dixon IS Duff, Lincoln IS Josie.
It is a privilege to see and hear Dixon, Lincoln, and Julius Harris (who plays Will, Duff's alcoholic father), then in their 70's and 80's, talk about the film they made 40 years earlier.
There is also a 30 minute unscripted discussion between Roemer and Young in which they tell the story of their experience in researching and making the film, and their feelings about it 40 years later.
This is a rare peek into the chaotic craft of film-making.Abbey Lincoln is better known as a jazz vocalist than an actress.
Abbey Lincoln's tears in the interview, like Josie's in the film, are no act.
And when the script calls for Duff to push Josie to the floor in a frustrated rage, concerned director Roemer offers to cheat: "I can fake the fall," Roemer says he told Lincoln.
He recalls her response: "I'm going to take that fall for all the black women." The fall is one of those classic moments, like so many others in the film, that emotionally freezes the viewer, and remains etched in our memory..
It's one of the defining films about race relations in the South as the civil rights movement was in high gear, bringing about the end of centuries of abuse by Whites of African-Americans.This movie takes place in a very rural region in the deep South.
Although people--both Black and White--are aware of the civil rights movement, it really hasn't taken hold here.
It will surely be a great improvement over the old school, but it will still be segregated--for Blacks only.Ivan Dixon plays Duff Anderson, an intelligent, capable, and hard-working railroad worker.
You grew old with an ever-shifting group of friends, moving from town to town and from bar to bar in the evenings.Duff meets Josie, played wonderfully by Abbey Lincoln.
His lack of work leads to anger and aggression, directed as much to Josie as to the people who are causing the basic problem.This isn't always an easy movie to watch, but it's well-crafted and important for everyone to see.
A rootless young track worker (Ivan Dixon) finds what he didn't know he needed when he meets a young teacher (Abbey Lincoln).
Life does not play easy with the young couple, especially life in the American south at the beginning of the Civil Rights Movement.A lovingly crafted film by Michael Roemer and Robert Young with a naturalistic and documentary feel.
Forgotten Gem Gives an Honest Appraisal of One Black Man's Experience in the Deep South.
In the midst of Sidney Poitier's breakthrough as a mainstream leading man of the big studios, director Michael Roemer made a groundbreaking independent film that fully captured the black experience at the dawn of the civil rights movement without exploiting the controversial subject or introducing a non-threatening component that would have made the story more palatable for white audiences.
The latter was especially the case in Poitier's biggest movies at the time like "Lilies of the Field" and "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner" where he played variations on the over-idealized black man, a point made ironic by the fact that the legendary actor turned down the lead role in this film.
In fact, the film is so truthfully matter-of-fact in Roemer's documentary-like approach that when Duff has an explosive moment late in the story it feels shocking but utterly real.The performances completely surprised me.
He doesn't take any short cuts in presenting Duff as a man who makes his own decisions no matter how harsh the consequences.
As Josie, jazz great Abbey Lincoln ("For Love of Ivy"), with her infectious smile, is genuinely affecting as a woman who becomes attracted to Duff because she thought the two of them "might have something to say to each other." One wonders in hindsight how powerfully she might have portrayed Billie Holiday if given the chance she was supposed to have before Diana Ross got cast in "Lady Sings the Blues".
Julius Harris makes his few scenes count as Duff's belligerent father, while Gloria Foster (later the Oracle in "The Matrix") etches a vivid impression as a beaten-down woman who remains inexplicably faithful to him.
Before Blaxploitation and the kind of African-American cinema we are used to seeing today there were film-makers like Michael Roemer making films like "Nothing But a Man".
Roemer may have been born in pre-war Germany but you would never know it judging from this ground-breaking film about what it was like to be black in sixties America and what, for many, it's still like to be black in America today.It's a very simple film, almost documentary-like in its approach to its subject and at times almost crude in the way Roemer, who had no real experience in film-making, presents his material.
Fundamentally it's a love story between Duff, (and excellent Ivan Dixon), and his school-teacher wife Josie, (the singer Abbey Lincoln), and this is handled without a touch of sentimentality.
It's also superbly shot in black and white by Robert Young, who with Roemer also wrote the film, but it wasn't really a success, even in terms of small budget independent art movies and is consequently seldom seen these days.
It recounts the story of a Black man in the 1960s American South (outside Birmingham, AL), his problems with relationships, with white men who mistreat him, etc.
Because of that, and because of the very fine acting, the characters in this movie come off as very real, not at all Hollywood caricatures.
But that doesn't always make the movie easy to watch.It's more than worth the occasional discomfort, however, because it's really a very fine movie, one that presents very real people going though all too real life situations and dealing with them in very human ways.
Beautifully acted with great naturalism and heart, and highly atmospheric thanks to top-notch black and white cinematography.Don't hesitate to rent this one or, better yet, see it in a revival house on a larger screen..
Nothing But A Man is one of the great hidden gems of American independent cinema.
It tells the simple story of a man and woman in love, trying to endure the hardships of life as a "coloured" in Mississippi in the early '60s.
Under all of this, is lovely and very human relationship which acts as the heart and soul of the film.Ivan Dixon manages to balance all of this impeccably in the lead role, making it impossible not to identify with him, even when we don't like him.
As with many movies from the 1960's that address racism in the south, there is always a key character that dares to challenge the status quo.
Nothing But a Man is an excellent showcase for Ivan Dixon and Abbey Lincoln.
Continuing to review movies featuring African-Americans in chronological order for Black History Month, we're now at 1964 when an independent film about the struggles during the segregated South gets released to critical acclaim.
Ivan Dixon, previously Joseph Asagai in both play and filmed versions of A Raisin in the Sun, is Duff Anderson, a railroad worker who one day falls for schoolteacher Josie played by Abbey Lincoln.
There's more but I'll just say that this was a very realistic drama about what it was like living in such humiliating times for a black man.
Dixon is at turns both smartly observant and righteously angry during the film and you can't help feeling sorry at times for him even when he does do things that get him in trouble.
Ms. Lincoln herself has such a quiet intensity about herself here that you hope she doesn't regret her love for Ivan's character.
Strong movie about being black in the South in the early 1960s.
An strong independent black man named Duff (Ivan Dixon) meets sweet, sensible Josie (Abbey Lincoln).
He becomes and disillusioned and begins to take it out on Josie.Powerful film about the disgusting racism that existed in the South.
There was something about the black and white documentary in your face style of independent film-making that made it seem like a home movie about our friends and family in their most unguarded moments.The characters were like people we both knew from our own immediate experience.
Whether it was Duff or Josie or Duff father's Will or Lee or Jocko, there was an undeniable reality to these characters, albeit they came across a little more subdued and restrained than the people on my block.
Excellent premise depicting the black man as a shiftless, worthless person and how this myth carries on through the various generations of black men.The problem with the film that it shows very well what goes on but the acting seems to be very much stilted and lacks depth and emotion.
We're getting a new school so let's keep quiet about persistent segregation is the thought here.The black minister and his wife look down upon a young Ivan Dixon who is courting their 26 year old schoolteacher daughter.Illegitimacy seems to be like nothing here and only at the end is there some breakthrough. |
tt0028313 | The Story of Louis Pasteur | In nineteenth century chemist Louis Pasteur (Paul Muni) believes that diseases are caused by unseen microbes. His radical theory is dismissed by most doctors, particularly his most vocal critic, Dr Charbonnet (Fritz Leiber, Sr.). Nonetheless, Pasteur carries on, with the assistance of a small group of loyal researchers, and finds a cure for anthrax. He also campaigns to have doctors wash their hands and sterilize their instruments before operating.
Charbonnet is so certain that Pasteur is a quack that he injects himself with some of the rabies virus. When a triumphant Charbonnet shows no sign of contracting rabies, Pasteur is puzzled, until his wife suggests that the sample may have gotten weak with age. This sets him on the right path to finding a cure. When a frantic mother begs him to try his untested treatment on her son (Dickie Moore), who has been bitten by a rabid dog, Pasteur risks imprisonment and possibly the guillotine to save the child. Even Charbonnet finally concedes that he is right. In the end Pasteur is honored for his scientific accomplishments by the very doctors who scoffed at his discoveries. | inspiring, historical | train | wikipedia | The first of the Warner Bros "biopics", it can boast of a great performance by Paul Muni, with none of the mannerisms that became a trade mark in the last and sorry years of his career.
The film's emotional ending (a well-deserved and long-overdue tribute to Pasteur's work by his collegues) centers on a closing speech by Pasteur (Paul Muni) in which he explains, simply and with passion, that making a contribution to the wellbeing of mankind is the most important work of all.Pasteur's discovery of the role of bacteria in spreading disease seems self-evident now, but he faced years of ridicule and isolation before his findings were accepted and played their part in transforming our world.This film is a vaccine against the cynical, self-referential, "in it for me (and maybe my small circle of friends)" films of the recent decades.
But every year after they have viewed the film almost all students come away legitimately liking the film.Paul Muni's performance is extraordinary and may be the best performance of his entire career.
Paul Muni has the title role in "The Story of Louis Pasteur," a 1935 film also starring Josephine Hutchinson, Anita Louise, Donald Woods, and Fritz Lieber.The biopic focuses on Pasteur's work in sterilization, rabies, and anthrax, and includes his inoculation of the small boy Joseph Meister (Dickie Moore) which is a famous - and risky - moment in Pasteur's life.
And certainly the rabies and anthrax stories are more dramatic.Some of the film, I believe, is fictionalized - his nemesis, Dr. Charbonnet, was probably created to represent some of the criticism Pasteur faced in his lifetime.
It seems crazy to think that before Pasteur, doctors did not sterilize instruments and wash their hands, but apparently, they didn't.Good movie..
The Story of Louis Pasteur (1827-1895) was also the film that got Muni his Academy Award for Best Actor that year.It's hard to imagine the world of science and medicine without the contributions of Pasteur.
His chief critic Dr. Charbonnet played by Fritz Lieber nearly sank Pasteur's work with a bold move that I cannot tell about, but will make you gasp when you see it on screen.Josephine Hutchinson is Muni's ever faithful wife Marie and she does well by what is really a rather colorless part.
There is a nice subplot involving Donald Woods as an early convert to Pasteur's way of thinking wooing and winning daughter Anita Louise.The film goes through Pasteur's main achievements of sterilization during medical procedures and cures for anthrax and hydrophobia.
The story and screenplay which also won Oscars for 1936 is simple and straightforward enough for any lay person to follow.There are several good performances of men of science who opposed and/or supported Pasteur's work, in some cases opposed then supported.
Porter Hall, Akim Tamiroff, and Halliwell Hobbes who has a small part as Joseph Lister, the English scientist.Pasteur fought hard for his ideas against the medical and scientific establishment of his day and lived long enough to receive due acclaim from his nation of France and the world.
Paul Muni gives an impressive, Oscar-winning performance as Louis Pasteur, so fiercely dedicated to his findings and the results they receive, he drives himself to a partial stroke.
PAUL MUNI gives an eloquent performance as Louis Pasteur in this abbreviated biography of his life which never has time to mention some of his other achievements, such as pasteurized milk.
ANITA LOUIS and DONALD WOODS provide what little romantic interest there is in the tale, strictly cardboard characters little more than ciphers.Muni ages convincingly without the use of heavy make-up and won a Best Actor Oscar for his detailed performance.
Story of Louis Pasteur, The (1935) *** (out of 4) Bio pic of chemist Louis Pasteur (Paul Muni) who found a cure for the black plague but was then blacklisted when he made the claim that childhood fever was caused when doctors didn't wash their hands before delivering babies.
This is a pretty strong film from start to finish that features a terrific performance by Muni who rightfully deserved his Best Actor Oscar.
God knows he's given countless great performances throughout his career but I was shocked at how well he play Pasteur who of course used his brains more than his muscles or mouth like many of Muni's other roles.
There's not a single second where Muni comes off as himself but the entire film he gives the performance that we think we're actually watching Pasteur work.
In 1860 Paris, doctors are collectively disgruntled by chemist Paul Muni (as Louis Pasteur).
This is an exceptionally well-produced, straightforward biography of Louis Pasteur by director William Dieterle and the crew at Warner Bros.
And, the fact that you drank "Pasteurized" milk isn't even covered.******** The Story of Louis Pasteur (1935-11-23) William Dieterle ~ Paul Muni, Josephine Hutchinson, Fritz Leiber, Donald Woods.
He seemed to always play intense roles.The story is very frustrating, however, as we watch "Pasteur" become the target of an ignorant medical profession at the time, constantly trying to discredit the famous man's work.
This movie stars Paul Muni in an Oscar winning performance as a scientist who is looking for a cure for anthrax and then rabies, all the other doctors laugh at him.
Paul Muni does a good job and this is the same director of Life of Emilie Zola and Juarez..
Enjoyable biopic about the famous chemist Louis Pasteur, played by Paul Muni.
He's backed up by solid actors like Donald Woods, Henry O'Neill, Fritz Leiber, and Halliwell Hobbes, as well as the lovely Anita Louise and Josephine Hutchinson.
As with the best of Hollywood's great old biopics, its focus is to tell the inspirational story of a historical figure in an entertaining way.
While the actual details of the life of the great chemist, Louis Pasteur, are mixed up in this glossy MGM biography, the general facts are all there and the film is both captivating and inspiring.
Robinson) is Warner Brother's answer to this MGM film and BOTH are well worth seeing and are about equally entertaining.Paul Muni plays Pasteur, though much of his earlier career is left out of the film.
THE STORY OF LOUIS PASTEUR (Warner Brothers, 1936), directed by William Dieterle, starring Paul Muni, might have become a box-office failure considering its then theatrical popularity being swashbucklers, screwball comedies, love stories, screen adaptations to literary classics or the musicals.
Having little or no expectation except for Paul Muni, the sort of actor willing to assume the gamble to a point of not even caring if the movie proved popular or not, THE STORY OF LOUIS PASTEUR not only became an unexpected success, paving the way for other biographical stories to follow, but won Paul Muni the Academy Award as Best Actor for his memorable performance.
Rather than starting the story of Louis Pasteur as a child, leading to his scientific profession and courtship with his future wife, the original story and screenplay by Sheridan Gibney and Pierre Collins gets down to basics starting in 1860 with the shooting of Doctor Francois (William Burress) by an irate husband (William B.
After the husband presents the reasons for his actions to the police with a newspaper clipping by Louis Pasteur stating how microbes cause diseases and death, the scientists of the French Academy label Pasteur as a "menace to science." Louis Pasteur (Paul Muni) is then introduced as a chemist with a young wife, Marie (Josephine Hutchinson), and father to three children, the eldest being a daughter named Annette (Anita Louise).
Martel leaves Charbonnet's employ to work under Pasteur and Doctor Emile Roux (Henry O'Neill), dedicating themselves pursuing the deadly microbes that cause antrax and hydrophobia and cures, followed by Pasteur's painstaking attempt to find the cure for rabies as found on Philip Meister (Dickie Moore), a little boy left under his care, and testings on the child that could lead to Pasteur's imprisonment if he should fail.The supporting cast also includes: Porter Hall (Doctor Rosignol); Raymond Brown (Doctor Aradisse); Akim Tamiroff (Doctor Zaranoff); Iphigenie Castiglioni (Empress Eugenie); and Halliwell Hobbes (Doctor Lister from England), among others.
(Whatever became of the two younger Pasteur children seen early in the story before disappearing from view with no explanation?) The plot, in general, offers enough material to provide the story of Louis Pasteur, with extended scenes of investigation of the anthrax disease at the Pouilly Le Fort, dividing 24 vaccinated sheep with 24 non-vaccinated ones to see which ones survive; Pasteur's desperation in having Doctor Charbonnet follow his method of delivering his daughter's baby; but eliminates the use and term of "pasteurization" of milk for which he is most famous.While there have been earlier biographical stories, many of them being more fiction than fact, THE STORY OF LOUIS PASTEUR is no different, offering its blend of both, which really doesn't hurt the concept of the story by any means.
Distributed on video cassette in the 1990s, and later DVD, THE STORY OF LOUIS PASTEUR can be seen and historically studied for examination term paper in science class on Turner Classic Movies.
Although not quite one of my favourite biographical films of all time, 'The Story of Louis Pasteur' is a fine example of how to do it right.
'The Story of Louis Pasteur' is at its weakest in the romantic element of the story, which didn't engage as much as the rest of the film and didn't fit as well either.Also the performances of Anita Louise and Donald Woods who struck me as a little colourless.
The film is particularly worth seeing for the terrific and deservedly Oscar-winning performance of Paul Muni.
"The Story of Louis Pasteur" does take a few minutes to attain a grip on its narrative which eventually does make for very engaging drama.It is astonishing how a simple film revolving around a man and his microscope has been made into something so riveting, that you can't take your eyes off, once it picks up steam.
Paul Muni should be reason enough for anyone to look up "The Story of Louis Pasteur".
A tasteful and thoughtful fictionalization of Louis Pasteur's development of vaccines for anthrax and rabies that nevertheless peddles in the kind of hagiography one would expect from films of this time period, when things like subtlety were in short supply."The Story of Louis Pasteur" was a prestige pic from Warner Bros.
It did both, scoring a Best Actor win for Paul Muni, eminently watchable as Pasteur but who deserved to win both three years earlier for his intense performance in the intense "I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang" and a year later for his performance in another Warner Bros.
biopic, "The Life of Emile Zola." Indeed, there is speculation that 1936 saw a lot of vote rigging in the Academy and that Muni's win was the result of some under the table deals among studio execs to ensure that certain actors and certain films would win key awards.
But it's the kind of role and performance that could easily have won on its own merits, and indeed biopics have been one of the surest vehicles for actors seeking Oscar noms and wins ever since.The film also won two writing awards, the first of only four films in Oscar history to do so, when rules allowed both the screenplay and the original story on which it was based to be eligible even if written by the same people, which in this case were (Pierre Collings and Sheridan Gibney).
Paul Muni deserved the Oscar for his performance of the famous scientist.
It features Paul Muni's Academy Award winning Best Actor performance.
The strong supporting cast includes: Josephine Hutchinson as his dependable wife, Anita Louise as his daughter, Dickie Moore as a child who gets rabies, and Henry O'Neill, Porter Hall and Akim Tamiroff (among others) as doctors.
Directed by William Dieterle.Pasteur is an outstanding scientist, one whose discipline and methods allow him to achieve great insights, enabling him to discover the root causes of deaths in livestock and people (e.g. germs).
Muni Captures Every Scene with Expressions that a Full Beard can do Little to Hide as He Searches for Clues and Cures to Find and Kill the Invisible Monsters.The Production Design is Elegant but Simple and the Supporting Cast of Family Members, Doctors, and Politicians add a Backdrop of Intensity to Pasteur's Work.
Louis Pasteur was the person of 19th century that he discovered (Bacteria) and (Anthrx) at the same time of (Robert Koch) the German physiologist that won Nobel prize in Medicine or physiology in 1905 because of his discoveries (Tuberclosies - Malaryia).It is wonderful to be the secret of treatment the bodies from pains and diseases as an expanding for (The Christ) and another prophets by their holy books , massages and miracles.Paul Muni made his signature role by winning Oscar prize for best leading role as Pasteur in 1936 by his good Analysis for the character of this great scientist by his final speech at the end of this film that any scholar must be honest in his work and searches to be in the summit as him that he took his gift and honor from french scientific academy and if he was still alive in the 20th century he win Nobel prize in medicine without any competition but he died in 1896 before the establishment of Nobel prize before five years of it..
The Story of Louis Pasteur is like Marty: If the movie didn't win Oscars, it wouldn't be that bad.
Since it did win Oscars-screenplay and Paul Muni's only Best Actor award-I expected it to be good.
I think Paul Muni's a wonderful actor, but he didn't deserve even a nomination for this movie.The story is compelling to modern audiences, and since Paul's hair and makeup was created to look very much like Louis Pasteur, people were swept away.
Another of Warner Brothers' famous biopics and a 'prestige' production, (it won 3 Oscars, including Best Actor for Paul Muni's performance in the title role), but it's deadly dull, despite the best efforts of director William Dieterle to make it 'cinematic'.
Had they waited, he might have been awarded for an equally good performance in a much better movie (THE LIFE OF EMILE ZOLA) one year later..
To be fair, Muni does provide some commendable gravitas as Pasteur, and his award did come after his powerful performances in earlier films, such as the previous year's BLACK FURY (he placed second to Victor McLaglen in the 1935 Academy Award voting as a write-in candidate for that film.) But let's say that Muni delivers more impressively in the next year's LIFE OF EMILE ZOLA.As for the film, one must keep in mind that this became an early example of what quickly became a cliché in mainstream Hollywood cinema--the "neglected genius overcomes all obstacles." The script is usually excellent, and the directing and supporting performances are not bad.
He had an intelligent interest in science,and like many other people in the 19th century saw a bright future because of the improvements it would bring.Far from exiling Pasteur, he was his PATRON,building him a laboratory and providing him with all the resources that he needed for his research.While the lab was under construction, Pasteur became gravely ill.A bureaucrat, deciding it was a waste of money to build a laboratory for someone who would soon be dead, ordered work halted on his own authority.When the emperor heard about this, his outrage shook the bureaucracy so that there was a flurry of buck-passing, and work promptly resumed.The Emperor personally visited Pasteur to comfort him and reassure him that he would get his lab.The emperor would often bring members of his court to admire Pasteur's projects,and it was obvious to everyone that Pasteur was one of the emperor's favorites.Pasteur's main worry concerning the Emperor was that Napoleon thought Pasteur was virtually a miracle worker who could do almost anything, and was constantly assigning him tasks outside of his previous experience.Pasteur, a very modest man, was always protesting this, but Napoleon would say that he had complete faith in him,and Pasteur despite his misgivings, always came through.They always had a close and friendly relationship,and after the Emperor was overthrown, Pasteur refused to say a bad word about him,grateful to the end of his life.The part about his daughter having the baby, and Pasteur sacrificing his principles to get a doctor, never happened.The part about the anthrax and rabies, for which he was famous, is generally correct, but the notion that the anthrax experiment raised him from obscurity to fame is false.He was famous and respected at the time this happened.This movie is OK from a dramatic standpoint,but very distorted as biography..
That's work.Louis Pasteur, Paul Muni here, believed in the germ theory of disease at a time when the French Academy didn't.
Freud was born in 1856, three years before Darwin publish "The Origin of Species." Paul Muni is good as the impatient Louis Pasteur who receives his just honors at the end.
As I mentioned, Paul Muni received the Best Actor Oscar, and it was only right that he did.
the title character admonishes Future Generations at the end of THE STORY OF LOUIS PASTEUR.
While Paul Muni does an admirable acting job here, this was certainly not one of his best performances.
He was far better in "The Life of Emile Zola" as well as "Juarez" and "The Last Angry Man."The film discusses Pasteur's battles with anthrax and rabies.
Am shocked that the milk producers didn't carry on about this.There are nice supporting performances by Josephine Hutchinson as his devoted wife as well as Fritz Leiber, Dr. Charbonnet, a doctor who would not believe Pasteur's idea and was willing to fight and humiliate him all the way.There is a nice historical backdrop to the film, especially as it relates to the Franco-Prussian War of 1871.Donald Woods and Anita Louise are wasted in their roles as the son-in-law and daughter to Pasteur. |
tt1998407 | Uncharted: Golden Abyss | The story is set some time before the events of Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, and begins in medias res with Nathan Drake following rival explorer Jason Dante through a temple complex in Panama. Dante has ordered his army of mercenaries to kill Drake on sight, and after a series of gunfights, the platform Drake is climbing is hit by an RPG.
The game then flashes back two weeks, when Drake and Dante, revealed to be old friends, arrive at a dig site in Panama headed by Dante's "partner" Marisa Chase, who doesn't trust him. At the site, they find corpses of Spanish conquistadors that were apparently poisoned and a grave marker with a Visigoth symbol. Chase also shows Drake an amulet that she hid from Dante. The dig is then interrupted by Dante's real partner, warlord Roberto Guerro. Guerro captures Drake and Chase, however they escape Guerro's base after Chase starts a diversionary fire.
They then go to the house of her grandfather Vincent Perez, who found the amulet at the site. Perez hired Dante to conduct further research after being diagnosed with terminal cancer, and Dante paid off Guerro for access to the site in return for a share of the treasure that Guerro will use to fund his conflict. Chase arrived at the site herself hoping to finish Perez's work. Upon returning to Perez's study, they learn that the marker referred to the Sete Cidades, an ancient Christian sect dedicated to finding the seven cities of gold. Friar Marcos de Niza, a member of the sect, had led Coronado's expedition to find Cíbola only to find the villages of the Zuni.
Following further clues, one referring to a "Sword of Stephen", they follow Perez's trail to a ruined Sete Cidades retreat. They find Perez, who succumbed to his illness, as well as evidence that leads Drake to suspect that de Niza had deliberately misled Coronado for reasons unknown. Drake then follows the ruins to a crypt that contains the Sword of Stephen - the personal sword of Esteban, de Niza's guide; however, they are interrupted by Dante, who had followed them with Guerro.
Guerro takes the sword and Chase after pushing Dante off a balcony for insulting him. Drake reluctantly teams up with Dante to escape the ruins and Guerro's army, but are unable to stop Guerro from escaping with her. Dante decides to hire an army of mercenaries to rescue Chase and avenge himself on Guerro, and the two part ways after Drake objects. Although hesitant at first, Drake convinces Victor "Sully" Sullivan to help him find Chase and finish Perez's work. The two follow a map made from the charcoal rubbings of symbols found on the sword to a temple complex believed to house the entrance to the mythical city of Quivira. There they witness and fight through a battle between Dante's mercenaries and Guerro's men. Sully is injured in a fall, forcing Drake to continue by himself.
Drake then fights through more of Dante's mercenaries - surviving the explosion from the prologue - and makes his way to the massive entrance of Quivira where he rescues Chase from the remnants of Guerro's army. After Chase insists that they continue, Drake uses the amulet on the gate to open it. The pair then cross a massive underground lake and make it to the Golden Abyss, a massive room whose walls are lined with gold. They also find the corpse of Esteban, who was sacrificed by Marcos. A geiger counter stowed in Chase's backpack then suddenly activates and reveals the gold to be radioactive. Realizing that the Quiviran populace had died out from radiation poisoning, they conclude that de Niza had sacrificed Esteban and his scouting party before deliberately misleading Coronado in order to prevent them from looting the irradiated gold.
However, Dante arrives and reveals that he knew about the radiation, while still intending to sell the irradiated gold on the black market anyway. Drake defeats him in a fist fight and escapes with Chase as Dante verbally admonishes him for valuing principles above money. When they return to the gate, Chase detonates explosives that Guerro had planted beforehand, sealing Dante in the cavern for good. As the two escape the ensuing cave-in, Guerro appears and attacks them with a rocket launcher, trapping Chase under a fallen pillar. Drake fights and tricks Guerro into falling through a damaged bridge to his death with the Sword of Stephen. He then frees Chase and the two escape to the surface with Sully's help. Before they leave in a helicopter stolen by Sully, she tosses away the amulet, believing it belongs "in hell" with the rest of Quivira. It is also implied that the two start a relationship following the climax of the game. | violence, humor, murder, romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0060944 | Le scandale | Taking a prostitute to a park after drinking, Paul Wagner is attacked by unknown assailants, who leave him with a serious head injury and strangle her. Unable to manage the family champagne business, it is run for him by Christine Belling and her assistant Jacqueline. Christine tries to take advantage of him by selling the company, but he refuses to sign. On a business trip to Hamburg with Christine's husband Christopher, he gets drunk and goes to a park with a whore, who is found strangled in the morning. Going with Christopher to the party of a promiscuous artist, he again gets drunk and she is found strangled in the morning.
Terrified that he may be murdering young women after drinking, while Christopher is away he seeks the help of Christine. She takes advantage of him by getting him to sign away his rights in the company. He goes home despondent and in the morning Christine is found strangled. Christopher, who now owns the business, turns up with a striking blonde, who Paul remembers seeing in Hamburg and at the artist's party. It is Jacqueline, without the dark wig and pale make-up she wore to work, who is Christopher's mistress and has done the last three stranglings. A gun is pulled out and the camera recedes as the three fight over it. | violence, neo noir, murder | train | wikipedia | THE CHAMPAGNE MURDERS {Edited U.S. Version} (Claude Chabrol, 1967) ***.
Despite the mixed reception it enjoys among both critics and fans of the director, this film can now be seen to have been the one to virtually inaugurate Chabrol's major period; it was actually made in conjunction with Universal, a studio with which his idol Alfred Hitchcock was still tied at the time and, to further stress that connection, he utilized one of the stars from the latter's recent work (Anthony Perkins in the first of two pictures he did for the French director).
This co-production arrangement – which even saw eminent American film critic Derek Prouse and character actor Henry Jones figuring among the writers and supporting cast respectively!
– resulted in two separate versions: the English-language one running 98 minutes and the French being slightly longer at either 107 or 111, depending on the sources.
Unfortunately, the former seems to be the more readily available cut which, incidentally, also fails to give credit to Chabrol's regular scribe Paul Gegauff for his contribution to the clever screenplay!
Though Chabrol had previously dabbled in the thriller genre (including one in color, WEB OF PASSION [1959] that would make for a perfect thematic companion piece), this stylish film – which also brought on a sudden blossoming of his then-wife Stephane Audran's talents, in what initially appears to be a dual role – set him out as European cinema's foremost purveyor of folies bourgeoises (to cite a later, albeit much maligned, title I have been unable to track down for this comprehensive tribute).
Even so, this first 'mature' attempt proves a bit uneasy as a whole – owing, in part, to the language barrier but, also, the strained decadent milieu at its core (to get an inkling of the film's overall effect, if Hitchcock had made LA DOLCE VITA [1960], it would have looked something like this!).
In fact, the psychological aspect of the narrative (the hero suffers a head injury and undergoes repeated shock treatment, which makes him seemingly prone to blackouts) is rather downplayed in favor of some dreary business dealings which, eventually, descend into blackmail and murder.With the protagonist made to be an alcoholic playboy – I particularly enjoyed the Bunuel in-joke where the inebriated hero smashes a TV set just as a screening of LA MORT EN CE JARDIN (1956) is about to start!
– it was inevitable that Maurice Ronet, who had virtually cornered that particular market ever since playing the suicidal lead in Louis Malle's LE FEU FOLLET (1963), would assume that role here and he went on to win a Spanish acting award for his sterling efforts.
In retrospect, given his pedigree, one would have expected Perkins to be the victim of any potential conspiracy but he emerges a schemer here instead
which he does very well, mind you, except that in the last sequence we realize he had an accomplice all along who is even more ruthless than he is!Actually, the revelation with respect to the latter comes across just as 'shocking' as the one at the climax of Agatha Christie's "Witness For The Prosecution" (superbly filmed by Billy Wilder in 1957); that said, death and disguise also come into play at the finale of Chabrol's subsequent release, LES BICHES (1968; also with Audran).
Then again, such an audacious open-ended closing shot as one finds here could hardly have been anticipated!
Apart from Audran – not to mention a glossy look (courtesy of the ubiquitous Jean Rabier) which was soon to become a trademark of the Chabrol style – the film boasts a number of other attractive females (including Yvonne Furneaux as Perkins' wife, whose lust for power proves her undoing, Catherine Sola as Ronet's tennis partner and, both as unwitting pawns in the game of murder, voluptuous artist Suzanne Lloyd and Christa Lang, who had previously worked with Chabrol three years earlier in his espionage pastiche THE TIGER LIKES FRESH MEAT and would go on to marry iconoclastic American film-maker Samuel Fuller)..
Once things do get going there are some great scenes.
This is not really an early Chabrol who had already been making films for over fifteen years but it does come just before he fully got into his stride and his golden period began with Le Boucher.
Fascinating here to see Anthony Perkins with Maurice Ronet and the lovely Stephane Audran, not sure if he knew English or was dubbed but he looks fine.
Trouble here is that Chabrol takes forever setting this up and we have to spend what seems an interminable amount of time as the rich are seen to party pathetically with their business transactions forever hovering.
Once things do get going there are some great scenes and we struggle to make out who is doing what and for why.
Could have done with some of that cinematic style early on but certainly worth a watch for the second half.
Apparently referenced in Kill Bill 1 and 2 and I'm guessing that it is the final overhead scene shot in retreating fashion that could Tarantino's eye..
Scandal indeed!.
CONTAINS A BIG SPOILER Chabrol's transitional period was coming to an end.Hisgolden era was about to begin,and would culminate two years later with "le boucher".But the transitional period is still here in 1967."Le scandale" is nothing short of rubbish.The first hour is meandering and dragging on and on and on:you're going to tell me it's Claude Chabrol 's usual disgust for the bourgeoisie.It would work the following year in "la femme infidele" when Chabrol began with a fly on the wall account of the daily life of those wealthy people.It does not here .Anthony Perkins and Maurice Ronet are wasted and Yvonne Furneaux is undistinguished.Stephane Audran is here too and with her ,comes my big spoiler :so stop reading now if you have not seen the flick (but haven't you got a better way of spending your time anyway?).Anyone who knows Chabrol's works has seen Audran in a lot of films;and you realize that Jacqueline is a Stephane Audran made look ugly ,and the German hostess is the real sexy Audran.When the movie was made,Audran was hardly known in France and the audience could be fooled.No longer.Chabrol ,in the second part,tried to create suspense and fear ,by suggesting Ronet was going nuts.But it's too late and the ending recalls some of those Joan Crawford extravaganzas ,the likes of "straight jacket" except that you had a good laugh in Castle's movie .Not in Chabrol's dud.Gastronomist Chabrol fills his quota of good food.Here they treat themselves to some delicious kidneys (not hot enough,one of the guests complains.).
Snafu, Fubar, and Fiasco walk into a bar.
Spoiler alert: this review is all spoilers.
But this movie is so bad that I don't think it's possible to spoil it any further.
A reviewer who has praised the movie asserts that the Anthony Perkins character, Christopher, is in cahoots with the character, or rather characters, played by Stéphane Audran: Audran is Jacqueline when disguised as Christopher's mousy maid and she is the flashy Lydia when not in disguise.
Lydia commits a bunch of murders and tries to pin them on Christopher's friend, the character named Paul who is played by Maurice Ronet.
Lydia's plan is to benefit financially from the deaths of her murder victims and then live happily ever after with Christopher (why the beautiful and intelligent, albeit ruthless, Lydia would kill in order to be with a loser like Christopher is beyond my comprehension).
But if Christopher is in on Lydia's plan, then the scene where he makes a play for Jacqueline and she rejects him makes no sense.
Perhaps he could be in cahoots only with Lydia, not realizing that she is also Jacqueline, but that would mean that all it takes for a woman to deceive Christopher is not much more than her wearing of a wig.
Christopher's being in cahoots with Lydia would also mean that he would be delighted when he learns that his wife, Christine, played by Yvonne Furneaux, has been murdered, when in fact he is distraught.
The entire movie makes very little sense.
With the partial exception of Christine, all the main characters are unprincipled and obnoxious people, so it is difficult to have much sympathy for any of them..
Uneven early Claude Chabrol thriller.
This was a movie that French director Claude Chabrol made just before the period considered his golden era in which he knocked out a number of excellent dramatic thrillers.
It would only be fair to say that with this one he hadn't quite nailed the formula, as while it has a complex plot, it ultimately doesn't add up to all that much by the end.
The story features a young couple who try to convince, Paul Wagner, the mentally unstable owner of a respected champagne business to sell his company to another corporation.
Matters are complicated when on a trip to Germany, a girl Wagner meets is murdered while he experiences a blackout, while back in France the same thing happens once again.
These events are used as leverage to blackmail him into giving up his company.It's got to be said that this one takes a while to get going.
It begins with a scene involving a gang attack, which kind of sits a bit awkwardly in the story, and it is only alluded to later on but left essentially adrift from everything else.
After this, we watch some rich types involve themselves in a series of vaguely interesting activities but it is really only once the first murder finally occurs that the story becomes interesting.
It sort of gets by after that but you would be hard pushed to say by the end that it was anything too out of the ordinary or inspired.
Still, any film that features the incredibly alluring Stéphane Audran gets plus points from me basically from the get-go, and while she does have an admittedly smaller role than she would have in Chabrol's later films, it is an important one.
Frankly, Audran was a huge reason that many of the films from Chabrol's golden era were so good and in this instance, even with limited screen-time she is still head and shoulders above everybody else.
There was a neat disguise reveal later on which had me fooled and the movie does end on a commendably strange final shot.
Ultimately, this is certainly worth a watch if you like Chabrol or Audran, although it is for sure one of their lesser collaborations..
"Try to remember the motto:"The first will be last and the last
or something like that.".
Gathering up works from auteur film maker Claude Chabrol,I spotted a title starring Anthony Perkins.
With Chabrol being very open about his inspiration from the "Master of Suspense" I decided that it was time to see Chabrol meet the psycho.The plot:Caught in the middle of a car crash, champagne businessman Paul Wagner finds himself unable to settle down.Spotting a weakness, Christine Belling and her husband Christopher try to get Wagner to sell the business to them.Getting a grip on what few sense he has left,Wagner pushes their advances to the side.
Struggling to get his condition under control,Wagner starts to fear that the car crash affected him more than he originally believed,when Wagner's girlfriends start turning up brutally killed.
View on the film:Backed by Universal studios, (which led to a French and English version both being shot) director Claude Chabrol and cinematographer Jean Rabier fizz up the lavish lifestyles of Paul and Christopher,as stylish tracking shots pull back to reveal the colourful surroundings when the murders "pop." Closing in on Wagner's fractured mind,Chabrol locks in with elegant,tightly held close-ups which heat up a tough edge Film Noir atmosphere,which is lit up by Wagner's attempts to unscramble his memories.Kicking off with a car crash that sends Wagner into a whirl,the screenplay by Claude Brulé/ Derek Prouse/ William Benjamin & Paul Gégauff delicately builds up the fractures between Wagner,Christopher and Christine Belling,with Wagner's blunt outbursts cutting him off as a Film Noir loner.
Splashing the murders against the screen,the writers wonderfully press Wagner's anxiety down on the viewer,by making the viewer having to gather the loose reflections of Wagner's interactions with the victims, until the superb final shot "pulls back" to unveil the full puzzle.Carrying a sly grin on his face, Anthony Perkins gives a great performance as Christopher,whose calm, collected business manner Perkins peels away to uncover a ruthless, calculating bite.
Pushed to put the cork back in the bottle by the gorgeous Yvonne Furneaux's femme fatale , Maurice Ronet gives an excellent performance as Paul Wagner.Covering Wagner in Noir shakes of disbelief,Ronet digs his nails into the tortured doubt of Wagner,as the murder victims get covered in champagne..
Effective psychological thriller.
This early Claude Chabrol thriller is rarely seen, but it's just as good as most of his later, more widely acclaimed films.
The beginning is a little too languid (as one character puts it, their job is "to do nothing with distinction"), but once the first murder occurs, the film transforms into a gripping, Hitchcockian mystery.
Chabrol is collaborating with his regular cinematographer and composer, so the photography and the music are up to his usual high standards.
There are some stunningly beautiful women (Stephane Audran in red lingerie is worth the price of admission by herself....and why is Suzanne Lloyd so little-known?), and an equally stunning plot twist.
But you must also be prepared for one of the strangest, most open-ended final shots you will ever see! |
tt0056243 | Mix Me a Person | Phillip Bellamy, a leading barrister, tells his wife, psychiatrist Anne Dyson, about his most recent case defending a young layabout, Harry Jukes, who has apparently shot a policemen on a country road and been found by police still holding the gun. Bellamy is convinced of his guilt, but Anne is less sure. Much of her practice is with troubled young people and she feels there is more to the story than the police evidence.
Anne visits Harry in prison. He is depressed and distrustful but finally agrees to talk to her. Harry's story is that he took a Bentley Continental car to impress a girl but when she went off with another boy decided to take the car for a spin before dumping it. Swerving to avoid another car he burst a tire but could not find any tools in the boot to change the wheel. He asked the driver of a car parked in the copse nearby for help but he was occupied with his girl and refused. Harry was spotted by a policeman on a bike who stopped to help. He flagged down a lorry to ask to borrow a jack. The lorry stopped but the passenger immediately produced a gun and shot the policeman. Harry managed to grab the gun off the killer as the lorry drove away. Shortly after, a police car arrived and Harry was arrested.
Anne believes Harry's story and tries to persuade Bellamy of Harry's innocence. She interviews Harry several times and begins to follow up some aspects of his story. She visits the gang that Harry hung out with in a cafe in Battersea and they agree to help her by trying to find the couple in the parked car. She also visits Taplow, the man whose car was stolen, several times and finds his account unconvincing. One of the boys from the cafe agrees to take a job at Taplow's frozen food depot to do some investigating there.
Harry is found guilty and the subsequent appeal is dismissed. Anne manages to find more details supporting Harry's story but none of this evidence is accepted by the authorities. The boys from the cafe manage to find the couple and two of them go with Anne to confront them. The woman is ready to co-operate but the man panics and in trying to get away crashes into a tree and is killed. His injured girlfriend makes a statement but it is of no help. On the eve of Harry's execution, Dirty Neck, Harry's friend who has been working at Taplow's depot, arrives to tell Anne that something odd is happening at the warehouse. Anne goes there to investigate and is imprisoned in the cold store from which Taplow helps her escape. She contacts the police who have actually been looking into the case again.
It transpires that an IRA outfit were planning to rob an arms lorry on its way between bases. A previous attempt had been aborted because of a policeman intervening - which led to his shooting and the murder trial for which the innocent Harry now stands convicted. Now the IRA are planning a similar operation but are thwarted by the police. Both Taplow and his comrade Terence end up dead. Harry is released from prison, and returns to join his mates at the Battersea Cafe. | murder | train | wikipedia | Clunky but compelling. Adam Faith is a teenage tearaway accused of killing a policeman, but he never done it, honest. Anne Baxter is his lawyer's shrink girlfriend (or so we think), determined to find out the truth. Plot twists will keep you glued. But listen carefully, as Faith talks in a rapid Cockney mumble, and both Baxter and Sinden have this annoying habit of constantly dropping their voices to a whisper. Nothing and nobody is quite what they seem. Sinden at one point accuses Baxter of 'morbid femininism' (sic). Sexual relationships of all kinds are treated surprisingly realistically, and the UK prime minister's father in law is not bad in a small part.. Clunky mystery with young Adam Faith giving better performance than more seasoned actors. Adam Faith shows Anne Baxter and Donald Sinden a thing or two about natural acting. While they play to the gallery, the 50s/60s pop idol nicely underplays his part as a young lad charged with murder. The scriptwriter/production designer/director has a ludicrous, but typical idea of what 'upper-class' Sinden calls a teddy-boy (already a dated idea in 1962.) Faith and his mates are a neatly attired, clean-cut crowd, hanging out in an espresso bar, decked with pictures of Ella Fitzgerald and Chris Barber (!) - a more likely venue for 40 year olds at that time. It was the pre-Beatles era, and most British films were very myopic in their portrayals of youth, although 'Saturday Night and Sunday Morning' had hit the screens two years previously. This does seem like the Tunbridge-Wells version of youth gone astray,and accordingly it wasn't exactly a box-office smash. The clunky plot has more than one handy coincidence, and while the portrayal of the working classes is condescending, at least Anne Baxter's psychiatrist character gets to voice her opinion that people are human beings and should be treated as such. Jack MacGowran shines as a villain, as does Alfred Burke as a humane screw, and it's good to see Aussies Ed Deveraux and Ray Barrett playing senior coppers, but generally the whole pic is just a budget cut above one of the typical British supporting features that were still being produced at the time.. Terrible but undeniably entertaining. Terrible but like a lot of bad films, undeniably entertaining, "Mix Me A Person" was a 'hard-hitting' (for that read, X certificate), British film dealing with crime, punishment, teenage delinquents and what appears to be the IRA. Anne Baxter, whose career was on a somewhat downward spiral at the time, is the psychiatrist trying to prove Adam Faith's innocence on a charge of murder. She also happens to be married to his barrister, Donald Sinden. Lots of flashbacks tell us that Adam is indeed innocent while in the present Anne takes on the role of investigating snoop. The dialogue, by Ian Dalrymple, is laughably bad as is Leslie Norman's insipid direction but it gallops along and it's always fun seeing someone like Baxter slumming it. Needless to say the film wasn't a success and has all but disappeared. Don't seek it out but should it come your way, you could do a lot worse.. A mixed up film. At the time this film was made the Swinging Sixties in Britain were yet to begin. Britain's old social mores still held sway, while youth culture was bubbling up ready to take centre stage. In this film teenagers at the Paloma café call each other "nit" and "berk" and say things like "Cor! Strike a light!" While the word "virginity" is censored to a "V."The star of the film is the pop singer Adam Faith. Although he sings the theme song "Mix Me a Person" and does an English language version of "La Bamba" in the film, he plays a serious role in a serious film dealing with serious issues. Faith can almost certainly act better than he can sing; and, as the teenager sentenced to death for the murder of a policeman is totally convincing throughout.The plot is not too bad although it hangs together with a series of unbelievable coincidences. But I suppose that just goes to show that no matter how convincing the case against a condemned man is, there is always an element of doubt, which makes the irreversible death penalty useless in a civilised justice system. The film is fairly well directed. The script is a little jaded and unreal. Otherwise Mix Me a Person is well above average for a British B movie; and is much, much better than the cops and robbers tripe that was typical of the period.Now the acting. The warders, police, villains, do their jobs well. It's the principle characters that are - well - they are absolutely pathetic in many cases. As mentioned, Adam Faith is great. Anne Baxter, who plays the psychiatrist with gravity-defying hair who tries to prove Faith's innocence, acts well or badly, depending on whom she is playing the scene with. If she plays with someone who acts well, she acts well. Unfortunately, many of her scenes are played with her barrister boyfriend played by Donald Sinden. Sinden chews up the scenery so much that there must have been teethmarks all over the film stock; so, in her scenes with Sinden, Baxter does likewise. Then there are the new generation of actors represented by the kids at the Paloma Café. Of these, Dr Who girl Carole Ann Ford is excellent and totally convincing. The rest, which include Tony Blair's father-in-law Anthony Booth, are, in my opinion, absolutely APPALLING. On the credit side, the abolition of the death penalty was a hot topic at the time. It would be easy for this film to sentimentalise and trivialise this subject; somehow this film avoids that, and no doubt had a minor role to play in the death penalty's final abolition a year or two later. The helplessness of the innocent man and those who take his cause against a bureaucratic and rigid justice system determined to exact its pound of flesh is captured wonderfully well. For all its faults this mix-me-a-film is well worth watching. Its good points outweigh its bad ones, which is why I have given it 7 out of 10. |
tt0023285 | Number Seventeen | Detective Barton is searching for a necklace stolen by a gang of thieves. In the beginning, the gang is in a house in London, before going on the run.
The film starts off with Detective Barton (John Stuart) arriving at a house marked for sale or rent. The door is unlocked and he wanders in. An unknown person with a candle is wandering about and a dead body is found. When confronted the mysterious person claims innocence of the murdered person. Barton (who introduces himself as Forsythe) asks the stranger what he has in his pockets (handkerchief, string, sausage, picture of a child, half a cigarette), before the shadow of a hand is shown reaching for a doorknob. The stranger (who later introduces himself as Ben) searches the body of the dead person and finds handcuffs and a gun which he takes.
The detective returns from investigating the weird sound and finds the handcuffs which the stranger left on the ground. A person is seen to be crawling on the roof through shadows, who then falls through the roof. This is a woman called Miss Ackroyd (Ann Casson) who is revived and cries out for her father. She explains that her father went onto the roof and that they are next door in number 15.
The bell tolls half past midnight and the dead body has disappeared. Three people arrive at the windswept house, Mr. Ackroyd (Henry Caine), Nora (Anne Grey) (who is deaf and dumb) and a third person. Ben draws out the gun. Ben accidentally shoots the governor. Mr. Ackroyd draws out a gun and asks him to search the gentlemen, Ben and Miss Ackroyd. The telegram is revealed to Mr. Ackroyd. Sheldrake (Garry Marsh) gets the diamond necklace, which he has hidden in the upper portion of a toilet. Ben causes a commotion and is locked away with Sheldrake.
The two hands of Sheldrake reach out and appear to strangle Ben who is only pretending to be knocked out. More members of the gang arrive. They suggest tying up Miss Ackroyd and 'Forsythe'. The three thieves all have to catch a train. However, one of the "thieves" is Miss Ackroyd's father—a police officer—who locks away two of the thieves and frees Miss Ackroyd and Doyle. He opens the door where Ben is locked away with Sheldrake and gets into a fist fight with Sheldrake.
The other man reveals himself as Sheldrake (the supposed 'corpse' from earlier) and frees the others. Miss Ackroyd and 'Forsythe' are tied up again. Nora reveals herself to be able to speak and says "I'm coming back". She comes back and frees Miss Ackroyd and Doyle. Miss Ackroyd faints but recovers. Nora returns to the basement to allay the suspicions of the other thieves and buy time for the rest to get away. They free Ben and Miss Ackroyd's father. The thieves arrive at the train yard, and board a freight train that is departing. The train says Deutsch-Englischer Fahrverkehr Ferry Service between Germany-Great Britain.
The train departs with Ben aboard and he stumbles onto crates of wine. The thieves, after dispatching the conductor, go to the front of the train, shoot the fireman, and catch the Driver as he faints. 'Forsythe' failed to get on the train before it departed and commandeers a bus. Ben is revealed to have the necklace. Sheldrake discovers he doesn't have the diamond and the thieves fight each other. Sheldrake claims that 'Barton' a detective posing as a thief. A chase scene occurs on the train as the thieves go after Barton. Barton escapes and handcuffs Nora. The bus that 'Forsythe' is on races after the train. The thieves, realising the train is accelerating, try to find the brakes. They turn dials helplessly and notice the bus that 'Forsythe' is on.
Pushing levers and turning dials does nothing, indeed, it only makes the train go faster, leaving the thieves unable to escape. At the dock, the ferry pulls up. As 'Forsythe' watches, the train hurtles through the dock, crashes into the train currently on the ferry at full speed, and pushes it out to sea, dragging the remaining cars into the ocean. People are rescued from the water. Henry Doyle tells Forsythe that he is posing as Detective Barton. But Forsythe is actually Detective Barton, who says to Doyle, "You can't be Barton because I am." All of the thieves are apprehended by the police who are on the scene. Nora asks Barton, "What are you going to do about it?" Barton replied "You better come along with me." Nora says "Where?" "To breakfast." Barton says, and they laugh. Ben then reveals he has the diamond necklace. | suspenseful, murder | train | wikipedia | One of Alfred Hitchcock's British (earlier) movies, "Number Seventeen" shows his touch in many of its interesting and creative details, and it is an entertaining film, although the plot is rather chaotic and often confusing.The story concerns a vacant house ("number seventeen") on which several different persons converge for various reasons.
If you watch it over again, you realize that everything does fit together pretty well, but it is quite hard to catch everything the first time through.The somewhat confusing plot is redeemed by a lot of Hitchcock touches.
After a rather slow beginning, it gets your attention and keeps it until the end."Number Seventeen" probably could have been a much better movie if the plot and characters had been developed more carefully, but it is still pretty entertaining as it is.
It's certainly not up to the standard of Hitchcock's later work, but it's a moderately enjoyable film both in itself and for the insight it offers into Hitchcock's development as a director.The plot is rather complex and can be a bit difficult to follow at times.
Hitchcock's early movie from British period with thrilling ending chase in scale models.
The picture deals with a deserted house in London as scenario where we find a suspecting hobo (Leon Lion , film producer and he played similar role at stage) , a young girl called Nora (Grey), a detective and a gang of thieves involving the robbery of a necklace .
The film has various Hitchcock touches as well as the ¨McGuffin¨ , this time seem to be the robbed necklace ; furthermore , the overlong and exciting chase sequence of a train and a bus realized with a maquettes and miniatures .
It's a neat trick to bring the audience into the action, having us become the camera and discover the environment, and yet at the same time keeping the man's identity and purpose unknown.What follows is a steady descent into the depths of farce, with exaggerated performances, sped-up fist fights and too many ridiculous plot twists and character introductions to really keep up with.
Eventually, the entire cast will end up in a mad chase between a runaway train carrying the bad guys and a bus commandeered by the good guys (or so it seems).Thoough not one of Hitchcock's best early films, Number 17 is certainly amusing and contains a lot of intentional comedy that many critics seem to want to ignore, keeps a steady, if hectic, pace and boasts some pretty affective use of miniatures for the 1930s.
NUMBER SEVENTEEN is one of the very few films Alfred Hitchcock made that has aged poorly.
While it doesn't lack merit as a rollicking little caper, the story is too confusing for the film to be enjoyed, and surprisingly enough the direction is clumsy and the whole thing ends up rather incoherent.There may be a reason for this.
While this is something that rarely happens in his catalog as director, you can sense the same thing to a lesser extent in STAGE FRIGHT and THE SKIN GAME, yet the technical competence of the former and the fine source material and performances of the latter make those more fun and interesting to see than this.The real crime here is witnessing the failure of one of Hitch's only stabs at an old-dark-house mystery; it's a severe disappointment that he didn't explore the potential of the story to a greater degree.
To a fan of the director, it's essential but a bit off-putting.One good point is the closing chase sequence, which takes up a major chunk of the movie's second half (the total running time is only an hour).
Hitchcock's Number Seventeen has to be his most experimental film by far and it's actually quite an enjoyable watch from a technical perspective if you can get beyond the confusing plot.
The film is basically divided into to parts (2 acts almost - this movie runs just over an hour) the first taking place in a deserted house and the second being a wacky chase between a bus and a train.
This really is far from top form for the great Alfred Hitchcock but is an interesting, sometimes exciting film with Hitchcock touches which lift it above its average origins.It is important to remember that this is in keeping with most early talkies in appearing odd and over acted.
Camera shots and outdoor filming was made more difficult and sound was poor.The 'classic' Frankenstein directed by James Whale is more over acted and has more bizarre dialogue than this, both that film and this one have enough qualities to overcome the dated nature of nearly all early talkies though.The plot is interesting and strange but is not fully thought through.
One of Alfred Hitchcock's British earlies: "Number Seventeen" shows his experimentation in the area of suspense and atmosphere.
The plot is shaky and frankly I didn't quite get it in the first time around but I enjoyed the fact that you never knew who anyone was, were they telling the truth?The story involves a vacant house in which assorted characters meet up for various reasons and possibly nefarious purposes.A jewel heist is at the core of the situation but that is just the Maguffin as it is hard to fathom why some of the characters have any good reason for being in the house.
audience, it doesn't excuse the poor, choppy quality of the film.It's hard to follow the plot because Hitchcock fails to let us in on certain details.
Hitchcock clearly has had a lot of fun showing off the tricks of the trade that he had learned in Germany, and the film is often a delight to watch.On the other hand, the plot is complete tripe, and it can start to grate in the middle of this short film.
Having read some less-than-brilliant reviews about 'Number Seventeen,' an early work of Hitchcock, I was a bit tentative about how good it would actually be.
However, by the end of the film, I was pleasantly surprised!The film starts very slowly, and Hitchcock takes time to develop the characters and the setting, and to begin building the suspense.
There's also a detective trailing them and some innocent people get mixed up in it.The story makes little sense and the British accents are hard to understand.Also there's a character called Ben (Leon M.
Number Seventeen is, to my best of knowledge, a really primitive, early sound-era experimental thriller where plot suspense gets thrown out the window in lieu of cinematic tricks, really goofy near-slapstick type violence, and a climax that had me transfixed as well as laughing my head off.
Strange to think that a film by the master of suspense could be borderline (if not just) incoherent, but here it is, a picture where the twists and double-crosses (i.e. that scene towards the end involving Barton) keep coming at a fast, rambling clip, until all one can know for sure is that Ben (Leon M.
But what is one to think of seeing the all-too-long train chase, that contains as many implausible bits of human action as much as stupid shots of the train moving model-wise (was I watching an episode of the lost Thunderbirds collection or something?).Now, on another level though, Hitchcock does pull off a somewhat entertaining picture- and probably more than anything based on what he had to know was too goofy and delirious to take seriously, like when the fist-fights break out, or when Lion has to act like he's knocked out when a man puts a one hand on his neck to knock him out, and glances back to see if Ben is asleep about 10 times (it's maybe one of the funniest scenes I've ever seen in a Hitchcock movie).
It's a good-looking picture with some nice "old dark house" atmosphere going for it and the beginning and ending are sequences worthy of consideration for Hitch's 1930s highlight reel.
And Number Seventeen is one of them, of Hitchcock's films it is in my bottom 3 along with Juno and the Paycock and Jamaica Inn. But it is a little better than those two, because it actually does feel like Hitchcock, but unfortunately not Hitchcock at his best.
There are some of Hitchcock's touches like the McGuffin and the final twenty minutes, but there is really the sense that his heart was not in it and that he had little interest in the film.
The story suffers from being convoluted, things being left underdeveloped and under-explained due to the too short length and pacing that is, especially in the first third of the film(the final twenty minutes is really where Number Seventeen really comes to life), as creaky as nearly broken floorboards.
Early Alfred Hitchcock film that finds a bunch of criminals gathered at a house following a jewel robbery.
A group of criminals have committed a jewel robbery.They gather in an old house.In that house is also a detective, a man called Ben and a woman called Nora.Number Seventeen (1932) is an Alfred Hitchcock film.It's based on the play by Joseph Jefferson Farjeon.The cast includes Leon M.
Lion, who plays Ben.Anne Grey plays Nora.John Stuart is Barton-The Detective.Donald Calthrop is Brant.Ann Casson plays Rose Ackroyd.I found this film on a VHS from the library a little while back.Hitchcock came up with much better than this later in his career.He went on to make some of the biggest classics in movie history.This early work is very mediocre.But the movie is quite funny from time to time.Some of it may be unintentional, though.And the train sequence works.Visually the movie looks good.Just watch those shadows play in the house.Hitchcock himself stated this film being a disaster.But Hitchcock at worst isn't all that bad..
The police trace the jewels and also turn up for the hunt; wino gets a gun and only complicates matters, for the characters this film as well as the viewers watching it.Allegedly neither Hitchcock, nor his co-screenwriter Rodney Ackland wanted anything to do with this movie, so, again allegedly, they tried to make this screenplay as absurd as they could.
They succeeded anyway, as it rarely makes sense (a cop is somehow able to stop a bullet from hitting girl by blocking it with his hand?) and film only occasionally has some of Hitchcock's style and sense of detail showing through the confused and illogical muddle.Good climactic chase between a bus hijacked by cop and a train, which ultimately crashes into a ferry and sinks into the river, but the model-work is hit and miss, some shots are effective looking and other shots are pitiful, like something filmed in a kid's bathtub..
A remake with a clearer plot and good special effects could actually be an interesting movie.The film is just quirky and dull.
So I decided to check out this early Hitchcock film one night, and thirty minutes in I felt like I had found a real hidden gem.
To me, Hitchcock's best films are the ones that deal with characters stuck in confined places, and this seemed like the precursor to films like "Lifeboat" and "Rope".The first half of the film is really atmospheric and sets up a cast of really interesting and fun characters, as well as a pretty solid mystery.However then the characters break out of the house they're stuck in and it becomes a pretty boring train/bus chase that has an unsatisfying conclusion.
Only the final scene alone, which is created through one of the best use of miniature models in cinema history, is worthy to watch the film.Twist after twist without any space for take a breath between make this high pace comedy thriller bit confusing, but it is still fun entertainment..
Although occasionally out of balance with comedic overtones following with dark shadowy play, the fast pace of the movie and never ending twists and surprises manage to keep the film on track.
"Number Seventeen" came at a time when Alfred Hitchcock seemed to be slightly struggling in taking his career to a new level of greatness.
Scary empty house with a corpse, deaf and mute lady and a runaway train, intriguing early Hitchcock masterpiece.
I've seen this film a few years back, forgot about it and finally ran across it in a film pack - very glad they added this one, it's good to see it again.The film is mainly in a "spooky old house" setting with wailing winds, great shadows, strange characters, a murder(?), a stolen necklace, a great chase, humor splashed about and a story that is simple but good.
This is not an Alfred Hitchcock masterpiece but it's a fun one.Try to watch this film without taking it seriously - remember it's entertainment and artful in it's way (the cinematography and directing.) 9/10.
You would be hard pressed to find another very Low-Budget Movie from the early thirties with a final Third Act so frantically edited and exciting in its use of quick cuts and miniature manipulation.It zips along with a frenetic chase between a bus and a train and finally a Docking Pier that eerily anticipates modern Film Technique.
Supposedly based on an "old dark house" type of play that has been remade countless times, the original story could not possibly have involved everything found here: a reckless chase between a runaway rain run by presumed jewel thieves in which The Girl sits handcuffed, with a bus (all done in pretty accurate miniatures, of course) rushing towards a drawbridge where a freight ship is accosted, with the inevitable final crash, death-defying last-minute rescue and happy ending with a double twist.
He was making mediocre and problem filled films like Number 17, a crime thriller about a group of criminals who rendezvous at a safe house after stealing a very valuable necklace.
Also, I don't usually critique a movie on technical aspects like this, but the sound quality in Number 17 is absolutely dreadful, and it makes it really hard to understand what the characters are saying at times because of the hollow muffled quality of the dialogue.But there's a silver lining to all the disaster in this shoddy film.
When Hitchcock isn't making a film with a great plot or decent characters, he's still doing something right.
Each of his early mediocre films seems to have something interesting in it in the way that Hitchcock directs.
Number Seventeen (1932)** 1/2 (out of 4)Extremely strange film from Hitchcock has a tramp (Leon M.
I've seen just about every movie from the director and this is without question one of his strangest and while it doesn't completely work in the end it's still an interesting film.
This old Alfred Hitchcock film is extremely tough to watch, as the film (even by 1931 standards) has very poor sound and the print is pretty bad as well.
It is essentially an "old dark house" film (which were very common in the era from 1920-1935) and the plot really makes no sense.
My only interest was that Hitchcock made the film and I am interesting in seeing his early development.
Even then, the tension is often undercut with some arresting implausibilities, and amateurish editing (e.g., during the runaway train sequence, they use the same bit of film with our two jewel thieves looking out the door of the engine, at least three different times).This was an awkward era for movies.
This film also climaxes with an exciting set piece action sequence, another distinctive characteristic of later Hitchcock movies (e.g The Thirty Nine Steps, Saboteur, North By Northwest, etc.) Modern-day viewers will undoubtedly find Number Seventeen a rather primitive affair, but taken in the context of when it was made it is an intriguing, interesting thriller that any Hitch enthusiast should try to see at least once.Undercover detective Barton (John Stuart) turns up at an unoccupied house no.
It's interesting that he uses both prominently in what is probably the one film where we really see him enjoying himself.Hitchcock was near the end of his contract with British International Pictures when he was given the play "Number 17" to adapt, and virtually no budget (10,000 GBP).
Lion as the homeless man Ben,who perfectly suits the films mix of comedy and mystery Film Noir with a great performance that is able to show the character getting into some funny situations,whilst still having a sense of unease around the events that are unfolding in the house.With the second half of the film being much more "comedic",it seems that as the film becomes less serious,Hichcock seems to become less interested in the film,with a chase scene that ends up just looking like a three year old child smashing his plastic train into a wall.Thankfully,the first half of the the film,is able to make the short-comings of the second half be easily forgotten,with Hitchcock almost turning the film into a brilliant Haunted House movie,that is filled with a fantastic shadowy candle-lit Noir look,which helps make the scary search round the house extremely enjoyable.Final view on the film:A very well-directed "spooky" first half,let down by a more comedic poorly done second half..
COMMENT: After a splendid introductory tracking shot into the deserted house, the direction becomes more static for the first half of this film which obviously follows the complicated (yet suspenseful) plot twists and turns of the original stage play pretty closely.Over-acting atrociously, Leon M.
The suspenseful, harrowing chase, though clearly done with miniatures, is also a tried and true characteristic later associated with Hitchcock, to say nothing of the use of trains in his films in general.The story begins with "Stuart" entering an abandoned house, full of cobwebs.
Things don't exactly "happen" in "Number Seventeen", an early sound film from Hitchcock's pre-Golden period.
Taken separately from the rest of the film, the first half of Number Seventeen is probably the worst thing Hitchcock has ever done.
The chase scene and train crash at the end is rather exciting – and the only really worthwhile part of Number Seventeen – but it's not enough to redeem the awful first half.. |
tt0120867 | Jerry and Tom | Hit men Tom and Jerry wait in a Chicago bar for the go-ahead to kill Stanley. Anxious to get the hit done, Jerry suggests they perform the hit immediately; Tom refuses, and Stanley entertains them with jokes. As the phone rings, the film shifts to a flashback set ten years earlier, in 1984. Jerry, a youth employed at Billy's used car dealership, joins Tom as he walks with Karl. Karl describes how a local gangster bit off the nose of Karl's nephew. Disturbed by the audaciousness and brutality of the attack, Tom promises to look into the issue. However, Karl becomes spooked when they enter Tom's car, and Karl begins bargaining with Tom, to Jerry's confusion. Tom agrees that the two are friends with a long history but strangles Karl after an apology. Jerry throws up but insists that he is otherwise fine.
Tom's next hit involves a trip out of state. Jerry tags along, and when he becomes surly, Tom allows him to accompany him to the site of the hit itself, a cinema. There, they meet an unnamed man who becomes annoyed with their loud conversation in which Jerry describes a domestic dispute with his girlfriend, Deb. The man in the cinema tells them the story about how he and his fiancée, Vicki, the star of the low budget action film he is watching, angered the mob. After hit men assassinate Vicki via a weapons mishap on the set, he goes into hiding and loses his will to live. Moved by the story, Jerry decides to marry his girlfriend, and the two hit men rise to leave. Jerry is surprised when Tom slits the throat of the man, and Tom admonishes him to not get so emotionally involved in the stories of their victims.
On Jerry's first kill, the two track their victim to a Chinese restaurant. Nervous, Jerry becomes paranoid and makes a spectacle of himself in front of the victim. To calm him, Tom describes Ronald Reagan's final acting performance, a cold-blooded hit man in The Killers. Enthused by the thought of following in Reagan's footsteps, Jerry is able to relax and make his first kill. Later, as the two wait for their next hit, Tom tells Jerry about their co-worker, Vic, who is rumored to have had an affair with Marilyn Monroe and assassinated John F. Kennedy. When the target arrives, Jerry asks to make the hit himself, and Tom impatiently watches as Jerry awkwardly attempts to make a clean kill. After Jerry simply pulls out the pistol and shoots the man head-on, they leave.
Tom and Jerry join Vic for a meal, which Vic has prepared himself. During the conversation, Vic reveals that he intends to publish his memoirs. After Vic describes a feature film adaptation and talk show appearances that he has planned, the trio argue over the appropriateness of such actions and who should play each of them in a film. Tom suggests Don Knotts for Jerry, who becomes offended that the others do not take him seriously. Jerry pulls out a syringe and explains that he is diabetic, only to suddenly stab Vic with it. Surprised and angered, Tom castigates Jerry for killing Vic in such an undignified manner, as they had previously planned to take Vic out back and shoot him after he finished with his dinner, a death that Tom considered more proper for an assassin of Vic's stature.
In their final hit, Jerry panics and accidentally murders an innocent bystander. He then tells a disturbed Tom of how he occasionally fantasizes about killing his family, eventually admitting that he has pointed a loaded weapon at his infant son's head. In the present, the phone rings, and Tom reluctantly answers it; he is given the go-ahead and kills Jerry. After Tom unties Stanley, Stanley reveals that he has been tasked with killing Tom. The film ends as Stanley asks Tom if he knows any good jokes. | comedy, humor, flashback | train | wikipedia | 1st watched 4/1/2001 - 7 out of 10(Dir-Saul Rubinek): Witty, black comedy with terrific performances by Mantegna and Sam Rockwell.
The movie starts out in the present as it appears Jerry and Tom are waiting to "do" another person, and then takes you back ten years to show you how Jerry got involved in the business that Tom already has been doing for many years.
A Sardonic Tale of Two Hit Men. This is the movie that brings you into the world of the ordinary hit man, well not the machine gun tottling Mafioso gunmen we're so used to watching in the big gangster movies.
The hit men work as used car salesmen, wipe windows in the lot when free and pay for their own movie tickets.
Young Jerry (Sam Rockwell) learns the ropes from Tom (Joe Mantegna) and witnesses his first murder in the front seat of a car.
Jerry's induction is every bit as abhorrent as one would normally react to seeing a man killed.
In fact Jerry gets to be as ruthless as Tom, to the point that he even takes sadistic pleasure when whacking off his victims.
Apart from a very entertaining script, what makes the movie an excellent watch is the top-notch performances from the cast, especially Joe Mantegna, Sam Rockwell, Maury Chaykin and Charles Durning.
The brutality of the killings is shocking but any darkness in the movie is balanced by the humorous edge throughout.
The movie starts and ends on a sardonic note, the very tone that first-time director Saul Rubinek wanted to create.
Look for a very entertaining two hours of superb characters, situations, and some of the most crafty filming techniques I've seen in years.
This one was worth rewinding and watching the characters more closely to fully appreciate them and many of the scene transitions.
One has to have a morbid sense of humor to enjoy this wry black comedy about two used car salesmen who moonlight as contract killers.
Other than some innovative scene transitions, the direction by veteran TV director Saul Rubinek was nothing special, except I suppose he made good use of a very limited budget.
The story was taken from a play by Rick Cleveland, (`The West Wing' TV series) and Rubinek maintained the theatrical feel using simple sets and concentrating mainly on the actors.Joe Mantegna is an excellent tough-guy character actor and conjures another terrific mobster.
Sam Rockwell is also good as his dim-witted cohort, who begins to like his work a bit too much.
Charles Durning gives a droll performance as an over-the-hill hit man who wants to write a book about his targets.
There are also cameos by William Macy, Ted Danson and Peter Riegert.This is a better than average B movie with some acting performances that are worth seeing.
I saw Jerry and Tom at the 1998 Sundance Film Festival.
There are moments of drama and irony in this film, but mostly it's a very well-written and well-acted comedy that is at times hilarious for the ease with which it captures icons and styles from other films while at the same time twisting and mocking them.
This is part of my Scarecrow Video Guide inspired movie-trek, following "Steven Soderbergh's Schizopolis"."Jerry & Tom" is a fun little black comedy, but it reminded me a little too much of another fun little black comedy..."Coldblooded", starring Jason Priestly & Peter Riegert.
I'm not sure which one is lesser known, but they both have something to offer."Jerry & Tom" is the "better" film, if only by virtue of the performances.
Joe Mantegna is always good, and Sam Rockwell can't lose, IMHO.
(It's been at least 7 years since I saw it.) I could tell 10 minutes in that "Jerry & Tom" was based on a play.
It would be a great play, but as a film it's a little lacking.
Aside from Mantegna and Rockwell, Charles Durning is predictably excellent, and William H.
Macy shines in a brief role.Perhaps these two films would make a good double feature.
Watch "Jerry & Tom" first and savor it, then have a few drinks and enjoy "Coldblooded".Next on the trek- "Forbidden Zone"!.
Great cast, even good performances, could not save this film.
Danson and Macy were at their best, and Durning's performance was great, but all were wasted.
The Rockwell character lost credibility after a few years of his boss still saying he was a good kid.
Jerry and Tom are two hit men who engage in clever banter before brutally killing people.
This movie has been described as a black comedy.
The audience is subjected to short, repetitive vignettes featuring the violent ways used to kill the victims.
Joe Mantegna plays his usual Mafia-type hood and Sam Rockwell plays a slovenly, moronic thug who becomes increasingly mean through the movie.
This could have been a much better movie if the killings and the various inhumane methods used were kept off screen.
We know they were hit men and we know, from their frequent inclusion in Hollywood films, what they do, so why dwell on the act instead of on the story.
This movie's celebration of killing and matter-of-fact brutality combined with its light tone desensitizes its audience.
A tedious, dialogue-intensive story about the vicissitudes of a mentor/protege hitman team, "Jerry & Tom" is a study in understatement with a pointless plot and an ending which may make you want to "whack" yourself for having watched the whole thing..
There are many funny moments, but the overall effect is somewhat slight.What makes it work is the Joe Mantegna/Sam Rockwell duo.
Still, watching these two in "Jerry and Tom" is great fun and there's good support from Charles Durning, Ted Danson and Maury Chaykin.There is a nice sense of whackiness about it all, not only in the dialog and characterization but also in the strange and unique manner in which some of the scenes smoothly segue into each other with unexpected camera moves..
This movie Jerry and Tom was a breath of fresh air, something different.
It was well done and well cast and it was fresh with a different way of changing scenes, more like a carousel effect with sets blending into the next...
I couldn't have a cast a better crew of characters, each one brought just what the needed to their role.The movie develops as a new hit man starts his training under the watchful eye of his teacher.
We watch him grow through the years, from a young long haired hippie to a well groomed hit man.The humor throughout the movie by itself makes this movie worth watching, very subtle at times, and outrageously funny at other times..
Not sure why this hasn't reached a wider audience or gathered higher praise.Awesome Sam Rockwell vehicle and twisted buddy movie starring Sam and the always sly and fly Joe Mantegna.
Macy add great character parts as well.Really good scene-to-scene transitions (plus a cameo) that reminds one of...Bottom line is this is a great idea well executed by great players (with a soundtrack that ranges from Quiet Riot to Dean Martin)..
jerry and tom is a film for those who enjoy films, not movies.
it's creative in it's execution, has a great consistent cast and it's a directorial debut for saul rubinek to boot.the film takes the viewer on a ten year trip through various events of a seasoned hit man and his apprentice.
instead it leaves the audience to participate in the film and do a little time-based investigative work (it's refreshing to see the director give a little bit of credit to the audience to use the brain they've been given).there are lots of long takes and inventive transition shots (one single take, for example, will go from a sunny and hot florida dog race to a snow covered chicago used car dealership without flinching...you have to see it to fully understand it) that may be missed on the average viewer.
but if you have an eye for something fresh, Jerry and Tom should not be over looked.Some viewers apparently have issues with the "blue language" contained within but the fact is that some people swear and some people swear alot!
this isn't the first film to use the infamous "f word" and this is by far not the worst case of such words in a film.As well, violence and bloodshed has become normal in society, it's unfortunate and true, don't blame this film for prompting "teen-agers to open fire on their classmates." (unless you can name a specific instance during a school shooting where the killer cried out "this is for jerry and tom!!") if anything Jerry and Tom is an apt commentary on how absurd society has come in its response to violence.watch jerry and tom and decide for yourself, don't just go by what some imdb user has said...that goes for my comments as well.
Some very rewarding performances make this movie about paid hitmen / car salesman a special find in your local video store.
Its twice as good as Tarantino's "Jacky Brown" and features the same overly chatty style but Sam Rockwell, Joe Mategna and the other actors in this film look as if they were actually having a good time during filming.
Good to see a mob movie that didn't end with people pointing guns at each other ala City on Fire.
I saw this movie at the Sundance Film Festival in January of 1998.
A black comedy a bit like Pulp Fiction but not as gory.
Joe Mantegna as Tom teaching Sam Rockwell as Jerry how to kill people for money.All the acting is great, but especially Rockwell's.
The movie spans 10 years, during which the character of Jerry goes from goofball teenager to a man who kills for a living and wants to be remembered by other hitmen as a legendary assasin.
One played all the murder victims while the other two played Jerry and Tom. In the film the victims are played by fine actors William H.
Macy, Ted Danson and Charles Durning.Mantegna is perfect as Tom. You see him slowly realize the evil of his profession as his "student" becomes an accomplished murderer..
No one seems to know how to cast this actor, so we may never see him in a major role in a movie with an actual budget, but he and the others (i particularly liked Ted Danson's contribution; funny stuff) do a great job with a low-key directing style by first time feature director Saul Rubinek.
If you're here, you know what the movie's about, so i'll just say that, though not a Hall of Fame candidate, this is an enjoyable dark comedy with some excellent visual touches in transitions from scene to scene..
Joe Mantegna & Sam Rockwell were amazing in this unknown gem.
Do you enjoy films about Hit men?
This movie shows the rise & fall between these two cold blooded characters.
There is a great mix of violence & humor in "Jerry and Tom".
You need to check out this unknown gem....Now on to the cast/characters....First we got Jerry played by Sam Rockwell (Choke, Matchstick Men, Welcome to Collinwood, Heist, The Green Mile, Safe Men, Lawn Dogs, Box of Moon Light, Confessions of a Dangerous Mind, & Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford) he's a newcomer to the contract killer business who ends up loving his job a little too much plus he's not that smart.
Then we got Tom played by Joe Mantegna (House of Games, The Godfather: Part III, Homicide, Bugsy, Searching for Bobby Fischer, Airheads, Albino Alligator, Thinner, The Last Don 1/2, Joan of Arcadia, Criminal Minds, & The Simpsons -Fat Tony-) he's the veteran of the duo who teaches Jerry everything he knows about contract killing.
Then there's the supporting cast of Maury Chaykin (Death Hunt, The Hunt for the BTK Killer, Nero Wolfe Mystery, Sugartime, Devil in a Blue Dress, & Twins) as Billy, he's the boss who sets everything up plus he owns the car dealership they work at when their not killing people.
Then there's his long time partner Vic played by Charles Durning (The Sting, Breakheart Pass, Sisters, Dog Day Afternoon, The Fury, When a Stranger Calls, The Hudsucker Proxy, Evening Shade, State and Main, & Rescue Me) who's a former contract killer himself who actually taught Tom everything he knows.
Plus we get some great cameos from their victims such as Ted Danson, William H.
I enjoyed "Jerry and Tom" quite a bit.
Joe Mantegna, Sam Rockwell, William H.
The car lot fronting for a murder for hire business is intriguing but the attempts at black comedy mostly misfire, probably due to the very grim motivation of the contract killers.
If on the other hand they had been partners saving their blood money to constantly keep expanding the automobile business, that would have lifted this black comedy to greatness, simply by making the plot more outrageous.
Like he finally woke up and decided to do one great thing before it was all over.Maury Chaykin did his usual disappearing act.
I could give away a lot to those in the know by saying that this should have been his movie.
Maybe being in the company of Charles Durning and Joe Mantegna had something to do with it.
It's STILL "a Sam Rockwell flick".There wasn't enough of Sarah Polley or Peter Riegert.
You see what I'm saying -- great casting.I'd be curious to know if this was filmed in "digital".
(I'm not up on technical.) Some scenes on my screen seemed over-perfect.That leaves director Saul Rubinek.
(Actually that's an oxymoron because this breed of losers-at-work comedy CAN'T breed.)Jimmy Breslin started it all, I think, with THE GANG THAT COULDN'T SHOOT STRAIGHT (1971).
And, as another reviewer correctly points out, a failing of this film is that it isn't clear enough about it's own identity.
I'm side-stepping that because there is so much to enjoy either way.I've always been a fan of Rubinek's character work.
Lo and Behold.There are at least two other films I've seen recently portraying mentor and novice hit man.
I think this one will stick with me the longest because Mantegna and Rockwell make such an odd combination.
Tom (Mantega) and Jerry (Chaykin) are experienced hit men waiting in a bar for a phone call to do their next job who currently is tied up before them.
We then jump back 10 years to find a much younger Jerry and Tom, and we trace their development throughout the years.And that's the plot.
The story follows Jerry from a car salesman who gets accidentally involved in his first hit, through the years as he develops more and more of a taste for the killing, while Tom is heading the other way as the more mature hit man who is losing his taste for the whole thing.
However the thin plot is greatly enriched by making the characters the story.Of the two leads Jerry is the most interesting to watch as he changes the most notably over the film, but Mantegna's Tom is as good as a more stable foil for Jerry.
The various victims all have their amusing quirks and are well played by good actors (William H Macy, Ted Danson, Peter Riegert), while other supporting roles such as Vic and Billy (Durning and Chaykin) are great.The whole story is bristling with comedy and style.
The stories the characters tell and the things they say are brilliant, including flashback stories of Elvis, JFK and others are really funny, while other conversations (such as who play them in a movie - "Don Knotts!") are inspired in their hilarity but also their normality.The director Saul Rubinek is very clever in his direction.
In fact he brings clever touches to all the film.
The killing is often hinted at rather than shown and this allows us to focus on the stories and the comedy rather than the moral difficulty behind what you're seeing.The film is funny throughout but it does have it's thoughtful moments and the conclusion is actually quite moving.
Also some may find the lack of plot to be frustrating or boring and find themselves unable to enjoy the stories within.Overall though, this is a light little gem that draws it's comedy from the stories and the characters within the film.
This is filled with clever and funny touches from the opening bar scene right down to the old-fashioned credit scene and Danson's accreditation as "man who loved Vicki"..
Jerry and Tom is similar to Pulp Fiction, with many of the same silly dialogues about trivial things, followed by intense action as a mob movie.
But some people might get tired of the nattering in these scenes, it didn't have the same power as Pulp, and nowhere near the power of The Money Kings, another recent mob movie with Peter Faulk.
(I fell asleep again.) Jerry and Tom seemed like a pleasant enough story but with a final catch which didn't really unfetter my disinterest.
I must get out more.Ron* Jerry and Tom went STRAIGHT to video in the UK.
Still, Rubinek does an excellent job with his main gimmick for the film...smooth, seamless scene transitions between different time periods and geographic locations.
They are worth waiting for.The movie is a black comedy, but I didn't really find much humor in the wry situations.
I'm not sure if they were not-enough or a little-too-much.Mantegna goes a bit overboard in playing the laid-back "button man" as part-philosopher and part-salesman, but he does an adequate job.
Sam Rockwell fares better as the kid who grows into the profession, enjoying it a bit more than he probably should.
The bit parts they play are overwhelmed by our expectations.I enjoyed the movie, but, if you really want an interesting take on the "old hit-man bringing along a younger guy", try ,"Cohen & Tate" (1989), which I find has much more interesting dynamics between the protagonists. |
tt3343136 | Sleeping Beauty | After many childless years, King Stefan and Queen Leah happily welcome the birth of their daughter, the Princess Aurora. They proclaim a holiday for their subjects to pay homage to the princess, and at the gathering for her christening she is betrothed to Prince Phillip, the young son of Stefan's friend King Hubert, so that their kingdoms will always be united.
Among the guests are three good fairies called Flora, Fauna, and Merryweather, who have come to bless the child with gifts, beauty and song. Before Merryweather is able to give her blessing, the evil fairy Maleficent appears, only to be told she was unwanted. Maleficent turns to leave, but when Queen Leah asks if she's offended, the evil fairy curses the princess, proclaiming that Aurora will grow in grace and beauty, but before the sun sets on her sixteenth birthday, she will prick her finger on the spindle of a spinning wheel and die. King Stefan and Queen Leah are horrified and beg the three good fairies to break the curse. Unfortunately, they are not strong enough to break it, but Merryweather uses her blessing to weaken the curse so that instead of dying, Aurora will fall into a death-like sleep from which she can only be awakened by true love's kiss. King Stefan, still fearful for his daughter's life, orders all spinning wheels in the kingdom to be burned. The fairies do not believe that will be enough to keep Aurora safe, and so they spirit baby Aurora away to a woodcutter's cottage in the forest until the day of her sixteenth birthday.
Years later, Aurora, renamed Briar Rose, has grown into a beautiful teenage girl. On the day of her sixteenth birthday, the three fairies ask Rose to gather berries in the forest so they can prepare a surprise party for her. Rose is friends with the animals of the forest and sings them a song, Once Upon a Dream. While singing in the forest, Rose attracts the attention of Prince Phillip, now a handsome young man. He races to find the owner of the beautiful voice and is instantly struck by Rose's grace and beauty. Rose at first is frightened at the sudden appearance of the stranger, but Philip soon puts her at ease. They instantly fall in love, unaware of being betrothed years ago. Rose asks Phillip to come to her cottage that evening.
While she is out, Flora and Merryweather argue about the color of Aurora's ballgown. They fight, attracting the attention of Maleficent's raven and revealing the location of Aurora. Back at home, Briar Rose is thrilled to tell her guardians she met a man and fell in love. The fairies tell Aurora the truth about her heritage, that she is a princess and already betrothed, and tell her she must never see the man she met again. Heartbroken, she leaves the room. Meanwhile, Phillip tells his father of a peasant girl he met and wishes to marry in spite of his prearranged marriage to Princess Aurora. King Hubert fails to convince him otherwise, leaving Hubert in equal disappointment.
The fairies take Aurora back to the castle and leave her alone in a room to wait for her birthday celebrations where she will finally get to see her parents. Maleficent then appears and magically lures Aurora away from the fairies and tricks the princess into touching an enchanted spinning wheel. Aurora pricks her finger, completing the curse. The good fairies place Aurora on a bed in the highest tower and place a powerful spell on all the people in the kingdom, causing them to fall in a deep sleep until the spell on their princess is broken. While doing so, they overhear a conversation between the two kings. From King Hubert's conversation with King Stefan, the fairies realize that Prince Phillip is the man with whom Aurora has fallen in love. They rush to find him, but he is kidnapped by Maleficent who is waiting for him at the cottage in the woods. She shows Phillip the peasant girl he fell in love with is the now-sleeping princess. She tells him she plans to keep him locked away until he's an old man on the verge of death, then release him to meet his love, who will not have aged a single day.
The fairies find and release the prince, arming him with the magical Sword of Truth and the Shield of Virtue. Maleficent tries to stop Phillip by surrounding Aurora's castle with thorns but fails. She then transforms into a gigantic dragon to battle the prince herself. Ultimately, Phillip throws the sword, blessed by the fairies' magic, directly into Maleficent's heart, causing her to fall to her death.
Phillip awakens Aurora with a kiss, breaking the spell and thereby wakes everyone in the palace. The royal couple descends to the ballroom, where Aurora is happily reunited with her parents, while King Hubert is confused of how the two young royals met. Flora and Merryweather resume their argument over the color of Aurora's ball gown, magically changing it from blue to pink while the happy couple waltzes. The last color to appear is pink. Princess Aurora and Prince Phillip live happily ever after. | fantasy | train | wikipedia | I managed to last about 15 minutes until I wanted to gouge out my eyes and drill a huge hole in my head to make it all stop.It is such a long time since I have seen a movie so awful, how it managed to to get a 4 I will never know, I would have given it less than 1 but there is no option.
Today in this financially challenged time I find it incredulous that this type of junk direct to DVD rubbish keeps being made, I would have hoped that the financiers had closed off the lines of credit, the sooner the better in my own opinion..
Because of this, it's obvious the film will have a low budget and very modest pretensions—and most likely will be a film you'll see coming direct to DVD.
And, I might add, it's filmed entirely in Bulgaria.The cast for Sleeping Beauty is very, very unusual.
In addition to acting in the film, Casper Van Dien directed the film.
This is because this odd version of the classic story has a lot of intense gore as well as a reference to rape—and I really am not sure why these were included in the film.The first portion of the film is much like the Perrault story as well as the Disney tale.
However, the good fairies are able to change the curse—instead making it so the princess will sleep for as long as it takes until a prince of good heart will come and kiss her.
Weirdly, they also put the entire kingdom to sleep when she falls asleep —even though this seems like an incredibly bad idea as it leaves the kingdom to the nasty sorceress.So far this is pretty much the classic story.
Having the prince battle his way in, kill the sorceress and kiss the sleeping girl clearly had to be padded out
a lot.
The overall effect isn't bad
but it is muddled and not particularly noteworthy unless you thought the original story should be spiced up with zombies, spinal columns being yanked out, be-headings and the like.
It's not good
but not completely terrible either if you absolutely must see a classic fairy tale infused with zombies and the like.
Sleeping Beauty is far from great, far from good even, but for The Asylum it's okay.
Maya Van Dien is very endearing as one of the more interesting characters while Finn Jones is good carrying the movie, and the ending is fun with some goofy suspense.
Sleeping Beauty starts off very well too with a great classic fairy-tale atmosphere.
However, much of the rest of the acting is not very good, Casper Van Dien and Catherine Oxenberg is rather wooden as underwritten characters; Grace Van Dien is beautiful but never rises above okay due to not having much of note to work with; Olivia D'Abo's performance is very inconsistent and not in a good way with hammy moments and bland ones, and worst of all Edward Lewis French plays the Prince as a truly annoying idiot.
The characters are fairy-tale clichés and that would not have been a bad thing- characters can be clichéd and still be good enough- if they didn't have such cardboard personalities or acted so inconsistently.
The story feels very dragged out in places as well as structurally rather muddled and while it starts off well it later goes over-the-top with the violence and gore that it feels like a completely different movie and makes one question who the movie is aimed at.
The music does sound pedestrian, the narration while delivered in a very distinguished manner by Michael York wasn't necessary and at times over-explanatory and the special effects do often look cheap with stilted movement.
All in all, Sleeping Beauty is not good but it is not that terrible either, nowhere near among The Asylum's worst.
Most probably the worst movie I have ever seen and believe me after going back to watch the old Batman & Robin Drama with the 'BOOMS' & 'CLASH' that is saying something!
because the experience of Casper van Dien as actor could be basis of a better story.
because it is only a film for the family and friends of director and the great question remains why the movie is on the big screen.
Writer/Director Casper Van Dien (Johnny Rico from "Starstip Troopers") shows some real audacity in how he handles the story: the evil witch has an army of zombies, gives shelter to a murderous sea monster AND rips a guy's head straight off (a guy who bleeds awful effects), that really ought to count for something.
If you get to make your debut as a director with a movie about Sleeping Beauty and the first thing that comes to mind is "hey, let's put in zombies", you are entitled to some of my respect.
"Sleeping Beauty" will have tremendous trouble finding an audience though: the movie's way too creepy and gory for the kiddies, but the title won't attract many fans of terrible B-movies either.
The prince is kind of a jerk this time and the princess is in the movie even less than in the original.So the queen and king of Magicfantasyland have a baby daughter and hold a ceremony in the courtyard.
The three good fairies are busy blessing her with vague, useless gifts like "truth" instead of chainsaw arms when an evil fairy (now Tambria rather than Maleficent) bursts in and curses the child to be pricked by a spindle before her 16th birthday.
The brat prince discovers her kingdom's plight and runs off to face the evil Tamera and her gang of monster zombies-- goons and whipping boy in tow.The Bad:The writing is bland and amateurish.
Half the time, I wasn't sure whether to blame the actors or the script for a particularly terrible line.
I believe Sleeping Beauty's mother may take the cake in the bad acting department.
Barrow (Finn Jones) didn't annoy me as the lead and actually did a decent job of playing the annoyed whipping boy the whole time.
At the beginning I really thought this movie would be something great, kind of like Lord of the Rings or some other well made adventure film.
With the means to go to Bulgaria to shoot a film like this one with good costumes and to be honest pretty OK selection of actors (I'll get back to this in a moment), you would presume the result to be, if not true to the story, then at least providing you with an hour or two of adventurous excitement.
No twist, no surprise, just funny looking zombies and what I felt was poorly inspired acting throughout the movie.
It seemed to me as a lazy attempt to shoot the movie live, kind of like 'playing as we go'.
Lots of effort was made to make a movie like this keeping in view, the scenery, the dress, the buildings, the carriages, the culture, the castle, the kingdom and the royalty life style, apart from the CGI's that were shown were all up to the mark, as the movie do not have a famous actor or actress it doesn't means that the movie is not good, on the other hand the movie was really good and the minutest details were covered with detailed analysis and relevance to the actual story.
I liked the movie and after seen all I was thinking that my one and half hours was not wasted.
I rate this movie 7 out 10 due to its detailed planning and execution and keeping the audience committed to the story till the end..
Apart from the terrible acting from an okay cast and some dodgy directing, this isn't too bad a story.
As a film though, it's only average.Though the cast has B-Movie king Casper Van Dien (who directed this flick), Catherine Oxenberg, and Michael York listed, their worth in this film is minimal.
Even though, Van Dein and Oxenberg, as Sleeping Beauties regal parents, are asleep for the majority of the movie they actually appear to be sleepwalking in their "awake" scenes.Even Olivia D'Abo who has a meatier role as the evil witch, Queen Tambria, ofttimes appears to be a somnambulist.
The best actors in this little play are the Kings whipping boy, Barrow (Finn Jones) and the Prince Jayson (Edward Lewis French) along with his heavy Gruner (Gil Kolirin), and his soldiers.What this film really appears to be is an exercise in how many Van Dien's you can get on the screen in one film...
the Van Diens make a movie.The one thing that did surprise me was the location.
I would love to live in that mansion come castle.That said, there were a lot of gaping holes in the story that Dien should have ironed out when filming.
This is bad writing and directing.There are some nice beasties in the film, though you can see when the budget started to run low.
However, near the climax of the film, the same monster is looking pretty funny and quite unrealistic as it prowls the dungeons.On the whole, this film could have been a hell of a lot better had the "Quality" cast put the effort into their portrayals of their characters...
I'm guessing Casper, having been excited with the experience of working at Mortal Kombat franchise for the first time, decided to make a semi-'Mortal Kombatish' movie, of which he thought it would kinda be appealing both to kids (the adolescents anyway) and the adults.
Plus, the teenage girl-like fairies, sleeping princesses and daffy impostor-princes on one side and the gory scenes of head-ripping on the other side...
well, don't actually go hand in hand.I also fail to get it why Casper every so often has to cast his family into the movies he chooses to play in.
Maybe the crew, who sensed in the preproduction the movie would suck, thought a high class young actor would come up as a saving grace, just as they though Michael York's narration would yield the story as thrilling or at least bearable.Generally, an averagely endearing pastime of a movie, but hardly something to be remembered, either among the critics or the audience..
I fell like it was done very well and a different twist on the fairy tale...
Warning do not let your kids watch this unless you want them to see walking dead zombies.The movie is what it is, which is a modern adult themed interpretation of a Disney classic.
I could tell from the cover that it was going to be a B-movie, but figured it would be an OK movie.Well, the wife watched it one day when I was at work, and when I came home she was smiling and grinning, saying I really had to see this movie.It has zombies and just the right amount of gore, which make it worth watching, Compared with other movies, I think this movie would have made Maleficent, look like a B-movie if it had its special effects budget.I give it an 8 out of 10, and say with the right mindset going in, you wont be disappointed Its like a Chronicles of Narnia mixed with a little of the Night of the Living Dead.
When people gave this a 1/10 review on IMDB stating that the title had no production value, I was expecting something different, and I am a big fan of low budget horror, and student films, but this was well rehearsed, scripted, executed, and not a low budget, and, not a student movie set.
This is what I would call a Vanity Movie, in that it seems Casper van Dien promised his daughters to make a movie with them and this is the result.The two critics so far seem puzzled for what kind of audience the movie was made and I can see their problem.
For an actual Parody Movie it takes itself way to seriously (I think that would have been a fun way to go with this), and I hope I'm not talking out of my butt here because I'm not exactly genre savvy, since I usually have the threshold of an immature three year old for scary stuff, but as a Scary Movie it fails spectacularly too, as it's not scary like ...
Of their girls I like Maya better than Grace, but then she also had probably the more interesting role with (little plot helper) Newt rather than Sleeping Beauty.Olivia d'Abo is underacting while overacting.
Some of which are a brutal sell-sword type (Gruner), two brothers (lets call them Rapist and Thief) and a farmer lad (Barrow) that acts as whipping boy for the prince and overall punching bag for all of them.
Unlike the zombies the CGI monsters are actually pretty cool for a B-movie.
I was keenly interested to see what I expected to be a modern retelling of an old fairy tale, enhanced with fine acting and superb special effects.
The story was interesting, and the characters and settings were well presented and costuming was pretty good, and the quality of the filming was acceptable.
The acting was poor all around, and the obvious attempt to embed some credibility by having the narration done by Michael York proved too little.
I thought it was something similar to the old Hollywoody movie, but was I wrong big time.
I could not imagine where in the world they found this kind of prince, specially when you make a fantasy movie.
My recommendation is get as far away as possible from this C grade movie (B grade is too good for this one....).
Sometimes a movie is so bad that I feel compelled to review it in a desperate attempt to save others the money I've wasted.
The title role being blandly and subserviently played by daughter Grace who doesn't demonstrate any character which could place her as a female role model and develop her career (her entire existence can be encapsulated as too stupid to not touch spindle knowing what it represents, needs prince to wake her, instantly becomes his, and has his baby), while daddy Casper writes/directs and plays her dad and step mum Catherine Oxenberg plays mum.
The movie may have benefited from open auditions to get talented actors rather than just family members, but then it is possible that the writing was so bad that no-one with any actual ability wanted any of the roles.The budget is clearly low as the special effects are quite ordinary by 2014 standards, although if the story and acting were up to par, the effects probably wouldn't have mattered much.
It probably doesn't help that it is one of three movies in the same year re-telling the same fairy tale.
While I haven't seen the other 2014 Sleeping Beauty, I cannot envisage it being as bad as this one, and Maleficent is a clear choice here instead..
SLEEPING BEAUTY is a B-movie version of the story, shot in Bulgaria by actor Casper Van Dien, who seems to have cast most of his family in supporting roles.
It bears little relation to the actual fairy tale and is more like a typical movie by The Asylum.
A bullish prince and his companions go on a mission to rescue a beautiful princess from an evil queen, and along the way they encounter lots of terrible CGI dragons and random zombie-like foes.
So, Casper Van Dien (of Starship Troopers fame) decided to feature his daughters in a fantasy story.
It seemed like everyone, even Casper Van Dien himself wasn't serious about this movie.
The only actor who actually made an effort (and way better than they rest) was the horrible Prince Jason.
Not only is one actor/actress make such woeful effort, everyone was equally bad, some more than other, including Casper Van Dien himself.
This movie made the villain look pathetically powerless and not evil enough.Weak and corny script.
Not even Casper Van Dien and his wife was at all convincing.Let's look at the scene at the river/lake (I couldn't tell for sure, they said 'lake', but the lake looked too small to be a lake, more like pond).
A good narrator does not tell a good story, at least in a movie.The only thing I can praise about this movie is the beautiful setting.
I can see that much work has been put into making it, but the acting skills of the actors/actresses, the weak and corny script and weak directing make it all worthless.What are you doing with this piece of crap, Casper Van Dien?.
But then i saw some familiar faces including actors from Game of Thrones, Starship troopers etc.The movie starts out in a mighty kingdom where a new princess is born to the King and Queen.
Then another evil queen comes around and curses the new princess because she wasn't invited.
And then the story follows the fairytale with everyone falling asleep etc.Then we go 100 years in the future and see some prince and his five men whipping Loras Tyrell because they seem to be the only people in his kingdom and i guess they have nothing else to do.
Long story short they travel to seek this forgotten kingdom with the princess which is in the middle of a field so makes no sense they didn't know where it is.Now the good part actually starts.
But they really made some good CGI monsters, good plot twist and a very good ending!I give this 9/10 because of the actors and the very good writing from the second act!.
The acting is pretty poor, the costumes looked like they came from a thrift shop and the dialogue is awful!
Having Casper Van Dien and his family direct and star in the film was some more Asylum genius as no one has mastered the faux-Elizabeathan accent like them.
Sleeping Beauty was named "Dawn." Again, how clever is that, especially when Casper Van Dien is made up to look like Tony Orlando.Then there is the almost Monty-Pythonesque language:Prince: "What is that?" |
tt0918627 | The Cook | Fatty is the head chef at the "Bull Pup" restaurant where Keaton serves as the head waiter. One evening while service is in full flow Keaton and Fatty entertain the crowd with their dancing (Despite breaking most of the plates and bottles in the restaurant in the process). The fun is soon spoiled when a vagrant comes in (St John, referred to as "Holdup Man" in the credits) and begins ruining everyone's good time and dancing with the waitress (Lake) against her will. Fatty, Keaton and the manager are no match for Holdup Man but he is subsequently scared off by Luke, Fatty's dog. Later, Fatty and Keaton join a pair of gentlemen in the restaurant for a big plate of spaghetti, not being able to replicate the correct way of eating it they resort to their own methods of eating one string at a time and cutting it with scissors to make shorter.
The next day Fatty plans a fishing trip with Luke while Keaton simultaneously takes the waitress on a date to the amusement park. Fatty takes a shortcut through the park and knocks several people out with his exceptionally long fishing rod before arriving on the beach. The waitress gets separated from Keaton and is chased around the park by Holdup Man and ends up falling off the top of a roller coaster, falling into the sea. Holdup man is chased off by Luke yet again and Fatty and Keaton attempt to rescue the waitress but find that the key to a flotation device is "in a courthouse one mile east". Acting fast, they grab a rope to throw to the waitress but Keaton falls off the pier still holding the rope and drags Fatty in with him | violence, cult, comedy, murder, adult comedy | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0164961 | Vidocq | In 19th century Paris, the famed detective Vidocq (Gérard Depardieu) disappears while pursuing a murderer called the Alchemist.
Étienne Boisset (Guillaume Canet), a young biographer of Vidocq's, follows in his footsteps and progressively uncovers Vidocq's investigations. He learns how Vidocq was first called in to investigate a series of assassinations by lightning, which led him to pursue the Alchemist. Étienne discovers that the Alchemist is a wizard of sorts who wears a mirrored mask and kills virgins to maintain eternal youth. Even the sex of the Alchemist is a mystery, because it sometimes utters mocking feminine sighs during combat with Vidocq. Étienne probes deeper into Vidocq's investigations and eventually comes to learn that the Alchemist uses virgin blood to make magical mirrors that consume human souls.
At last, Étienne comes to the end of his trail and discovers Vidocq alive and in hiding. Étienne dons a mirrored mask and reveals himself to be the Alchemist. Vidocq has known all along, however, and is ready to fight his nemesis. During their final confrontation, Vidocq defeats the Alchemist, but the end of the film suggests that the Alchemist survives. | dark, murder, cult, atmospheric, flashback, sci-fi | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0304722 | Skinned Deep | While taking a family trip, the Rockwell family become lost on the highway. When their car gets a flat, father Phil (Eric Bennett) goes to a convenience store to find help and a strange old woman invites them to stay with her while one of her sons fixes their car. She introduces the family to her strange sons: Plates (Warwick Davis), Brain (Jason Dugre), and one whom the woman calls "Surgeon General" (Kurt Carley). When Mrs. Rockwell takes a picture of Surgeon General, he kills her. Plates starts throwing plates at Phil, who is then murdered by Surgeon General. The Rockwell children, Tina and Matthew, escape through a window and are pursued by Surgeon General and Plates. Matthew taunts Surgeon General who swipes at him and splits him in two. Tina is captured and knocked out. When she wakes up she is in a room covered in newspapers where she escapes out of a trap door. She finds a couple old bikers from part of a gang at the convenience store being served coffee by the old woman and begs for help from the family. She gets recaptured and it's assumed the gang are killed in a cutscene. Brain takes Tina to a park and shows her how to ride a motorcycle. In the end Tina manages to kill and escape the strange family, where she finds help from a policeman who turns out to be similar to the strange family. | violence | train | wikipedia | Skinned deep, this is a masterpiece of bad movie making.
To most people, saying that this movie is terrible would be an instant turn off but for me that just sounds like a dare.
Bravo to Skinned deep for breaking rules of killing kids in a monster movie.
No part of this movie is a let down, even up to the very end where the best song ever plays through the credits, by song, i mean a girl screaming for like five minutes.
The Surgeon General in it has the strength of ten tigers too.Watch it and love it for all the wrong reasons.Telling it like it is there..
I can't really score it as that would imply this is an actual movie and not some bizarre experiment in performance art gone horribly awry.The only real gripe to have with the movie outside of the fact that it looks like it was shot on video, is the aforementioned story.
But really I'm guessing that wouldn't have worked as it looked like their budget was already being stretched thin.Consider it one really bizarre movie that was too ambitious for its own good/budget..
Bad acting (not as bad as in movies like "Abscent of Light" or "Goth", but stupid), bad music, bad story, lots of gore and goofy characters.Seriously, the movie is meant to be comedic, or how else could you interpret a wrestling match between a senior citizen and a midget?
Troma + David Lynch + Texas Chainsaw Massacre = Skinned DeepAside from the lead, Warwick Davis and the guy who played Brain, the acting is pretty much awful.
The majority of the budget looks like it went to the special effects, (which were decent.) (Considering the director is a special effects artist, this was no surprise.) The, uh, story was a bare-bones Texas Chainsaw knock-off.
I really thought this movie would be worth the 5$ I spent on it, because it's the directorial debut of Gabe Bartalos; who happens to be the regular special effects guy of such brilliant directors as Frank Hennenlotter ("Brain Damage", "Frankenhooker") and Matthew Barney (the "Cremaster"-cycle).
Well, "Skinned Deep" once more proves that people who're talented in the art of make-up effects don't necessarily make good directors, as Bartalos' own project is an irredeemable lousy gore-flick that hangs together by amateurism.
So far, this seems like a reasonably normal horror plot but the depraved family also battles a gang of old and senile motorcycle hooligans as well as a jeep full of chubby woodchoppers, and this is where the absurdity really kicks in.
You could try, like many of my fellow reviewers apparently did, to look at "Skinned Deep" as a typical so-bad-it's-entertaining trash movie...
As long as you don't go in expecting anything other than a movie that's full of gore, bad acting, and stupid fun, you'll have a good time.This is the best movie Troma never made.
The acting is abysmal, even for a bad horror movie, and whoever wrote this should never work again.
Its only redeeming quality is that it provides the opposite end of the spectrum from bad movies that are worth watching..
It can by no means be compared with classic "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" like every second person does - it is definitely a lower class movie.
The audience smiled as well, responding with the LOUDEST movie presence that I've heard in three years, sending plastic plates flying throughout the theater during Bartalos' intro and whenever Warwick Davis, as 'Plates,' was on the screen.Other standouts at the festival included 'LOVE OBJECT' by Robert Parigi, Greg Pages' 'THE LOCALS,' and the awesome 'WONDERFUL DAYS' by Kim Moon-Saeng.
The film is 1000 times creepier than Rob Zombie's idiotic House of 1000 Corpses (when will that moron figure out that no matter how much of a fan of the genre he may well be, he sucks as a filmmaker?), even though it was shot on a miniscule fraction of the budget.
If you like those sleeper gems of the horror genre, cooked up by half-mad geniuses with vision, intellect, courage, and a lot of raw intuition about the very nature of horror (which lies, I believe, in our deeply seated fear of all that can go wrong when our normally reliable assumptions about reality are called into serious question), then this movie is for you.
with Warwick Davis as Plates.This is one of those horrid movies that no one buys, that makes money off of stupid renters.
The characters are granny, the crazy mother, Plates, the midget that throws plates, Brain, a guy with a big head and the Surgeon General.
I rented this looking for a bad movie, but if you expect any entertainment at all, avoid this at all costs.
This is what I wrote to the famous Mr. Warwick Davis (All Leprechaun movies, Star Wars , Harry Potter, 10th Kingdom, Willow, Labyrinth and many more)and will give you an idea of what I think of "Skinned deep" : "Hi Mr. Davis, I always been a fan of your acting qualities.
Today I've rented this DVD called "Skinned deep" and I was surprised to see you in this movie as the figure "plate".
But the story and the character "General" is great and weird at the same time.You can easily give this a bad vote, but look past it and see it as something that is for your pleasure: a true sick and disturbing movie with some great characters like Warwick Davis (Leprechaun) as Plate, this is really a sick person ;-) I would like to see a sequel!And there is gore all over the movie from a family to a couple of old bikers that cruise around and stop for a coffee.
I had myself pretty much prepared for Skinned Deep given the fact that I've rented several Fangoria released films in the past, and generally know what to expect.
Usually there's no plot, bad dialog, no scares, in fact just about everything is bad with a Fangoria release except for the gore.And I suppose that's why I keep coming back to these flicks.Skinned Deep does deliver on the gore quite early in the film, but pretty much leaves you hungry for more and the only thing there to chew on is one terrible line, plot point, or general stupid place in the movie.
This thing just plods along after the initial kills, forcing you to watch weird scene after weird scene that made little or no sense.People have pointed out the relations to Basket Case, TCM, and Troma a few times already in other reviews...
Speaking as both a horror filmmaker and a true horror fan, movies like Skinned Deep are very frustrating to watch.
The entire film is mostly painful to sit through, especially the end credits scrolling on a black screen with the lead actress screaming for literally ten minutes straight.
Even Forey Ackerman's brief cameo can't save it.This entire movie makes me angry is because I know there are better scripts and far better filmmakers out there who are not being given the chance to make a truly excellent horror film that gives this genre, and it's fans, the respect it deserves.
surely this will become a cult classic horror/comedy plates has to be one of the best characters in film history sure there was no emotion or good acting skills shown but that still doesn't mean this is a great film and surely in 5-10 years will be remember as a cult classic and film beyond our generations understanding, just like all cult classics I'm sure this film is still vastly unheard of so i ask everyone out there to get this film out and show someone they know needs a laugh to show them this film sure some of the scenes are a bit weird and futureistic for us to understand but like all cult classics this will become one everyone loves.
Been there many times before, as has become apparent with most special effects artistes who want to throw something together and pass it off as a movie, should really take stock.The main character/villain, the Surgeon General is cool to look at, but at first glance you find yourself reminded of Dr Satan from Rob Zombie's directorial encore.
As for the character of Brains, well the director must have really be a fan of cult director Frank Henenlotter, for one scene has Brains, totally naked running down a busy street.Overall a very major disappointment, not many special effects people make that successful transition, names like Chris Walas, Kevin Yeagher and now alas Mr Gabe Bartalos.
I realise money is a major issue when it comes to making these kind of movies, but at least has the decency to craft some sort of original storytelling technique before you dare to put it onto film.As for Warwick Davis, I think another Leprechaun beckons, time to hide behind the mask and please pass on making good on any more favours.
I enjoy clever spoofs of horror movie convention (and would love to see a parody in which screeching cats keep leaping into frame accompanied by LOUD JOLTS OF MUSIC, thus killing off both of those exasperating gimmicks for good).
What should have been a joyfully grotesque meal sequence left me wondering, "Are these people really this oblivious?" After one character makes an escape yet is still stranded in the building in which something horrible has happened, why would this person begin calling out for help, especially when the room s/he sees below looks like something out of the original "Texas Chainsaw Massacre"?
To think that this movie made it to the shelves of Blockbuster can only give hope and provide inspiration to any dreamer looking to make films, if only for a weekend.Plot: Demented family wearing obvious prosthetics goes on killing spree.
This is by far the best "so bads its good" film I've seen.Because; the lead villain is seriously cool, the others are brilliant as well, stuff explodes, stuff bleeds, Warwick Davis throws plates at people.It is possibly the most fun film I've ever seen and I really enjoyed drinking my beer and watching this trippy film.
In my collection (mainly consisting of bad shark movies) the majority of the film is usually spent waiting for cool stuff to happen.I cant explain it...
It all could have been great but I guess he wanted to make a movie about a weird family like in Texas Chainsaw Massacre but what's this.
I'm not saying I'm a huge Warwick Davis fan, but, he was the only decent actor in this film, and, only for his speech at the end of the movie while speaking to the senior bikers.
Did someone really think it was a good idea to film this movie?.
Sounds like a typical horror movie.
But "Skinned Deep" is not a typical horror movie.First of all, everything is bad: the acting, the characters, the dialogue, the concept.
And I have never seen such bad acting or such dumb dialogue.All I can say is that "Skinned Deep" would make a very good documentary on how not to make a horror film..
I can only assume that, on realising that making a decent horror film was way beyond his capability, make-up FX man-turned-writer/director Gabriel Bartalos opted to make the worst and most bizarre film he possibly could in the hope that fans of crap movies would seek it out, revel in its absurdity, and adore it for its sheer awfulness.Well think again, Gabe...
Only teenage cutie Tina (Karoline Brandt) survives the slaughter, when Brain (a mutant with a huge external brain) takes a shine to her.The other members of Brain's clan (a plate-throwing dwarf, a deformed creature with a steel trap for a mouth, and their evil matriarch) attempt to induct the frightened girl her into their family, but Tina isn't too keen on the idea: when alone with Brain, she tears out a chunk from his massive head (which for some reason contains several animated wooden alphabet blocks!?!) and makes a bid for freedom.Meanwhile, a gang of geriatric bikers turn up to deal with the murderous mutant clan.As the battle rages between the elderly and the mutated, Tina wanders into the lair of 'the creator': a musclebound, headless body with a vicious little creature inside its abdomen.In the hands of a skilled movie-maker, and with reasonably talented actors, this kind of demented lunacy might just work, but with Bartalos directing a motley cast completely devoid of talent, Skinned Deep fails miserably.
This movie starts of really bad like Troma wanted to make a Texas Chainsaw Massacre Rip Off. An incredibly stupid family gets lost in nowhere and meets a creepy family who happen to kill them.
it slides between classic horror, total trash (the bum fight reminded me a lot of the "Street Trash" style), over the edge politically incorrect humor like Troma delivers it and a mixture of real bad camera and effects and some pretty decent shots and splatter or explosive effects.
The movie ends with the typical "sequel awaiting" finale but tops it off with the credits rolling on the girl screaming for several minutes in an incredibly funny way.
Not long ago my friends and I had the idea, on a rainy day, to go rent some horrible looking B movie merely for the laugh factor.
The unfortunate thing about renting Skinned Deep first, is that now every time we try and watch a bad movie for the comedic value, it doesn't compare and we always end up talking about Skinned Deep..
If you're not attuned to the style, if you're not a fan of rejecting standards in that way (including the standard set forth by the "cult of originality"), if you think that Interview with the Vampire (1994), say, is the sole recent pinnacle of horror films and should be emulated stylistically, Skinned Deep is likely to just seem to you like a crappy, clichéd film with bad acting and questionable technical elements.
Writer/director/producer/loom-operator/cobbler Gabriel Bartalos also throws in a couple elements not usually found in these films, such as the hilarious septuagenarian biker gang, which becomes a major subplot in the climax.Although some people are sure to complain that this is "just a rip-off of TCM", I think that is misguided at this point in time (if it was ever guided).
The freaks in Skinned Deep are one of the best collections I've seen in a TCM film, as good as Rob Zombie's Firefly family in House of 1000 Corpses.
I was watching this movie expecting an amateurish low budget horror flick like Ozone - Attack of the Redneck Mutants or Zombie 90: Extreme Pestilence, but this one is definitely a lot better than those movies.(minor spoilers) Among other things, we get a midget throwing dinner plates as if they were shurikens, an elderly biker gang, and a Texas Chainsaw Massacre inspired mutant redneck family.
The movie also has a few Troma-like jokes, which are actually pretty funny without being too silly.Since this is low-budget, the camera work and acting are bad (although Warwick Davis as Plates is brilliant).A fun, weird, original B-horror movie.Rating: 7/10 (subtract at least 2 points if you're not into low budget stuff, but then you will probably have never heard of this movie).
"Skinned Deep" is one of those films that will have you're jaw dropped to the floor when it's all over, and you'll be thinking to yourself, "Where the hell do people get money for stuff like this?"What works in "Skinned Deep"?
Writer/director/producer/effects artist/control freak Gabriel Bartalos is no stranger to the horror genre, having done the effects for films like Blade (1998), Basket Case 2 (1990) and Brain Damage (1988), so as you can imagine the special effects are the highlight.
There are lots of other memorable characters in the film, like Plates and Brian.
The film makes no sense at all, but hey it was a fun ride.Don't expect a serious horror film here, "Skinned Deep" is anything but that.
Want to see a film that features a character called Surgeon General that looks like Dr.Satan's cousin, a plate throwing dwarf called Plates played by Warwick Davies, a character called Brain (or Brian) with a huge over-sized brain filled with toy blocks, a disturbed yet lovable' Granny', a geriatric biker gang, a headless bodybuilder with 'Dyno-mite' on his crotch, full frontal male nudity, a child getting sliced in half, music by Captain Sensible, a fight between a dwarf and a bow legged ancient biker and, to top it all a cameo by Forrest J.
Cheese-A-Rama movie for sure...but worth seeing the ingenious special effects, especially with the character of 'Brain' (or Brian for those sensitive ones).
Let me start off by saying that I love bad movies.
They're a riot to watch with friends, movies like Killjoy, Gingerdead Man, ANYTHING Troma, etc.
We were expecting something similar, a movie so unbelievably bad you can't help but laugh at it, thus increasing your enjoyment.
I wonder what the makers of this film were thinking, did they really make a serious attempt to deliver a creepy horror movie??
Its about a girl who's family gets killed, and one of the sons of the "creator" who we meet at the very end of the film, decides he wants to keep her as a pet, right after the brother is sliced in half.
The acting in this movie was horrible, the main character Tina did not seem to have any emotion after seeing her parents killed.
The death scenes are lame, especially those of the mutants, and the only character that was enjoyable in this movie was the Surgeon General.
I would like to see the Surgeon General in another movie, one with a better director and a better storyline.
Note to Bartalos; grotesqueness alone does not a horror film make
oh, and don't quit your day job.Hart Sharp Video, who I must confess, I've never heard of before, have done an uncharacteristically bad job of transferring Skinned Deep to DVD. |
tt0357718 | Halo 2 | === Setting ===
Halo 2 takes place in the 26th century. Humans, under the auspices of the United Nations Space Command or UNSC, have developed faster-than-light slipspace travel and colonized numerous worlds. According to the game's backstory, the outer colony world of Harvest was decimated by a collective of alien races known as the Covenant in 2525. Declaring humanity an affront to their gods, the Forerunners, the Covenant begin to systemically obliterate the humans with their superior numbers and technology. After the human bastion at the planet Reach is destroyed, a single ship, The Pillar of Autumn, follows protocol and initiates a random slipspace jump to lead the Covenant away from Earth. The crew discovers a Forerunner ringworld called Halo, which the Covenant wants to activate because of their religious belief that the activation of the ring will bring about a "Great Journey," sweeping loyal Covenant to salvation. Leading a guerilla insurgency on the ring's surface, the humans discover that the rings are actually weapons of last resort built to contain a terrifying parasite called the Flood. The human supersoldier Master Chief Petty Officer John-117 and his AI companion Cortana learn from Halo's AI monitor, 343 Guilty Spark, that activation of the Halos will prevent the spread of the Flood by destroying all sentient life the parasite can subsist on in the galaxy. Instead of activating the ring, however, the Master Chief evades Guilty Spark and his robots and detonates the Pillar of Autumn's engines, destroying the installation and preventing the escape of the Flood. The Master Chief and Cortana race back to Earth to warn of an impending invasion by Covenant forces.
=== Plot ===
Taking place shortly after the events of the novel Halo: First Strike, Halo 2 opens with the trial of Thel 'Vadam, a Covenant Elite commander in charge of a fleet from the first game, aboard the Covenant's mobile capital city of High Charity. The Elite is stripped of his rank, branded a heretic for failing to stop the humans from destroying Halo, and is tortured by Tartarus, the Chieftain of the Covenant Brutes. On Earth, the Master Chief and Sergeant Avery Johnson are commended for their actions at Halo. Lord Terrence Hood awards the soldiers alongside Commander Miranda Keyes, who accepts a medal on behalf of her deceased father, Captain Jacob Keyes.
A Covenant fleet appears outside Earth's defensive perimeter and begins an invasion of the planet. While the UNSC repels most of the fleet, a single Covenant cruiser carrying an important member of the Covenant hierarchy, the High Prophet of Regret, assaults the city of New Mombasa, Kenya. The Master Chief assists in clearing the city of Covenant; with his fleet destroyed, Regret makes a hasty slipspace jump, and Keyes, Johnson, Cortana and the Master Chief follow aboard the UNSC ship In Amber Clad. The crew discover another Halo installation; realizing the danger the ring presents, Keyes sends the Master Chief to kill Regret while she and Johnson find Halo's key to activation, the Index.
Meanwhile, the disgraced Covenant commander is presented before the Prophet Hierarchs, who acknowledge that though the destruction of Halo was his fault, he is no heretic. They offer him the honored position of Arbiter so that he can continue to fight for the Covenant. On his first mission to kill a heretic, the Arbiter discovers 343 Guilty Spark, who the Covenant calls an "oracle," and brings him back to High Charity. Responding to Regret's distress call, High Charity and the Covenant fleet arrive at the new Halo, Installation 05, just before the Master Chief kills Regret. Bombarded from space, the Chief falls into a lake and is rescued by a mysterious tentacled creature.
Regret's death triggers discord among the races of the Covenant, as the Hierarchs have given the Brutes the Elites' traditional job of protecting them in the wake of the death. The Arbiter is sent to find Halo's Index and captures it, Johnson, and Keyes before being confronted by Tartarus. He reveals to the Arbiter that the Prophets have ordered the annihilation of the Elites, and sends the Arbiter falling down a deep chasm.
The Arbiter is saved by the tentacled creature and meets the Master Chief in the bowels of the installation. The creature, Gravemind, is the leader of the Flood on Installation 05. The Gravemind reveals to the Arbiter that the Great Journey would destroy Flood, humans, and Covenant altogether, and sends both the Arbiter and Master Chief to different places to stop Halo's activation. The Master Chief is teleported into High Charity, where a civil war has broken out among the Covenant; In Amber Clad crashes into the city, and Cortana realizes that Gravemind used them as a distraction to infest In Amber Clad and spread the Flood. As the parasite overruns the city, consuming the Prophet of Mercy in the process, the Prophet of Truth orders Tartarus to take Keyes, Johnson, and Guilty Spark to Halo's control room and activate the ring. The Master Chief follows Truth aboard a Forerunner ship leaving the city; Cortana remains behind to destroy High Charity and Halo if Tartarus succeeds in activating the ring.
The Arbiter is sent to the surface of Halo, where he rallies his allies to assault the Brute's position. With the help of Johnson, he confronts Tartarus in Halo's control room. When the Arbiter tries to convince Tartarus that the Prophets have betrayed them both, Tartarus angrily activates the ring, and a battle ensues. The Arbiter and Johnson manage to kill Tartarus while Keyes removes the Index. Instead of shutting down the ring entirely, a system wide fail-safe protocol is triggered, putting Installation 05 and all the other Halo rings on standby for activation from a remote location, which Guilty Spark refers to as "the Ark". As Truth's ship arrives amidst a raging battle on Earth, Hood asks the Master Chief what he is doing aboard the ship. The Chief replies, "Sir, finishing this fight."
In a post-credits scene, Gravemind is seen arriving on High Charity, where Cortana agrees to answer the Flood intelligence's questions. | good versus evil, violence, humor | train | wikipedia | The missions with the SCARAB will have you looking at the screen in awe.What didn't work: I wish the game would have spent more time on Earth fighting off the Aliens and I wish we could have seen innocents slaughtered mercilessly by the Aliens and why is this game rated M, most of the violence is against the Aliens anyway.Overall: This game is possibly the best game on the Xbox.
The movies are great - I don't like the new/remapped characters such as the Covenant creatures in the opening sequence...but they look amazing and character details (faces in particular, and body movements) are more realistic than anything we've ever seen before.
It was a unique experience and blew everyone away - myself included.If you thought HALO was overrated, please don't blame your disappointment on those of us who enjoyed the game - it does not mean we don't know anything about FPS games.
Suffice to say it's both disappointing and extraordinary in various measures.Gameplay: 8/10 Graphics: 10/10 Plot: 8/10 (it has much more actual story than many other games, even if it's a bit silly at times) Weapons: 7/10 (I'll admit it, I miss the other weapons but maybe these will grow on me) Vehicles: N/A (I haven't played enough with them yet - I am disappointed, however, that many of what Bungie promised is not here)Overall: 9/10I know this may seem a bit odd.
But overall it's just very DIFFERENT from its predecessor, and this is the reason it's causing so much distress - it's very multiplayer-oriented so the first-player campaign won't take long to complete, but it's still a lot of fun and very different from the original HALO which is more than can be said for many games.
(Unreal Tournament 2003 was an enormous disappoint - the characters were awful, the gameplay was boring.)HALO 2 might disappoint some die-hard HALO fans, but they need to recognize that sometimes being different is better than just copying - we can accuse Bungie of many things but we can never say that they were content to merely rip off the original!A very fun game that I'm sure will grow on me more with time..
This time it offers you the covenant perspective as you play another character, ARBITER; a disgraced covenant elite who must stop a rebellion in the galaxy; along with the consummate professional MASTER CHIEF as he vows to stop the destruction of Earth during the war.
HALO 2 reeks of quality; nice fine touches of witty, purposeful additions to appeal to the hardcore, loyal players of the original; rock music used in the BUNGIE opener; Johnson and Chief at the awards ceremony; Captain Keyes daughter's introduction; the return of Blood Gulch in the multiplayer.
Halo 2 is a sweeping; hugely epic adrenaline shot straight to the heart, with occasional cinematic breaks directed by the legendary Joseph Staten; of course the real battle begins when you clock the game on easy, normal and hard; and you find your way barely breathing through LEGENDARY mode.
I would expect Halo 3 to ship in no more than 3 years time; rounding up the story with a thrilling climax; the end of a trilogy, the best FPS trilogy created by man...well, BUNGIE then (they're not quite human y'see) and if sales records are anything to go by it will probably be the best selling game ever.
Halo 2, hmm....I thought I might try it out, I mean, I only spent 100000000 hours on the first one...Anyway, this game is good.
As a matter of fact, so good that if you have an Xbox and don't own this game, you should slap yourself.I thought I might start on the story mode when i got it.
The game ends in a cliff hanger, Arbiter and the gang learn of the "Ark" from the Monitor and Chief zooms toward Earth to end the Covenant war by killing the final Prophet, the Prophet of Truth.Yes, you do not end the crisis in Halo 2.
Its so awesome that it is nearly inevitable to play for hours on end just to beat your friend down for that one-millionth time in a multiplayer game.
While the gameplay mechanics have mostly been recycled from the original Halo (and that's a good thing -- after all, it's not a very good choice to try to fix something that isn't broken, only to break it anyways, like many developers have done in the past with sequels), Halo 2 does add some new tricks to the already excellent formula to create perfect gameplay.
People who have played first-person shooters for a long time may not notice anything new in Halo 2's storyline, but who cares?
There's probably no other storyline to use for a futuristic, sci-fi themed game that takes place in deep space.Gamers have been sick of always playing as some kind of "tough guy" who can take 40 bullets to the head before dying.
The game will tell you via a message at the top of the screen if an object can be used with the action button, so that you know what you're doing.Such excellent attention to realism means that you will be immersed into Halo 2 for a long, long time.
This now-legendary first-person shooter even converted people who wouldn't normally look at a gamepad, winning them over with accessible gameplay, an involving story and the xenocidal charms of its protagonist, the enigmatic Master Chief.Halo 2, then, is a sequel with no small amount of hype to live up to.
Far more polished than the original story, Halo 2's plot line drives the action well and, thanks to the judicious use of cut-scenes, gives a deeper insight into the Covenant, evolving them beyond faceless cannon fodder and probing the reasons for their galactic jingoistic instincts.Which brings us to the most significant change in Halo 2.
The continuing narrative doesn't abandon the Master Chief, though, and you'll alternate from one side to the other as the story progresses, until the two come together in a final, satisfying synthesis.The graphics, while not leagues ahead, have certainly been given a boost this time around, and the fiendishly addictive multiplayer mode now comes with added bells and whistles in addition to being Xbox Live enabled.
8/10Conclusion: Halo 2 is excellent and is worth buying, it maybe short but you would want to play again, with co-operative it is good, it is great on xbox live too but you shouldn't buy this game until you have the first or have finished the first.
This is the only reason people will play this game after they beat it.OVERALL 7/10 - I know I gave a lot of it good reviews but I still feel like there was something missing in this sequel.
The first game was repetitive and this game was pretty much the same as the first but better graphics.and story is an important part because it motivates you to beat the level and helps you know what your playing for.
But the only reason people beat this game was hoping the story would get good, or just to tell there friends they beat HALO 2..
Only reason I gave it an 8 instead of 9 was that it was felt unfinished and rushed as well as an unsatisfying and incomplete ending.The first Halo game was something of a milestone of it's time as it reinvigorated the FPS genre in ways that were never before seen in the history of games of this kind.
With that in mind, Halo 2 does it again with tight game play and graphics and a gripping if somewhat recycled plot.The opening scenes of Halo 2 are simply impressive on the now-ancient Xbox hardware, showcasing very fine details in the characters both old and new, especially the Master Chief and Cortana, who looks even more refined then ever before.
Just like in the original, the level of strategy evolves into fresh game mechanics; most certainly as the Arbiter which was a blast to play.
Hopefully the next game, which I yet to play, ends the series with a rock-hard solid coup De grace.Halo 2 is worthy of praise but it's somewhat unfinished feeling and cliffhanger ending marred it's potential..
Halo 2 is one of the best games i have ever played.
Better Graphics, gameplay, multiplayer and campaign (the campaign in Halo 1, was OK), Controls and gun selection like dual-wielding weapons.
But anyway, I think I've made my point, now: For the following:Gameplay-10/10 Simply amazing, it was so fun Presentation-9.0/10 All the basics Multiplayer-/10/10 Jaw-dropping multi player, very, very fun Graphics-8.0/10 Graphics aren't that good, the textures are pretty good, the shadowing is all right A.I.-8.8/10 They run, jump, duck, its pretty good, nothing mind-blowing Last Appeal-10/10 You'll want to redo the campaign billions of times, if you've got Xbox Live(TM) Your going to be playing this game until you, well, you'll never get off!.
The review of Halo 2 written by that guy is false, not in all ways but there are some flaws if you sit and compare the game with the original.For a start the Campaign mode deserves a 8/10.
the plot is quite hard to follow and as you are sometimes in the middle of fighting enemies while she talks the lack of in-game subtitles means you cant tell what shes saying.as i live in an area that is broadband deprived i cant speak for the xbox live mode and the campaign and split screen modes are all i have to use and i kinda have the feeling they were being pushed by Microsoft to make the online mode better at the expense of one player.
Overall it is an impressive game that looks beautiful but I don't think anything can save it from the let down factor caused by Bungie's decision to drop a lot of the most anticipated features in their rush to finish in time.
If you have XBOX live then you should buy it, but even that becomes repetitive very quickly.7 out of 10 it may be an good game but it is in no way the best FPS ever like some people seem to think..
I also compare this game with Half-Life 2, which is a great game.Halo 2 Half-Life 2 Graphics: Poor Amazing Story: Poor Great Weapons: Fair Excellent Realism: Poor Amazing Overall: Poor ExcellentScale used: Poor Fair Good Great Excellent Amazing.
Honestly, if this is the best game ever then gaming has lowered itself from imersive long well-written games to cheesy explosion-filled stereotypical high budget action movie rip-offs.I got confused after playing Halo 2 and comparing it to Halo 1 (to see if it lived up as a good sequel), because it all didn't add up.
Now I'm not going to give away much of the plot since its to good to ruin but the best way can describe it is you play as the Master Chief of course as everyone knows the Covenant have found Earth and you must defend it.
And the orchestral score to me personally surpasses John William's Star Wars score.I will say the Xbox Live multiplayer is amazing even though you can't play missions online, with the inclusion of Banshees, Energy Swords, and yes you can play as elites and the maps Blood Gulch and Battle Creek from Halo 1 are back!
I might spoil the ending by accident, so watch out, but you won't be missing anything.I hear people around me yelling stuff like, "Halo 2 is immaculate!" and, "Best game ever!"...
I do not agree with these statements completely, but I do not deny that Halo 2 was an incredibly great game.With beautiful levels and creatures, wonderful gameplay for an FPS game, and an amazing storyline (that never actually completes in the game), this game dazzled me, but I think it was overrated.
It could either mean that Halo will be a lost story and will never be completed, or it could be a prophecy foreseeing a third installation in this truly wonderful game series.I only have 1 controller and I don't have X-Box Live, so I'm not exposed to the true greatness of Halo 2, but I've played these modes at friend's houses.Back to my true subject, Halo 2 is greatly overrated when compared to the TRUE ultimate game...
This game is Wounderful and it is really fun the storyline is amazing the graphics are very likable the game play is awesome because i like first person shooters the music is catchy the sound is realistic and don't get me started with the weapons there are so many of them i don't know if i want The Sword or The Sniper Rifle or The Shotgun.
You also will discover a new side of the story as you play as an Elite Covenant who is blamed for the destruction of Halo.
halo 2 is possibly in the top 10 video games and i for one thought it was great i'd give it a 9/10.but here are the down falls on halo 2.weapons-alright now I'm mad they changed the weapons on halo and i am very VERY disappointed!they took out a lot of my favorite weapons and they took out the fun of sniping because now they can snipe you.another thing i was mad about was that "THIS GAME WAS TO SHORT!"this game took me two days to beat and I'm only a beginner at this game.it could at least take a week or two.other than that this game was very exiting game play 10/10 story 7/10 graphics 9/10 and overall score 9/10 and halo 2 might have its down falls but other than that halo 2 will attract millions..
OK so I took my time getting to writing a review for this game but lemme tell you now, if you liked the first halo you'll love this one.
It drew me in for continuous play with engaging characters, an extremely strong story, and voices that made you proud to be fighting as either Master Chief or one of the downtrodden Covenant."Halo 2" takes huge steps forward from nearly every facet of the original.
Very good graphics, smooth gameplay, more diverse weapons (although in short supply), less backtracking through levels, more vehicles to control (but less than expected), excellent replay value, although not as many enjoyable levels as the first game.
As for single player even I enjoyed the game's intense combat engine, as it forces you to think of what the is the best tactic and not just run into a pack enemies guns blazing;however, on the game's easy settings you can do that and not get instantly killed and I loved it when I got to commandeer a Banshee or Scorpion tank, as it was immensely satisfying and more importantly fun.
Grenades are obviously the more important part of combat in both Halo games, yet for some reason I can only hold 8 at a time.2.) Still WAY too linear.
Many today think of Halo as the game that made people buy an Xbox in the first place so why wouldn't expectations for its sequel be high?
It's a shame, because between a great story line, some awesome new weapons, and the introduction of great movie clips between levels, the game had a lot of potential.
Perhaps one or two in the videos, but none in the actual game play.Halo, 8.5 out of 10.
The best thing they can do is make a movie about the Fall of Reach, leading into the first HALO game.
simply draw dropping multi-player, A-OK story-line, and a well built game engine.First lets start with the new gameplay, dual wielding, recharging health, new weapons, vehicle damage, new characters, and the new thing ***SPOILER***, being able to play as a new character 'The Arbiter'.
Simply Amazing, loved it.New Gameplay- 7-10, didn't like some things, such as when you let the AI drive the warthog, they tend to get hung on objects, and go very slow during a huge firefight.Multiplayer- 1000-10, Wow, simply amazing, playing LAN is so great, and Xbox-Live is probably the greatest achievement from Microsoft..
The multi player of Halo 2 is the only reason why this game gets a 5 from me.I was holding off on Xbox because there were no good games for it.
in truth halo 2 is not one of the greatest games I have ever played though it was pretty good.now lets talk about the graphics, overall great, incredible environments, and vehicle and enemy rendering.
I can see that a lot of detail went into making the graphics the best of their time.the story was great, the cutscenes almost made me think I was watching a movie more than a game.
Now I'm going to have to wait 3 more years for halo 3 to come out on the xbox 2.multiplayer, just one word, amazing overall, halo 2 is a pretty solid first person shooter that has it's moments, though if your looking for a game that will keep you playing and playing and playing I would recommend half life 2.graphics:10 Gameplay:8 story:10 length:5 overall:7.9.
Halo 2 is one of the games that'll keep you entertained for hours and hours.You return as the Master Chief, who now has to defend Earth from the Covenant.
I played it and the game was spectacular, but many people were disappointed at the story and the cliffhanger ending.
What Halo 2 lacks everywhere else it makes up for in game-play and multi-player.
The first Halo was good because of story and multi-player.
This is part of what makes this game the best first person shooter ever, that it is unlimited in it's settings.Halo 2 has the player in the midst of exciting battles using imaginative weapons and following a brilliant storyline.
I have found it difficult to think of anything was better in the original and feel that people played Halo so much that they sort of feel disappointed that their personal favourite bits just aren't in this game.. |
tt0049652 | The Rack | Having survived two years in Korea in a prisoner-of-war camp, Captain Edward W. Hall, Jr., returns home to San Francisco and reports to an Air Force base there. His father, a retired lieutenant colonel, is glad to have his son back, but still grieving over the death of his other son, Pete, in the war.
Pete's widow, Aggie Hall, confides to her friend Caroline that it is difficult to be around her brother-in-law without being painfully reminded of having lost her husband. A welcome-home party is held for Capt. Hall, which surprises Colonel Dudley Smith, a friend of Ed, Sr. He finds out that Capt. Hall's father is unaware that Ed Jr. is about to be tried in a court-martial for collaboration with the enemy.
Asking bluntly if the charges are true and being told that they are, Ed Sr. cruelly says to his son: "Why didn't you just die?"
Major Sam Moulton prosecutes the case. He calls eyewitnesses who testify that at the POW camp in the winter of 1951, Capt. Hall made speeches and signed documents on the enemy's behalf. A much-decorated officer, Capt. John Miller, reveals the scars he received while a prisoner, all the while never conceding to his captors anything but his name, rank and serial number.
Capt. Hall has his sister-in-law's support, but his father refuses even to attend the trial. Hall is disconsolate and wishes to plead guilty. But his lawyer, Lt. Col. Frank Wasnick, appeals to him to take the witness stand and explain his actions.
In stark detail, Capt. Hall discloses the torture he underwent. How he was ordered to bury other soldiers, dead or alive. How he carried a wounded man for four days so he wouldn't collapse and be placed in a grave. How he was placed in solitary confinement for months at a time, denied light and company and forced to live in his own filth. After repeated demands to read propaganda statements, Capt. Hall agreed to do so but wrote one himself, using language that attempted to mock the enemy's purpose.
The breaking point came soon after the enemy handed Capt. Hall a letter from his father that was intercepted, one revealing that his brother Pete was dead. Capt. Hall's father, who finally has come to the trial, is devastated by his son's testimony. He forgives him, but the official judgment is not so kind. Capt. Hall is found guilty of treason. | brainwashing | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0060714 | Morgan: A Suitable Case for Treatment | Morgan Delt (David Warner) is a failed artist, who was raised as a communist by his parents. His upper-class wife, Leonie (Vanessa Redgrave), has given up on him and is in the process of getting a divorce in order to marry Charles Napier (Robert Stephens), an art gallery owner of her own social standing. Given the innately rich and personal world of fantasy Morgan has locked himself into, he goes off the deep end. He performs a series of bizarre stunts in a campaign to win back Leonie, including putting a skeleton in her bed and blowing up the bed as her mother sits on it. When these stunts fail, Morgan secures the help of his mother's wrestler friend Wally "The Gorilla" (Arthur Mullard) to kidnap Leonie, who still nurtures residual feelings of love tinged with pity for Morgan. The plan fails, and Morgan is arrested and imprisoned.
On his release he crashes the wedding reception of Leonie and Charles dressed as a gorilla, for which scene Reisz borrows clips from King Kong to illustrate Morgan's fantasy world. Morgan flees the wedding on a motorcycle with his gorilla suit on fire. He is subsequently committed to an insane asylum. Here, Leonie visits him looking visibly pregnant. With a wink, Leonie tells him he is the child's father. Morgan returns to tending a flowerbed as the camera pulls out to a longshot of the entire circular flowerbed with the enclosed flowers arranged into a hammer and sickle. | insanity, cult, psychedelic, satire | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0027439 | Charlie Chan at the Circus | Charlie Chan takes his wife and twelve children on an outing to a circus after receiving a free pass from one of the owners, Joe Kinney. Kinney wants Chan to find out who is sending him anonymous threatening letters. Nearly all of the circus workers are suspects, since Kinney is very unpopular. However, when Chan goes to meet him during the night's performance, he finds the man dead, seemingly killed by a rampaging gorilla who somehow escaped from his cage.
Lieutenant Macy takes charge of the investigation, assisted by Chan and his overzealous eldest son Lee, who also takes the opportunity to (unsuccessfully) romance Su Toy (Toshia Mori, credited as Shia Jung), the contortionist. On Chan's advice, Macy lets the circus continue on to its next stop, with the trio tagging along. During the train ride, an attempt is made to murder Chan with a poisonous cobra.
Then someone tries to break into the circus's safe, but nothing is missing. Macy finds a marriage certificate inside, showing that Kinney supposedly married circus wardrobe lady Nellie Farrell in Mexico. However, Kinney's fiance Marie Norman claims that she can prove Kinney was not in Mexico the day indicated on the certificate. Before she can prove it, during her act, someone shoots one of the ropes of her trapeze swing and she falls to the ground, seriously injured, but still alive.
A doctor is summoned. Chan states that Marie is too badly hurt to move, so the doctor must operate on the spot. Chan asks everyone to keep quiet and clear the area, so as not to cause a potentially fatal distraction for the medical staff during the delicate operation.
Meanwhile, Chan has noticed a newspaper article about a crime committed at a casino the day of Kinney's alleged marriage. He sends his son to phone for a description of the crooks involved from the police. When Lee returns, he sees a man slug the policeman guarding the gorilla's cage and let the ape out again. He struggles with the man, but is knocked out.
The gorilla reaches the tent where the operation is in progress and tries to cause trouble. Fortunately, the operation is a fake, as is the gorilla. He is shot to death by policemen masquerading as doctors. It is revealed to be snake charmer Tom Holt in a costume, trying to pin a second death on the escaped animal. He and Kinney had robbed the casino and hidden out at the circus. However they had had a falling out over the division of the money, leading to Kinney's murder. Nellie Farrell and her brother Dan are also arrested for trying to use a forgery to gain half interest in the circus. Charlie Chan agrees to obtain a lifetime pass to the circus for his family. He sees Lee Chan and Su Toy having some romance together wondering if any future grandchildren will be able to see the circus, too. | mystery, murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0026854 | The Passing of the Third Floor Back | The film focuses on a run-down boarding house in London, home to an assorted group of residents. Many of them cling precariously to their social positions with only one figure, the wealthy self-made businessman Mr Wright, being truly successful. The house is owned by the grasping Mrs Sharpe, who mistreats the maid, Stasia, a rehabilitated juvenile delinquent. The various members of the household are miserable and openly sneering and rude towards each other, the one exception being the respect shown by all to the powerful Mr Wright. In the case of one couple, Major Tomkin and his wife, this involves pressuring their daughter Vivian to marry Wright in spite of her obvious horror at the idea.
The house's familiar routine is thrown off-balance by the sudden arrival of a mysterious foreign stranger, intended by the author to be an allegorical, Christ-like figure. Polite and charming, he swiftly earns the respect of the others in the house, especially that of Stasia. He takes a room on the "third floor back" and joins the residents for the dinner supposedly held in celebration of the marriage between Wright and Vivian. It becomes evident that she doesn't want to marry Wright, as she is in love with one of the other lodgers, and she storms out of the room. The desperate Major later tries to convince Wright that it is a misunderstanding and that the engagement is still on, as he and his wife are terrified by the loss of security if the marriage is broken off.
The stranger observes the meanness shown by the other members of the house, and gently encourages them to treat each other better and to pursue their dreams rather than live in fear about their precarious social position. This gradually begins to work with some of the house's members convinced by his charisma. One bank holiday, the stranger announces that he will treat them all to a trip on a boat to Margate, surprising the more snobbish residents by insisting that the servants, including Stasia, will join them. Despite the initial awkwardness, the outing soon begins to go well. When Stasia falls in the River Thames, one of the women jumps in to save her life. Once she is rescued, she is looked after by the Tomkins, who treat her as though she were their daughter, and also begin to regret their bullying of their own daughter into a marriage with Wright. During the trip various members of the house begin to enjoy themselves and treat each other with more respect.
This change in their situation earns Wright's resentment, and he begins to spitefully plan to wreck the stranger's attempts to reform the guests. This becomes apparent when the next day the inhabitants return to their previous unhappy existence and resume fighting. Wright taunts the stranger by demonstrating how easily he has corrupted them through the simple power of his money. The stranger tries to convince Wright that he too should try to seek a better and happier life, but Wright rejects this suggestion. Their dispute develops into a moral battle between the stranger's goodness and Wright's evil. | paranormal | train | wikipedia | null |
tt1954470 | Gangs of Wasseypur | A gang of heavily armed men scour and finally narrow down on a house in Wasseypur. They surround the house and unleash a wave of bullets and grenades on it with the intention of killing the family inside it. After heavy firing on the house, they retreat from the crime scene in a vehicle, convinced they have killed everyone within. The leader of the gang then calls one J.P. Singh on his cell phone and reports that the family have been successfully executed but he is double crossed by JP Singh as a fire fight erupts between them and a police check post blocking their escape route. The scene cuts abruptly for a prologue by the narrator, Nasir.
=== Introduction of Wasseypur and Dhanbad ===
Nasir's narration describes the history and nature of Wasseypur. During the British Raj, Wasseypur and Dhanbad were located in the Bengal region. After India gained its independence in 1947, they were carved out of Bengal and redistricted into the state of Bihar in 1956. In 2000, Wasseypur and Dhanbad were redistricted for a second time into the newly formed state of Jharkhand where they remain. The village has been historically dominated by the Qureshi Muslims, a sub-caste of animal butchers who are feared by the non-Qureshi Muslims living there and Dhanbad by extension.
During British colonial rule, the British had seized the farm lands of Dhanbad for coal which began the business of coal mining in Dhanbad. The region was a hotbed of the local faceless dacoit Sultana Qureshi who robbed British trains in the night and thus held some patriotic value for the locals.
=== 1940s ===
Shahid Khan (Jaideep Ahlawat), a Pathan, takes advantage of the mysteriousness of the faceless dacoit Sultana, a Qureshi, by impersonating his identity to rob British ferry trains. The Qureshi clans eventually find out and order the banishment of Shahid Khan and his family from Wasseypur. They settle down in Dhanbad where Shahid begins work as a labourer in a coal mine. He is unable to be at his wife's side during childbirth, and she dies. The enraged Shahid kills the coal mine's muscleman who had denied him leave on that day. In 1947, independent India begins to assert its authority over itself. The British coal mines are sold to Indian industrialists and Ramadhir Singh (Tigmanshu Dhulia) receives a few coal mines in the Dhanbad region. He hires Shahid Khan as the new muscleman of one of the coal mines. Shahid terrorises the local population to seize their lands and extract compliance.
On a rainy day, Ramadhir Singh overhears Shahid's ambitions of taking over the coal mines from him. Singh tricks Shahid into traveling to Varanasi for business but instead has him murdered by an assassin named Yadav. Nasir (Piyush Mishra), Shahid's cousin, finds Ramadhir's umbrella with his initials near the door and concludes that Ramadhir eavesdropped on their conversation. He flees from the house with Shahid's son Sardar in the nick of time as Ehsaan Qureshi (Vipin Sharma), another associate of Ramadhir Singh and a member of the Wasseypur Qureshi clan, shows up to kill them but is too late. An unsuccessful Ehsaan lies to Singh that Shahid's family has been murdered, burnt, and buried. Under the care of Nasir, Sardar grows up along with Nasir's son Asgar (Jameel Khan). Sardar learns the truth about his father's death, upon which he shaves his head and vows not to grow his hair until he has avenged his father's murder.
=== Early and Mid 1970s ===
The coal mines are nationalised. A mature Sardar Khan (Manoj Bajpai) and his kin start hijacking Ramadhir's coal trucks mid-transit. Ramadhir Singh suspects S.P. Sinha, a Coal India official, to be behind the hijackings and has him murdered. After Sinha's murder, Ramadhir's reputation for ruthlessness grows, and he becomes feared in Dhanbad.
Sardar marries Nagma Khatoon (Richa Chadda). The pregnant Khatoon confronts Sardar Khan and a prostitute inside a brothel and chases him away. Later, Nagma gives birth to Danish Khan but gets pregnant immediately afterwards. Unable to have sex with a pregnant Nagma, Sardar confesses his sexual frustrations with his kin. At dinner, Nagma gives her consent to Sardar to sleep with other women but with the condition that he won't bring them home or dishonour the family name.
Sardar, Asgar and Nasir start working for J.P. Singh (Satya Anand), Ramadhir Singh's son. They misuse their employment by secretly selling the company petrol in the black market. Later, they rob a petrol pump and a train bogey belonging to the Singh family. They usurp Singh's land, which forces the two families to confront each other for talks. The meeting ends in a scuffle, but Ramadhir Singh realizes that Sardar Khan is in fact the son of Shahid Khan who he had murdered in the late 1940s. Sardar and Asghar are jailed for assaulting J.P. Singh during the meeting.
=== Early 1980s ===
Sardar and Asgar escape from jail. While hiding in Wasseypur, Sardar marries a Bengali Hindu woman named Durga (Reema Sen). Asgar informs Nagma that Sardar has taken a second wife, leaving Nagma helpless. Meanwhile, Wasseypur has merged with Dhanbad and the Qureshi clan continues to terrorise the non-Qureshi Muslims. The locals then approach Sardar Khan for help as he was well known for standing up to Ramadhir Singh. During Muharram, both Shias and Sunnis are out mourning, including the Qureshi clan. Sardar uses the opportunity to launch a major bomb attack on many Qureshi shops and houses. When word spreads about Sardar's raids, his reputation grows and he commands more fear than the Qureshi clan.
Eventually, Sardar returns home to Nagma and she gets pregnant again. Sardar tries to initiate sex with a pregnant Nagma but she refuses, which prompts an angry Sardar to leave. He goes to stay with his second wife, Durga, and she gives birth to his son, Definite Khan. Ramadhir Singh, noticing that Sardar has abandoned his first family, tries to reach out to Nagma through Danish by giving him money. An enraged Nagma beats Danish for taking the money while she breaks down in front of Nasir. A thirsty Faizal wakes up in the middle of the night to find Nagma and Nasir about to have sex. Angry, he storms out of the house and becomes a stoner, permanently seen with his chillum. Nasir reveals that the desires were never consummated, but Faizal and Nasir never see eye to eye again.
=== Mid and Late 1980s ===
Sensing Sardar's increasing clout, Ramadhir calls his old associate Ehsaan Qureshi who brokers a meeting between Sultan Qureshi and Ramadhir Singh where the two decide to become allies against their common enemy, Sardar. Sultan asks Ramadhir for modern automatic weapons which the latter promises to give.
=== 1990s ===
Sardar becomes the most feared man in Wasseypur and shifts his business to stealing iron ore. Danish Khan joins the family business. A failed attack from Sultan Qureshi leaves Danish with a minor injury and causes reconciliation between Sardar and Nagma. Sardar finds Ramadhir and warns him of terrible consequences if anything ever happens to his family.
A mature Faizal (Nawazuddin Siddiqui) is seriously affected by Bollywood movies as he starts behaving, talking and dressing like Bollywood characters. Sardar sends Faizal to Varanasi to buy guns, but Faizal is caught by the police and jailed. Upon release, he kills the gun seller Yadav, who unbeknownst to Faizal was the nameless assassin who had killed Shahid Khan (Faizal's grandfather) and who had implicated Faizal to police earlier. Meanwhile, Sardar seizes a lake belonging to a local temple and charges commission on fish sellers who make a catch in that lake. An uneasy peace is maintained between the Qureshi and Khan families when Danish Khan marries Shama Parveen, the sister of Sultan Qureshi. At the same time, Faizal begins romancing Mohsina Hamid (Huma Qureshi), another kin of Sultan.
Faizal reveals to a friend that his father Sardar would be travelling without security the next day. Late that night, while Faizal is still asleep, his friend calls up the Qureshis and tells them that Sardar's bodyguards wouldn't be with him the next day. The next morning, Sardar leaves home alone and reaches Durga's house where he gives her her expense allowance. Once Sardar leaves, Durga also calls up the Qureshis and tells them that he has just left her house. The Qureshi men follow Sardar's car, and when the latter stops at a petrol pump to refuel they start shooting as Sardar ducks in the car for cover. The Qureshi men put several close rounds through the car window ensuring a precise & unmistakable hit, after which they escape. A shocked Sardar opens the car door and stands up to reveal multiple bullet wounds, with one bullet embedded in his head. He steps out with his gun drawn trying to locate the shooters but he eventually collapses to his death on a ferry cycle. | mystery, murder, cult, violence, action, revenge, entertaining | train | wikipedia | Yes, its true.Scorsese and Tarantino are there in Bollywood too,Anurag Kashyap surely belongs to that class.A Movie which gives you the raw look of everything love,ambition,politics,revenge,comedy, this movie has everything in it.I was expecting another disappointment with another Bollywood movie but right from first scene this movie blew me away.
A saga which has all the ingredients of a cult cinema like black humor, full mouthed characters, adultery, bullets,vengeance and everything you expect in a film by Anurag Kashyap.En route to end of British Raj in India, Shahid Khan, a dacoit, loots the British trains, masquerading as Sultana Daku, is shot dead by Ramadhir Singh's goon.
I think he is one of the most underrated actors, has now got an opportunity to flaunt himself in GOW II(I saw the trailer of Part II after the credit rolled).Rest of the cast Piyush Mishra, Pankaj Tripathi, Huma Quershi(debut-She looks ravishing while persuading the theater's security guard for the second show of the movie "Trishul") and others are so authentic that you will easily relate the characters with North India (Bihar), the dialects, the dialogue delivery, the expressions are genuine.The music by Sneha Khanwalkar is down to earth, a triumph, it has the rustic soul and is very unique.
GOW is a superb film which needs to be watched by anyone and everyone who has the slightest of respect and love for films and filmmaking.Sneha Khawalker's rockingtingly superb music brings a whole new level of excitement in the film and Rajeev Ravi's cinematography is very very efficient, sprinkled with quite a few shots of sheer brilliance.All this make a nice, superbly tasty biryani and the credit can only go the masterchef Mr.Anurag Kashyap.8/10, and I'd defo recommend all my friends to go and watch this film in CINEMAS!.
It is not the typical Indian movie with lot of dancing and typical good guy as lead character.Watching Gang of Wasseypur is like watching The Godfather instead of watching Indian movies.The main core of the story is almost similar with The Godfather, but overall with the Indian aspect in it, the story is different.
So there is little bit history lesson of India there, which is cool.The character is very different with the Godfather counterpart, Sardar Khan is not like Vito Corleone, he is more violence and kinda selfish, although their core story almost similar.
Co-written and directed by Anurag Kashyap, this film will probably propel the filmmaker into the ranks occupied by the likes of Coppola and Scorsese in crafting Mafia styled epics, filled with the themes of brotherhood, revenge, betrayal, sex and violence.
Showcased at this year's Cannes Directors' Fortnight with its sequel screened back to back, Kashyap has brought forth a sprawling, three generation span long tale of the titular Gangs of the coal mining town, where three crime families engage one another for infamy, riches and power supremacy.And what he had done to provide some gravitas to this tale, was a semi-documentary look at its background against the town of Wasseypur, where we witness how the wheelings and dealings between shady businessmen and their workers, and how some become politicians through bullying, gangster tactics, the laundering of money, and eventually buying support to ascend the political ladder.
But jealously meant Ramandhir's orders to get rid of Shahid, and thus opening up the feud to the second generation, led by Sardar Khan (Manoj Bajpai) who is hell bent on revenge.But in a tragi-comedy sort of way, the character of Sardar is somewhat tough on the outside with his ruthlessness, but all soft and fuzzy inside with his libido being lacking in control, with first wife Nagma (Richa Chadda) being relatively tolerant of his gallivanting ways only because she gets pregnant too easily, and the introduction of a Bengali girl Durga (Reema Sen) whom he met while on the run.
This sets up the third generation of cast with Sardar's sons Danish (Vineet Singh) and Faizal (Nawazuddin Siddiqui), with a hint on what's to come disrupt his family dynamics with illegitimate son Definite, entering the picture, whom we'll see more of in the next film whose trailer gets airtime right after the end credits.
And what makes it interesting in the entire male dominated world, is the story of the women behind the men, as seen from the major character arcs on Sardar's family involved in romance of some sort, playing critical roles in defining the male characters and contrasting them in both their private and public lives, and instrumental especially in the final scene, and going into the next film.It might be overwhelming at first with a myriad of characters being introduced, but Kashyap got his presentation all under control like an old hand, bringing on new characters with proper title flashes, and providing adequate screen time for each to establish his or her backstory.
If you haven't watched an Indian film for some time already, if at all, then make Gangs of Wasseypur your launch point now..
I also felt in the last 30 minutes like I was watching instances of City of God. Anurag Kashyap has properly set a standard for the Indian Directors about how to take inspiration from foreign films.
All the supporting cast performed extremely well.In all, rarely in Indian cinema has this type of film been made especially with so much characters and their development.MESSAGE: "!!Revenge!!"VERDICT: "A must watch".
What strikes from the word go is the sheer realism of the ganglands of Bihar from nearly perfect performances of the very believable Bihar characters, to the dress sense punctuated by what is an almost unheard of in your face soundtrack made up of local Bihari hits mixed in modern sounds, this is Anurag's best in terms of art direction (maybe only bettered by his far superior Black Friday) There is so much going on in the movie that at times it's hard to enjoy all of it.
The sexually crude songs playing constantly in the back ground, the numerous acts of violence (at times hard to connect) or for that matter the out and out vulgar dialogues spouted by pretty much all the characters of the film.However there is one major drawback which makes the film's narration slightly uneven and over dependent on a poorly placed cricket-like commentary to bridge the gaps.
Instead, the script chooses to spend almost incessant time on the family and life of the alpha male Sardar Khan (Manoj Bajpai) including his long drawn out romance with the Bengali immigrant Durga (a very hot Reema Sen) Sardar Khan's Feisty wife Nagma (played perfectly by Richa Chaddha) ends up having more screen space than the main antagonist Ramadheer Singh (who could have been a tour de force).
It is undoubtedly a masterstroke in terms of gritty depiction of the ganglands but it could easily have been a lot crisper and stayed a little true to its title.You could also give a benefit of a doubt to the script considering there is the still to be released second part which requires the side characters to take centre stage and hence so much time spent on their development.Of course, the 3 hour long film picks up in the last thirty minutes when the third generation begins to come into the fore in a godfatheresque fashion and the film ends with a perfect act of violence you would have expected a long time back.
In India the film will be released in two parts.Here I am reviewing the first part of the epic.With Smriti Irani gleefully welcoming the whole nation to Tulsi's family of "Kyun ki saans bhi kabhi bahu thi"(famous Indian soap opera),the family setting is disrupted by a series of bang-bang thus setting the mood for a raw violent epic tale of deceit and revenge.Welcome to Anurag Kashyap's take on the violent gang-war of coal mafia in Bihar,the movie is one of rare docu-fiction made in India that has the signature mark of Kashyap–arguably the best Indian film maker of current generation.The movie runs for a span of six decades telling us the evolution of coal mafia to its pinnacle of violence.
Kashyap dares to go beyond the conventional means while telling an off-repeated story of revenge.In fact this film is a case study for film makers who can learn the art and use it to make something unconventional yet entertaining.As a film lover I am eagerly waiting for GOWII.P.S:The trailer of GOWII sets the mood with characters like Perpendicular,Definite,Tangent.The film looks to be more quirky than the first installment.One of the characters,a lean structure shown chewing a blade with an assassin look seem straight out of Tarantino films and my expectation increases manifold..
I was first alerted of this movie by the sheer waves it was making in the Cannes Film Festival, and for the very obvious reason that it featured the hugely talented maverick director, Anurag Kashyap who had already carved a niche for himself by virtue of his brilliant direction in many unconventional, "art" films.
The other reason was that one of my favourite actors, Manoj Bajpayee(one of those rare Indian actors who actually understand the meaning of acting), the genius who lived through his characters in films like Satya, Raajneeti, and 1971.
The recent box office success of these films proves that there exists a larger population of people who step into the theatre to consume these films and most of them find it entertaining too.Gangs of Wasseypur is Anurag Kashyaps Take your brains with you masala potboiler film.On the surface it is a revenge drama spanning almost 70 years that starts between Shahid Khan (Jaideep Ahalawat) and Ramadhir Singh (Played by two actors, the older part is played by Tigmanshu Dhulia) and is inherited by future generations of Shahid Khan.At a running time of 2 hrs 40 min the film is engaging and entertaining with not a single boring moment, that is if you find a connect with the characters and their world.
The last time I enjoyed Manoj Bajpayees performance was in Aks. This one beats it and is his 2nd best after Satya.Even though Tigmanshu Dhulia plays his part with silent menace his character comes across too weak to oppose the overpowering character of Shahid Khan which takes away some spice from the film.
Gangs of Wassyepur didn't bore me for a second.Word of mouth Gangs of Wasseypur is Anurags tribute to the American gangster movies and Godfather and also his answer to the masala films of our times.Its an item film.
GANGS OF WASSEYPUR also tries to walk on that thin line between the meaningful and entertaining cinema which in fact turns out to be a worth watching project due to its execution, performances, music and dialogues, but at the same time doesn't has anything fresh to offer in terms of concept, storyline or script.
all these years bollywood has been churning out me too movies with fake western wannabe characters and music and dance and I practically stopped watching this cr@p every since I was around 16.GoW shows what real authentic Indian cinema can be, what it should have been - mind bogglingly rich in colors and smell and taste and overwhelming - just like India.I think this movie surpasses City of God in artistic value and screenplay.
It is all about CHARACTERS!!!and each character WILL have multiple dimensions within himself/herself.KUDOS to the amazingly talented path-breaking director of Indian Cinema, Mr. Anurag Kashyap for giving such an epic movie called "Gangs of Wasseypur".
Though the movie, has a native backdrop(Bihar), the theme is universal- REVENGE.What I liked: (I liked every part of the movie, but would like to mention some extra-extra-ordinary things)Manoj Bajpayee's screen presence, is FABULOUS!!Straight-forward, Bihar-accent-ed powerful dialogs (I felt that aha, I wish I was a Bihari for these 3 hours, to enjoy the dialogs more heart-fully)Timing of the songs and background music and the variation of these music pieces, elevate the movie to the next level.What I did not like: Nothing!!Summary: DO NOT MISS!!!Note: The movie ends at a critical point, and also lays the foundation for the sequel- "Gangs of Wasseypur-2", which will hit the screens soon, and I just cant wait to watch that.
this movie became my favorite before i watched it.........not only because of anurag sir......or its success at cannes film festival or manoj bajpayee but because of its promos.......i went to theater and came out with same happiness as i expected from anurag kashyap's movie......in India majority says that the movie is boring and not good but i don't agree with them because those are the people who liked worst movies like housefull 1/2,bodyguard,dabangg,wanted etc..
I am warning people out there that if You like non sense action like bodyguard or some baseless movie sorry sir/ma'am this movie isn't made for you....according to me this movie is 1 of the best movie of bollywood till date....anurag gave so much attention to the detailing that you can't just ignore it and every character has given life it's own time to breath.......performance of all actors are awesome and manoj bajpayee is at all time best.....the plot,the story is larger than life and as you all know that this story is based on true story....some people will get shocked after watching this movie that this is the same country that they belong to.....this movie is not made for people who thinks that real India is shown just in 'yash raj films'..............for me its the best film ever made.
A movie gets its due when it takes the audience along with it.Gangs of Wasseypur manages to go one step further,it grips you right from beginning till the end.A gripping narrative and a language so authentic and so raw,that you feel the lanes of Bihar right next to you.Populated with well etched out characters, clearly defined plot,wacky humor,Gangs of wasseypur keeps you on the edge of your sit.While some brazen soundtracks keeps you grooved.The acting department was flawless,including Manoj Bajpai giving the performance of his life.You get the feeling that the film's narrative structure was inspired by Martin Scorsese.
Manoj Bajpai is amazing as Sardar (he really got into the character) and the narration (by one of the gang members) adds a lot of flavor to the entire flow of the movie.Siddiqui's role is brief in the first part and I have a feeling he will play a major role in the remaining part of this epic.
Manoj Bajpai is amazing as Sardar (he really got into the character) and the narration (by one of the gang members) adds a lot of flavor to the entire flow of the movie.Siddiqui's role is brief in the first part and I have a feeling he will play a major role in the remaining part of this epic.
Tigmanshu as Ramadheer Singh is terrific, his expressions too good.Apart from this, the movie is informative - it very subtly tells the audience all about the way Indian coal mafia has progressed over the years, the gang wars, the politics.
Tigmanshu as Ramadheer Singh is terrific, his expressions too good.Apart from this, the movie is informative - it very subtly tells the audience all about the way Indian coal mafia has progressed over the years, the gang wars, the politics.
Just as many movies are being made in Bollywood these days that provides a good entertainment, Kashyap has given a good hit on the nail with his movie, Gangs of Wasseypur 2 to move the nails even deeper into a wood of mafia story.The GOW 2 smoothly begins reminding the audience about a squeal start, quickly hooks the viewer to await for the next revenge killing in the movie.The actors are well placed in their characters and handled well by Kashyap till each of them start to blossom to their purpose of remaining alive in the scenes.
From the Character development to the storytelling and narration by one of the characters, it's genius filmmaking from Anurag Kashyap.It's got everything you want in a movie, thrilling entertainment, action, comedy, romance, drama what more can I say.The way it's structured is amazing and even though the running time is long, you don't feel any drag at all because you're so immersed in the story.And the suspense in this film will make your butt clench which I'm sure is influenced by Brian De Palma's Carlito's Way, the train station scene.This should get a worldwide cinema release in all Countries to get the recognition it deserves.If you have the chance then put everything on hold and watch this film, you won't regret it..
Gangs of Wasseypur stands firmly on the grounds of Direction, Acting, Screenplay, Story-line, Cinematography, Music & off course The BEST Dialogues.
Filled with such juicy characters, music, cinematography, dialogues etc., this film certainly slips into your 'favorites list' as soon as you have seen the end credits or may be long before it.I have watched it at least 6-7 times and its not even been a year of its release.
she grabs Manoj Bajpai's as well as Audience (eye) balls with her performance Its is a nuisance that some masala film lovers claim to not understand the movie or character relations but then as a film lover u r expected to figure that out simultaneously from the narration without enactingAnurag Kashyap is a jewel in Indian cinema.....
With people bringing in movies without any story, just for entertainment, here comes Anurag Kashyap with an entertainer of his own.
I feel myself blessed for being a audience to this quirky, dark, highly amusing and straight on the face brilliant Film.The Cast, Sneha Khanwalkar's music, the direction, dialogues, script, the comic timings and the gore takes this movie to a next level.
"Gangs of Wasseypur" is one film where everybody's performance was exceptional.The movie ends teasing and the audience wants some more of it.
Literally this is best movie in Bollywood made in last 18 years(2018).it has still the same feeling as watching it first time.
It didn't feel like Watching a 5+ hour movie .So much realism is added to this Film. |
tt0051297 | Naked City | In the late hours of a hot New York summer night, a pair of men subdue and kill Jean Dexter, an ex-model, by knocking her out with chloroform and drowning her in her bathtub. When one of the murderers, conscience-stricken, gets drunk, the other kills him, then lifts his body into the air and throws it into the East River.
Homicide Detective Lt. Dan Muldoon (Barry Fitzgerald) and his young associate, Jimmy Halloran (Don Taylor), are assigned to Jean's case, which the medical examination has determined was murder, not an accident. Muldoon has been a homicide cop for 22 years; Halloran for three months. At the scene, the police interrogate Martha Swenson (Virginia Mullen), Jean's housekeeper, about Jean's friends, and she tells them about a "Mr. Henderson." They also discover a bottle of sleeping pills and her address book. Halloran questions the doctor who prescribed the pills, Lawrence Stoneman (House Jameson), and Ruth Morrison (Dorothy Hart), another model. Back at the police station, Muldoon questions Frank Niles (Howard Duff), who lies about everything, claiming only a business relationship with Jean and denying knowing Ruth, to whom he is engaged. The police quickly discover the truth behind many of his lies. Later, Muldoon deduces from the bruises on Jean's neck that she was killed by at least two men.
That evening, Jean's parents, Mr. and Mrs. Batory, from whom she had been estranged, arrive in New York to formally identify the body, and tell the detectives that they have no knowledge of Jean's acquaintances. The next morning, the detectives learn that Frank sold a gold cigarette case stolen from Stoneman, then purchased a one-way airline ticket to Mexico. They also discover that Jean's ring was stolen from the home of a wealthy Mrs. Hylton (Enid Markey). At Mrs. Hylton's Park Avenue apartment, the police learn that the ring actually belonged to her daughter, who, to their surprise, turns out to be Ruth. Learning that Ruth's engagement ring is also stolen property, Muldoon and Halloran take Ruth to Frank's apartment, where they coincidentally interrupt someone trying to murder him. The killer takes a shot at the cops and escapes onto the nearby elevated train. When questioned about the stolen jewelry, Frank claims that they were all presents from Jean, which reveals his true relationship with her, much to Ruth's chagrin. Frank is then arrested for the jewel thefts, but the murder case remains open.
Halloran learns that a body recovered from the East River, that of Peter Backalis (Walter Burke), a small-time burglar, died within hours of the Dexter murder and connects the two incidents. Muldoon, although skeptical, lets him pursue the lead and assigns two veteran detectives on the squad to help Halloran with the legwork. Through further methodical but tedious investigation, Halloran discovers that Backalis' accomplice on a jewelry store burglary was Willie Garzah (Ted de Corsia), a former wrestler with a penchant for playing the harmonica. While Halloran and his team canvass the Lower East Side of New York using an old publicity photograph of Garzah, Muldoon compels Frank Niles to identify Jean's mystery boyfriend. Dr. Stoneman is "Henderson". At Stoneman's office, Muldoon uses Frank to trap the married physician into confessing that he fell in love with Jean, only to learn that she and Frank were using him in order to rob his society friends. Frank then confesses that Garzah killed Jean and Backalis. Halloran and Muldoon, using different approaches, have come up with the same killer.
Meanwhile, Halloran finally locates Garzah and, pretending that Backalis is in the hospital, tries to trick Garzah to accompany him back to the hospital, but Garzah (knowing he killed Backalis) sees through the ruse. The ex-wrestler "rabbit punches" the rookie detective, momentarily knocking him unconscious. Garzah attempts to disappear in the crowded city, but as police descend upon the neighborhood, a panicked Garzah draws attention to himself when he shoots and kills a blind man's guide dog on the pedestrian walk of the Williamsburg Bridge. Garzah attempts to flee over the bridge but as police approach from both directions, he starts climbing one of the towers, and is shot and wounded. High on the tower, Garzah refuses to surrender, gunfire is exchanged, he is hit again and falls to his death.
As aerial and street shots of New York are shown, the narration concludes with the iconic line: "There are eight million stories in the naked city. This has been one of them." | violence, murder | train | wikipedia | Naked City was a showcase for up-and-coming stage actors, such as Robert Duvall, Dustin Hoffman, Robert Redford, Ed Asner--the list goes on and on.
The best episodes were like that--character studies, filmed in the early Sixties, finely wrought time capsules of a New York that no longer exists..
I came across "Naked City" three years ago when the series was aired on German television for the first time, to my knowledge.
Not knowing what to expect, I was stunned the very first time I watched a "Naked City" recording.
A show with actors that look like real people, a show that keeps you glued to your chair without having to resort to the eternal mindless shootouts and car chases modern TV series seem unable to do without.
"Naked City" is a real treasure that proves that television does not necessarily cater only to the needs of people unable to follow an intricate plot.
The characters honestly portray the ambitions and emotions of people, rich and poor, living in New York.The city is as much the star of the show as the actors.
Filmed in black and white on location, the show visually captures the New York cityscape in the early 1960's, before the major building boom began.The excellent cinematography, the forthright performances of the cast and guest performers, and the first-rate writing and direction make Naked City a gem to watch..
The location shooting in and around the streets of New York give a great view of the city in the early 60's.
But the real treat is the stories, many featuring some of the best all-time character actors of TV and Movies.
Just good old-time TV drama, that seems to forgotten in today's lousy free TV with all of those lame reality shows.Most of the indoor scenes were filmed at old Biograph/Gold Medal Studio the Bronx.
The 50's and 60's were a great time for young , talented actors living in New York.
Many good TV shows and movies were filmed at the Biograph and Naked City is among the best..
Many of these episodes featured the debutes of bit actors who were later to become stars on TV and in the movies...you name 'em, they first appeared in Naked City.
Of course the main star is New York City in the late 1950's-early 60's.
The IMDb lists Paul Frees as the narrator of "Naked City" - the series.
But it was my understanding that actor Lawrence Dobkin was the voice behind "There are eight million stories in the Naked City...This has been one of them".The discs of the show are excellent.
You get the rare chance, not only to see some of the talent of yesterday like Roddy MacDowall, Carroll O'Connor, and Maureen Stapleton, but actors doing early roles, some only walk-ons, like Dustin Hoffman as a thief in BAREFOOT ON A BED OF COALS or Peter Falk in a tiny role as a gun man in DEATH OF PRINCES or Gene Hackman as a nervous reporter in PRIME OF LIFE.The series seemed to be approached by it's writers as New York theater, people talking a bit more emotionally than you would see on LAW AND ORDER.
I became interested in this show a couple of years ago when I read in TV Guide that a poll of new York City Policemen voted it he best cop show ever, beating out #2 Homicide and all the recent cop classics, such as Law and Order, NYPD Blue, Hill Street Blues, etc.
That was pretty impressive since Naked City was on a generation or more before those shows and it was remarkable that modern day policemen had even heard of it, much less voted it #1.
The original basis for this was not a police story at all but a book of photographs of New York City that came out in the 1940's from a photographer who called himself "Weegee".
He decided a police chase story would be the best way to show the city off and the result was the classic police drama "The Naked City", (1948), with Hellinger narrating.
Both those actors decided they didn't like working in New York, (especially on the frigid early mornings that the series habitually filmed in so they could have the streets to themselves).
Silliphant and Leonard didn't give up, however and an hour long version of Naked City premiered in 1960 with Paul Burke and Horace McMahon replacing Franciscus and McIntyre, (who's character had been killed off in the earlier show).
This version lasted three years and included some of the best writers and actors in New York You name it, they were on the show: Ed Asner, Robert DuVal, Jack Lord, George C Scott, Dustin Hoffman, Peter Falk, Suzanne Pleshette, Lois Nettleton and many, many others.
Each episode ended with Leonard intoning "There are 8 million stories in the Naked City.
Eight!!!) Jack Webb had already pioneered taking much of the gunplay from cop shows but Naked City put it back with a vengeance.
The 138 episodes (all in B&W) of the police drama "Naked City" were originally broadcast on ABC from 1958-1963.
Image Entertainment's 3 DVD release "Naked City - Set 1" contains an assortment of twelve of the hour-long episodes from seasons 2 and 3.
Many consider this gritty crime drama the best ever of its genre and the title reflects a focus on stripping away the glamor off NYC and exposing its ugly inside; at least to the extent that they could get away with on broadcast television during those years."Naked City" is a follow-up to the 1948 film noir feature of the same name.
The show never stopped changing its cast, it was a bit like "Police Story" in this regard as it made its guest stars (it drew a lot of big names from Broadway) the show's greatest asset.
Those two (played by Bobby Morris and George Maharis) would be the catalyst for the Route 66 series, except Bobby Morris died unexpectedly, so Martin Milner starred opposite Maharis in Route 66.Actress Lois Nettleton, one of the guest stars on Naked City, explained why the show was so well done, saying that it, "..focused on the atmosphere and reality of the people involved in the story.
The star of this show was actually the streets New York City.
You can't beat that kind of casting.For a good take on the series, I recommend Jim Rosin's book, "Naked City, The Television Series." Then get some DVDs of the show and see why it was ahead of its time..
As others have noted, Naked City was essentially an anthology series (a now gone genre that was common in the late 50s/early 60s), rather than a "police procedural".
"Naked City" was put together by many of the same people responsible for "Route 66", which was the yin to this show's yang--restless loners who went everywhere (rather than cops rooted in New York) and and served up a similar range of characters in places all over the country, with similar kinds of scripts.
Whatever the limits of the writing, the show was well-acted and had strong regulars, as well as a range of guest stars and bit players that seems amazing from our vantage point in the present.Regarding previous comments: The city has changed less than one might expect in the last few decades.
OTOH, location filming was novel and has never been cheap, so the expendable perp cars would have been potential junkers.My guess is that "Naked City" was popular among everyday police officers for the same reason that "Barney Miller" was--it humanized the individual cop, showed the tedium of their job, and portrayed the world of odd and unexplainable characters that filled their day.
This makes for some pretty damn compelling viewing in addition to the fact the stories take place in New York City of the early 60's.
Naked City has its fair share of GOOD episodes.
However, over time the violence had seemed to be toned down a bit near the end of its run (possibly due to censor and public pressure ??) However it did not take away from the tense drama the stories provided.
I loved the way in some episodes as this the camera just fades away from the scene on a street at the end showing the despair people were sometimes left in.Speaking of camera work, in this show it is phenomenal, showing vividly the live streets and gritty locales of NYC that Flint and Arcaro would deal with day after day, episode after episode.
As a younger (cough, cough) member of a New York family (and I'm Italian so take "family" however you like...I miss the Sopranos already...) it was great to literally see the "old stomping grounds" that my brothers and sisters and parents knew and saw every day.Others may enjoy the story, but for me, it's all about the background.
I instantly remembered the series "Naked City".
As a kid, I watched the premier of Naked City on TV and instantly fell in love with it.
The second theme, which initiated the hour-long episodes, was "Naked City Theme", aka "Somewhere In The Night" by Billy May. The theme for the final season was "The New Naked City Theme" by Nelson Riddle.
A TV Series Featuring: Paul Burke, James Franciscus, Nancy Malone, Horace McMahon, John McIntyre, Harry Bellevar!
They were in a sense, "the New Westerns." One of the main reasons, other than Mr. Jack Webb's efforts that we have enjoyed our HILL STREET BLUES, HOMICIDE, NYPD BLUE and LAW & ORDER group is the quality displayed and subsequent success of NAKED CITY (Shielle Productions/Screen Gems TV, 1958-63).The idea for the Series sprang from Mark Hellinger's NY specific crime drama, THE NAKED CITY (Hellinger Productions/Universal Pictures, 1948) In it the drama of murder, the primary investigation and follow-up, all play out against the back-drop of what is (I being a super-sensitive Chicagoan) doubtless the greatest city in the World.
Never before had a movie set in NY been filmed completely there and on such a grand scale; using the best settings in the 5 Burroughs as the most magnificent scenery of an urban nature anywhere; as well as the use of countless thousands, or even millions of extras.There was very in common between the Film and the Series; although James Franciscus did portray the Detective Jimmy Halloran, who was Don Taylor's character in the film.
It seems that the hour long episodes put the series over the top; perhaps allowing more time for characterization, plot development and good old shoot-em-up Action!
In retrospect, we can only say that NAKED CITY has proved to be one of the finest Dramas in TV History, Cop Show or not.
Naked and Alive In New York City.
(*TV show quote*) - "There are 8 million stories in the Naked City.
This has been one of them."If you enjoy watching 1950's TV Crime/Dramas like "Dragnet" and "The Untouchables" - Then - "Naked City" is sure to be right up your alley when it comes to its overall entertainment-value.Yes. At times - These 1-hour, b&w episodes did lay it on pretty thick with the element of soap opera.
But, that aside - The show's strive towards gritty realism and hard-edged drama was, often-enough, sufficient to hold my interest (for the most part).What I also liked about "Naked City" was its use of plenty of outdoor location shooting on the streets of NYC.
One of the best cop shows of the genre from the golden age of television...the Emmy award winning "Naked City".
The anthology series "Naked City" was one example of just how fine a great television series was during that time.
It was the first series to be filmed on location within New York City and was in classic black and white with locations filmed at the Biograph Studios and in sections of Manhattan, Brooklyn, Bronx, Queens, Staten Island and other areas.
This half-hour version of "Naked City" was canceled by ABC after one season.
Then on October 12,1960,an hour long version of "Naked City" premiered with Paul Burke and Horace McMahon replacing James Franciscus and John McIntyre.
This hour long version lasted three seasons producing 99 episodes,all in classic black and white that aired from October 12,1960 until May 29,1963.
In all,a total of 138 episodes were produced for ABC.During the show's fantastic run,it included some of the best writers and best actors in television history and it shows in the Four Prime-Time Emmys it won for Best Drama Series (1959,1961,1962,1963),and was nominated for three Golden Globes as Best Prime-Time Drama Series in 1962.The best writers for this series came from Frank R.
But what made the show stand out was the acting were some episodes were nothing short of breathtaking but were absolutely incredible.This series was a showcase for up and coming actors who made their debuts here ranging from Gene Hackman, Robert Redford, Dustin Hoffman, Brock Peters, Dabney Coleman, Jessica Walter, Eli Wallach, Peter Falk, Dennis Hopper, Bruce Dern, Roddy McDowell, Martin Sheen, Diane Ladd, Christopher Walken, to Jon Voight, Robert Duvall, William Shatner, James MacArthur, Burt Reynolds, Telly Savalas, Susan Oliver, Leonard Nimoy to future up and coming actors like Sandy Dennis, James Caan, George Segal to Robert Blake, Valerie Harper, Brenda Vaccaro, Greg Morris, to Ivan Dixon and Vic Morrow.
The show also had the rare occasion for actors who were just starting out and one episode had future television actor Conrad Bain in a small role along with future Oscar winning actress Faye Dunaway in bit parts."Naked City" was a series that featured a "ethnicity" of fine acting in various roles and for an anthology drama it did not stray away from several subject matters even though this was one of the great cop shows ever produced from television's golden age..
That's why I love watching shows like The Naked City.
Yes Virginia, there was a golden time when great writing and really fine acting made TV such a pleasure to watch.
Back then producers had much more time to develop characters and situations because an hour show like The Naked City had far fewer interruptions for commercials.
Every time I watch an episode of this fine program I am reminded of just how much change has not been kind to TV.
The stories in The Naked City were about real people in situations that almost anyone could relate to.
This was a great human interest police show with the "wet streets" look and feel of New York City.
My uncle worked as an electrician on Naked City and my father was friendly with the very talented Paul Burke (Adam Flint).
Watching some episodes on Image's DVD set, it struck me how bizarre and outre Naked City really was.
I've just been introduced to this series through the DVD releases and have found myself highly impressed by the location photography in New York and the atmosphere of the stories.
You know if you watch "Breakfast at Tiffany's" you get to see New York at street level, alley level all kinds of levels.
Naked City takes you inside all of those nooks and crannies you might wonder about as you watch Holly Golightly race down the streets and alleys after her cat.Naked City not only excels in its cinematography of this great city but consistently includes captivating, colorful stories "one of the 8 million" as well as characters with dimension and growth throughout the original 4 seasons.
Before 2014 I had never heard of this show but have always appreciated great writing and colorful character development, Naked City has all that.
In many cases Naked City was their first television debut or close to it.
After watching every episode at least once, I can't believe we didn't see more from Paul Burke and Nancy Malone as well as Bellaver even though it's noted that Horace McMahon died just a few years after the series concluded, one of his last performances in Family Affair..
First of all, it ran from 1958 until 1963 and it was about honest cops in New York City.
The character of the main focus, a hard working detective played by James Franciscus, is a little too introspective and self doubting to be a good New York street cop.
New York City, even in those days, was a lot more interesting than the show is able to present it.
Loved the gritty/real Manhattan / New York City scenes somewhat like Law and Order or NYPD Blue.
Many top-flight actors made guest appearances, and Paul Burke, the star of the show and who later appeared in Dynasty, was great.
Watched several episodes from 1961 on one DVD: The Fault In Our Stars (a pretty good classic detective story), Take and Put (a funny farce), Make Believe Man (too "dark" a story didn't watch much of it).
These were hour long episodes starring Paul Burke (who rather resembled Franciscus) as the idealistic sharp young Det.Adam Flint, with his supportive aspiring actress fiancé Libby (Nancy Malone) plus Parker & Acaro continued in their established roles.This team investigated the deeper 'human drama' episodes, with famous guest stars, some just starting out on their acting careers (young actors such as; Dustin Hoffman, Jon Voight, Christopher Walken, etc appeared in supporting roles) plus a few lighter comedic episodes were included and some very complex/intense 'character driven' tales which featured many strong compelling acting performances often in rather 'offbeat' stories.The show stands as the template for many TV Cop shows and dramas that followed with the city of New York itself being very much a featured 'star' of the show..
This show is great, because it really shows the life of cops and people in NYC back then.
There were great episodes, like when the cops were forced to work long shifts and sleep in cots at the station. |
tt0480002 | Sharpe's Challenge | The film starts with a flashback to 1803 in India, where Sergeant Sharpe (Sean Bean) leads a patrol to an East India Company outpost. He arrives shortly before another supposedly friendly group of soldiers led by Major William Dodd (Toby Stephens). In a treacherous surprise attack, Dodd's men kill the entire garrison, leaving no witnesses, and makes off with the payroll. However, Sharpe is only wounded and manages to survive by pretending to be dead.
Fourteen years later, in 1817, Lieutenant Colonel Richard Sharpe, now a farmer in France, is summoned by his former commander, the Duke of Wellington (Hugh Fraser), to his London home, Apsley House, and asked to undertake one more mission for him: to find a man in India. The missing agent was trying to learn the identity of a turncoat officer advising a rebellious Maratha rajah. Sharpe refuses, unwilling to press his luck any further, until he learns that the agent is his old comrade in arms and best friend, Patrick Harper (Daragh O'Malley).
Sharpe sets out for India. On his way to report to General Burroughs (Peter Symonds), he passes a group of soldiers escorting Celia Burroughs (Lucy Brown), the general's attractive daughter. After a short conversation with her, he rides on ahead. He is soon attacked by marauders, but is rescued by Patrick Harper, who shows up just in time with his signature 7-barrel gun.
Celia Burroughs' escort is also attacked, by none other than Dodd; she is captured and taken to the fortress of Khande Rao (Karan Panthaky), the nominal leader of the revolt. However, he is not yet of age and is under the influence of a regent, his late father's favourite concubine, Madhuvanthi (Padma Lakshmi), and her lover, now General William Dodd, who plan to kill Rao before he declares his majority.
Sharpe reaches the encampment of General Burroughs, who is preparing to lay siege to the fortress of Ferraghur. The General is ill, so command has passed to an old, bitter foe of Sharpe's, the cowardly General Sir Henry Simmerson (Michael Cochrane). Simmerson refuses to act without orders and reinforcements from Agra. However, when Sharpe requests permission to infiltrate the enemy fortress, Simmerson is only too happy to allow him to risk his life.
Sharpe and Harper, posing as deserters, are welcomed by the rebels. Sharpe makes the acquaintance of former French Colonel Gudin (Aurélien Recoing), a fellow veteran of the Battle of Waterloo two years earlier. Gudin has been hired to train the men.
Meanwhile, General Burroughs recovers his health, dismisses Simmerson, and commences the siege. Sharpe discovers that Dodd has laid a trap for the British: they will attempt their breach of the wall just where he has mined it with barrels of gunpowder.
In a skirmish, some British soldiers are captured, among them Sergeant Shadrach Bickerstaff (Peter-Hugo Daly), who had clashed with Sharpe earlier. To avoid torture and execution, Bickerstaff betrays Sharpe. Sharpe and Harper are beaten and imprisoned, but Gudin, disgusted by the barbaric execution of prisoners, helps Sharpe and Harper escape, just as the British launch their assault.
Gudin next attempts to free Celia, but is murdered by Bickerstaff. Sharpe and Harper successfully set off the gunpowder prematurely, resulting in a huge explosion which kills many defenders. Harper encounters and shoots Bickerstaff, while Sharpe goes off in search of Dodd.
When it is clear the fortress has fallen, Dodd prepares to flee. Madhuvanthi attacks him with a knife when she learns that he is going to abandon her; he murders her. Sharpe finds and kills Dodd.
Khande Rao is allowed to keep his throne after he signs a peace treaty, much to Sharpe's disgust. Celia is reunited with her father. Their mission accomplished, Sharpe and Harper ride off. Celia tries to get Sharpe to stay, but when he does not she kisses him and bids him farewell, wishing him luck. | violence, action, flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0035713 | Captive Wild Woman | The film begins with animal trainer Fred Mason (Milburn Stone) returning from his latest safari with a horde of animals for his employer John Whipple (Lloyd Corrigan), owner of the Whipple Circus. Among them is Cheela (Ray Corrigan), a gorilla with remarkably human characteristics. Mason relates that she is the most affectionate jungle animal he has ever encountered.
Mason’s fiancée Beth Colman (Evelyn Ankers) is present at the dock for his return. She tells him of the recent health problems encountered by her sister Dorothy (Martha MacVicar). In a flashback sequence, Beth tells of taking her sibling to see Dr. Sigmund Walters (John Carradine), an endocrinologist of some standing. Dorothy is staying at Walters’ Crestview Sanatorium for treatment.
Fred and Beth arrive at the winter quarters, and Dr. Walters pays a visit. He is extremely interested in Cheela, and inquires about purchasing her. Whipple tells him that she is not for sale. Upon returning to his lab, Walters finds that his latest experiment has resulted in the lab animal’s death. He becomes convinced he needs larger animals that possess the “will to live.”
Walters enlists the aid of a disgruntled former circus employee to steal Cheela. After the ape is loaded onto his truck, the scientist callously pushes the man into the gorilla’s grasp and stolidly watches as the beast wrings his neck.
Back at his lab, Walters and his assistant Miss Strand (Fay Helm) transplant glandular material from Dorothy into Cheela. There were mentionings by Miss Strand that Walters has previously grafted the glands of different animals like placing a guinea pig's glands into a rabbit and a frog's glands into a mouse. To the horror of the nurse, the ape transforms into human form (Acquanetta). Telling the doctor that she cannot allow him to continue, Miss Strand informs him that at best he will have “a human form, with animal instincts.” Dr. Walters reaches the conclusion that he will need to place a human brain into his creation to successfully complete his experiment. He sacrifices Miss Strand for this purpose.
The brain transplant is a success, and the result is a sultry and exotic young woman who remembers nothing of her previous existence. Walters names her Paula Dupree, and takes his creation to the winter quarters for her first public outing. While watching Mason practice his animal act, an accident occurs. Paula rushes into the cage and saves him from the ferocious felines, who display an unnatural fear of her and retreat from her presence. Mason is dumbfounded and offers the girl a job in his act.
After the final dress rehearsal, Paula becomes jealous of Mason’s fiancée. She goes to her dressing room and while having a tantrum, begins converting to animal form. Later that night, she climbs through Beth’s window planning to kill her, but attacks and brutally murders another woman instead.
The beast returns to Walters, and the doctor realizes that another operation is necessary to return her to human form. He can continue to use Dorothy for the glandular material, but will need yet another subject to replace Paula’s damaged cerebrum.
Beth receives a frantic telephone call from her sister who expresses her fear of Dr. Walters and the forthcoming operation. Arriving at the Sanatorium to aid her sister, Beth is pegged by the good doctor as the next brain donor for Cheela. However, she proves resourceful in a pinch, releasing the ape from its cage. Cheela does Walters in and departs the lab, leaving Beth and Dorothy unharmed.
Performing his animal act solo, Mason finds himself trapped inside the cage with his unruly subjects. A powerful storm interrupts the performance and the beasts attack the trainer. Cheela comes to his rescue once again and carries him to safety. Unfortunately, a nearby police officer mistakes her intentions and kills Cheela. | murder, sadist | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0103564 | Tequila and Bonetti | The lead character of the series, Nico ("Nick") Bonetti (Jack Scalia), is a policeman from New York City who is proud of his Italian heritage and very fond of his vintage rose-colored Cadillac convertible, which he inherited from his father. After he erroneously shoots a young girl during a gunfight, he relocates to a beachfront Los Angeles precinct on temporary assignment. Here he meets his new partners, Tequila (a large, burrito-eating French Mastiff), and Officer Angela Garcia (Mariska Hargitay), who joined the department after her policeman husband's death. Their boss is Captain Midian Knight (Charles Rocket), who is almost as interested in selling a screenplay as he is in police work. The series shows their investigations of crimes and the evolving relationships between the characters. This show has the peculiarity that television viewers are able to hear Tequila's thoughts.
Life is not easy for Bonetti, due to his remorse about the girl he shot and the strange habits of Californians whom he does not understand. His neighbors include a Puerto Rican psychic (Liz Torres), who hears Tequila's thoughts but initially believes she is hearing spirits. Bonetti develops a grudging respect for the people around him as well as for Tequila, who despite his faults is an excellent police dog. The dog is portrayed as having human-level intelligence and a street-wise, sassy attitude.
The show was developed by producer Donald P. Bellisario. His daughter, Troian Bellisario, had a recurring role as Garcia's daughter, who for a time is unaware that her mother has joined the police department rather than continue a career as an art dealer.
Each episode has a montage during which Bonetti plays piano and viewers see odd, sometimes disturbing scenes featuring Bonetti's neighbors and co-workers. Some of these scenes are from later episodes, while others remain unexplained. Each montage ends with Bonetti's memory of the shooting of the girl in New York. | comedy, murder | train | wikipedia | My annoying self, my pretty partner and the cute annoying voice-over dog. I really wanted to like this cop show. But for me the 3-way partnership of Detective Nick Bonetti (Jack Scalia) and his delightful partner Angela Garcia (Mariska Hargitay) and that annoying "talking", and I do mean every voice-over thought that could be culled out of that dog, got to be too much.The dog is cute enough but the constant voice-overs of his every thought just became too much of the tale. Just a few clever thoughts voiced per episode would have worked better. You really don't want to be beating him to his lines.Making the dog the 3rd partner put him front and center to the episodes and, for me got in the way of any kind of gripping action and interplay of the 2 human partners. Nobody seemed to be having that much fun nor really working their performances, except maybe that annoying dog, LOL. I might have enjoyed that canine a whole lot more if he only had the occasional clever punch line. He really is an adorable dog, don't get me wrong.So for me, this comedic cop drama fell flat. Bonetti himself had his own annoying quirks. His character was the Hollywood depiction of a typical Italian machismo Brooklyn cop as a fish-out-of-water cop in L.A. The back story of his accidental fatal shooting of a 12-year-old girl gave us some sympathy for his mental anguish-tortured soul as shown to some, i.e. the ex-wife but not to others. such as his boss. as in his 'I'm over it" false bravado. Bonetti is an accomplished pianist as we see him at the keyboards in all three of the first episodes. So we see he has a bit of a cultured, hip side to his cop persona.Created by Donald P. Bellisario who is also top writing credit for the episodes of this one-season show as well as executive producer. His amazing and prolific talent is so many classic shows such as NCIS, Magnum, P.I., Quantum Leap, JAG, Airwolf and Black Sheep Squadron, and the list goes on, really had me hopeful for a show I'd missed in 1992-1993.The first three episodes was it for me, I just couldn't stomach any more of Bonetti himself or the abundant voice-over thoughts of that cute but annoying dog. It was pretty clear to me I wanted to ax this after the 1st episode, and by the 3rd episode, reaching for that ax had become an obsession. I succumbed. |
tt0878695 | Murder Party | Christopher, a lonely and plain man, finds an invitation to a Halloween costume party entitled "Murder Party", on the street. Constructing a knight costume out of cardboard, he makes his way to Brooklyn to attend the party, only to discover it is actually a trap set by a group of deranged art students. The art students, in costume, include Paul (a gothic vampire), Macon (a werewolf), Sky (a zombie cheerleader), Lexi (Daryl Hannah's replicant character from Blade Runner), and Bill (a Baseball Fury from The Warriors). They intend to commit a murder as a piece of artwork to impress Alexander, their wealthy and sinister patron, in the hopes that they will receive a large arts grant from Alexander. Christopher has brought along a loaf of pumpkin raisin bread, which Sky starts to eat. She then reveals that she is allergic to non-organic raisins, and didn't know about them. The group asks if she'll be OK, and she agrees explaining she's only a little dizzy and needs to sit down, however she falls over and hits her head on some old machinery and dies. The group hides the body, as they are embarrassed and don't want their patron to see it when he arrives. After dumping the body in a deep freezer, Macon blames Christopher for Sky's death and attempts to murder him before Alexander arrives by pouring a jar of acid on him. The acid has no effect as it is only a jar of Acetic Acid (vinegar).
The patron finally arrives to the Murder Party with a friend Zycho (who is unknown to the group), and his dog Hellhammer. Alexander is also dressed as a gothic vampire, but his costume is considerably cheaper than Paul's. Out of jealousy, Alexander forces Paul to completely remove his vampire costume while Zycho holds him at gunpoint. Alexander reveals that Zycho is his drug dealer and he was only joking with Paul, telling him the gun wasn't real. Each member of the Murder Party then gives their input on how they will commit the murder. Drugs and alcohol fuel the group as they decide to wait for the witching hour, at which time they will all stab Christopher in unison. While Macon leaves to pick up some pizza, Alexander has sex with Lexi. Macon arrives back to see the two having sex and this makes Macon visibly upset. Macon begins binge drinking hard alcohol in response and ends up covering himself in alcohol in the process. Paul, a photography artist, begins taking pictures of Christopher and is frustrated that no one will assist him.
Zycho, visibly bored with the party, asks Alexander if they could leave and Alexander whispers something in his ear in response. Alexander then suggests that the group play a game of ultimate truth or dare. They will all take a shot of Sodium Pentothal (truth serum) and divulge their most inner secrets. All eventually take a shot from the same needle, except for Alexander, who injects his shot into a slice of pizza. Each reveals mostly trivial truths about their lives and attempt to force Alexander to confirm that he indeed does have grant money to give. During this time, Bill who has mostly kept to himself playing a PSP and shown little visible interest in the proceedings, asks the group what they say about him behind his back. They tell him they make fun of him and plan on throwing him out of the group, but only because his work is so much better than theirs. This angers Bill and he goes back to playing his PSP. Macon confesses his long time love for Lexi and recounts a story of when they were in high school and ate a popsicle together on a water tower. Macon shows he kept the leftover popsicle stick as a token but is rebuffed by Lexi. Alexander sends Zycho out to get him some Crank. Macon is now extremely inebriated and goes outside to smoke a cigarette. Still covered in alcohol, Macon is engulfed in flames as he lights the cigarette, and only Christopher notices.
Frustrated with not having anyone to assist in his photographs, Paul calls his professional assistant to aid him. The group is not happy as the assistant is not aware of the murder party. An argument breaks out and Paul injects Alexander with a dose of Sodium Pentothal. The groups asks him about the grant again and discover Alexander is actually a fraud. He is a fry cook who plans on killing the group, stealing their art, and selling it as he assumes it will be worth more. Lexi discovers Macon on fire and she and the assistant extinguish him. Zycho returns with a bag of crank and Alexander immediately tells Zycho to kill everyone. Paul is shot in the head but doesn't realize and seems to only be annoyed that someone interrupted his shot. The assistant is also shot in the head and Zycho attacks Lexi. Macon, badly burned but still alive, gets his chainsaw and uses it to attack Zycho, killing him and passing out shortly afterward. Lexi immediately begins to untie Christopher, but Bill, who has now completely snapped, decides everyone has to die and kills Lexi with an axe. In the excitement Hellhammer eats the bag of crank and then attacks Alexander. Bill finishes off the wounded Alexander with a baseball bat and begins hunting down the last survivor, Christopher, who has now escaped. Macon awakes and pursues Bill with an electric chainsaw to take revenge for Lexi. The chase leads them to an Arts student party. Chris attempts to hide in a performance art exhibit and Bill is approached by the organizer and asked if has seen Alexander as a grant was promised to him. Bill is further enraged and vows to murder the whole scene. He enters the art exhibit and murders all the artists before cornering Christopher. Macon, who has arrived at the party and has found an outlet to plug in the chainsaw, falls off the roof while plugging it in. The plugged in chainsaw is conveniently left hanging in front of a window where Christopher is trapped. Christopher uses the chainsaw to stop Bill (by killing him), and leaves the exhibit as partygoers assume the murder scene is an art piece.
Christopher arrives home and his cat, Sir Lancelot, finally gives him his chair back. Christopher sits down and turns on his television.... still wearing his blood soaked Knight costume. | cult, satire, murder, violence, romantic | train | wikipedia | For those of you who like dark comedy, horror movies and action, and want something new and refreshing, watch Murder Party.Oh, yeah, after watching it you'll learn that even a "cat" will understand that the master has had a really, really bad day..
The story - normal guy finds a note inviting him to come to a Halloween party where art students are waiting with a plan to murder him for the sake of art) while a bit outlandish, was serviceable.
Accepting a strange party invitation, a middle-aged man finds that the event is really a ruse by a group of psychopaths intending to kill him only to continually thwart their attempts in the process and has to save himself from the remaining group finishing what they started.This could've been quite the fun and enjoyable effort.
The general concept of their ruse makes for a fun twist that's given right at the beginning of the film and the utterly cheesy premise has a lot of time to really work itself out with plenty of crazy encounters featuring him at the mercy of the group.
As well, the way this quickly delves into the bonkers territory with their games and torture tactics which has a sense of unease in what's going on as they go through their routines and games with him which is where this one does slip somewhat but still has enough overt weirdness about it to really generate some fun times with their treatment of him setting up the film's best aspects in the final half.
Having just read a review that describes this as a "Jerseyites view of the NY art scene", that is both astonishingly patronising (the whole point of the movie,idiot!)and unbelievably "jejeune" (wink), I have to say how much I love this film."Indie" cinema has been relegated to either a kickstart for the career of a middling celebrity, or a vacuum for self referentialism or schlock."Murder Party" is neither: it is witty,genuinely left field, and kind of touching.
It is black-as-black comedy rarely performed well nowadays.A hapless,lonely but genuinely nice,traffic warden on Halloween gets captured by a group of desparado wannabe celeb artists, after responding to a "murder party" advert.
I normally don't like it when horror movies try to be funny.
I personally rarely even laugh at standard comedies like "superbad", but this movie was great.
MURDER PARTY is a supposed spoof of slasher movies, thrillers where people are held hostage as well as a vehicle for poking fun at art generally.The plot sees Chris, a somewhat lonely guy who lives alone with a cat, finding an invitation to a murder party.
There is no party and Chris finds himself trapped by a group of deranged drug addicts who plan to kill him and film the act.The first few minutes of the movie were quite good and suitably misleading for what is to follow.
He would have been great in a different movie.By the time he gets to the party, things go downhill quickly.
Some scenes carry on like this for 10 minutes or more, making the modest running time drag out somewhat.The direction is very much along the lines of parodies such as SCARY MOVIE.
The gags are telegraphed in advance, the attempts at humour are massively overplayed, there is comic music in the background when Chris tries to escape and there are some incredibly silly special effects.I am a fan of "so-bad-it's-good" movies such as CAMP BLOOD, THE NAIL GUN MASSACRE, TROLL 2, DON'T GO IN THE WOODS and CHOPPING MALL just to name a few.
Comparing these laugh riots to MURDER PARTY proves that humour deriving from a serious subject only works when it is UNINTENTIONAL.Overall, MURDER PARTY is a seriously unfunny movie that has one interesting thing about it - the main character.
Hell, look at Kevin Smith's 'Clerks' for proof.The director of 'Murder Party' has gone on to make some very well received horror/thriller films, so it very cool to see where he, Jeremy Saulnier, got his start.
Being rather lonely he takes up the invitation and soon finds he will be the subject of the murder.From here things get strange and sometimes quite humorous.It's certainly worth a look and you won't feel you've wasted your time..
After having seen Blue Ruin and Green Room I was very curious to check out Jeremy Saulnier's first film, Murder Party.
Though watching this movie after having seen his other two films, it was interesting to see how he's grown as a filmmaker.
If you want a funny bloody Halloween flick, I would definitely recommend MURDER PARTY!!!.
Fun yet very bizarre movie that follows a group that plans a murder party and drops a random invite on the street not really expecting anyone to show up to be killed, for real all in the name of "art" THe movie is basically humor, then drug induced inside jokes, then a complete full on blood bath.
All of these people who star in this movie really must of had ALL their friends and family write great reviews for this utter waste of time.
I actually even mentioned to my boyfriend before we started it, that I had never seen so many great reviews in a row, for any movie (especially a horror flick.) Should of listened to my gut and passed this one by..
Jeremy Saulnier's feature film debut may not be as refined or focused as his breakthrough effort but it does succeed as a wicked horror comedy that's definitely crazy, twisted & ludicrous and in spite of its crude look & amateurish feel, manages to provide many good surprises along the way.The story follows a lonely guy who stumbles across an invitation to a Halloween costume party and, having nothing to do, decides to attend it, but soon discovers it to be a trap set by a group of deranged art students who intend to kill him as part of their art project to impress their patron.Written & directed by Jeremy Saulnier (best known for Blue Ruin & Green Room), Murder Party is shot with almost no money yet what it puts on the screen not only makes it a refreshing delight but also showcases the director's knowledge of the genre(s) & his eye for carving moments that are tense & engaging.Complemented by a thrilling score, aptly utilizing its camera to intensify the atmosphere, brilliantly balancing the elements of its genre(s), and certainly not holding back on violence or gore, the plot gets more n more demented as it progresses and completely snaps in the final act, killing anything & everything in its path.The characters inhabiting the story are nothing more than a bunch of losers, unworthy of any emotional attachment but it's the little details about them & their actions that provides majority of laughs.
Performance isn't the film's strongest suit but Macon Blair & Chris Sharp are still hilarious in their roles.On an overall scale, Murder Party does manage to live up to its name and is an amusing, ridiculous & farcical indie that's as absurd as it is entertaining.
Jeremy Saulnier is one of my favorite directors right now, his two most recent films (Green Room & Blue Ruin) are two of the best movies I have seen in the last five years or so.
I originally saw Murder Party years ago when it first came out but I was too young to fully appreciate it and didn't really have too many memories of it, once I realized that Murder Party was in fact Saulnier's directorial debut I knew I had to go back and check it out again.The film centers around a lonely young man (Chris Hawley) who lives alone and has no real plans for Halloween other than sitting at home with his cat watching horror movies.
I love the plot of this movie and the overall comedic tone of it as well, the film never takes it's self too seriously and they do an excellent job of mocking the art scene.
I was very pleased with the way the characters were all written, I loved how calm and casual they all were through all the insane events that transpired throughout the film.The acting was all top notch for a low budget flick, especially Macon Blaire's performance (who has been featured in all of Saulnier's films so far).
It's very rare that horror comedies are able to be genuinely funny but "Murder Party" really succeeds in that sense, it never felt like the comedy was forced or anything which made the jokes really land for me.
One of the things I really like about Jeremy Saulnier's films is how brutal and violent they are, and "Murder Party" definitely doe not disappoint there.
It's maybe not the most original premise for a horror movie, but that premise is more or less abandoned as more people show up to the murder party, old rivalries start to flare up, and mayhem and bloodshed start to ensue.
This movie has most of the elements that you'd want from a good horror-comedy; it's got a good amount of gore and a good amount of humor.
Much of the humor of this movie comes from poking fun at the whole "starving underground Brooklyn hipster vegan artist" scene, so if you don't find that sort of thing funny, many of the jokes in this film won't really do it for you.
I think these scenes were intended to be funny, but none of the humor really worked for me and it just felt like the movie was killing time.
You do get some good laughs in the third act from the murderers, but they don't really feel scary anymore since we've just spent the last hour of the movie poking fun at them.
Im sorry to say, this was absolute terrible, don't even bother watching it nothing happens apart from some random killing at the end, seriously its pathetic, and i've seen a lot of films lol...It starts of with a terrible opener, music sucks, i was bored in the first minute to be honest.Then he randomly gets taken hostage..
Especially in the Second Half when things start to come to a Climax filled with Gore and Suspense.The First Half builds on Dark Humor and a Laid-Back Feeling of a Psychotic Playground Populated with Misanthropes on a Mission to Snap and Murder ("Everyone Dies").When the Finale Ends Up in an Art Exhibit the Director's Eye for Stylistic Images Emerges and the Film Looks Beautiful as some of the Scenes are Presented Purely as "Art" ("Still Life").There's some Snappy Music and Insider Jokes for the Horror Crowd, enough Gorezone to Satisfy Hounds, and it's All Done with Exceptional Makeup and SFX that Never Looks Cheap.Overall, one of the Best Indies out there, a Grisly, Gritty, Black-Comedy-Horror..
A bunch of pretentious (psychopathic!) art students send out random invitations for strangers to attend the titular Halloween 'murder party.' Their reasons...
There's a few nice moments of black humour which help out the viewing and it is a pretty short film (it needs to be!).It's not awful, but I felt like there were long periods of time that felt like they had only been put in there to extend the runtime of a movie that doesn't really have enough plot to warrant it being anything other than a TV episode (length)..
This is not only a really original idea for a horror movie, but it also has interesting characters, nice gore and effects and some really good laughs.
Murder Party has a really unique feel to it that is hard to find in any other movies.
Once upon a time, I felt like watching a movie.
He soon finds out that he has made a dire mistake, putting his fate in the hands of murderous college students who want to kill him as art.What's simply wonderful about this film is how they manage Horror-Comedy.
There are a few really funny moments in this horror comedy, don't get me wrong, and the gore effects later on are pretty good, but the whole thing just feels like a few friends just sat together one afternoon in a warehouse with a camcorder, took way many drugs and filmed some stuff, then stitched a story around it.It's fun, but ultimately not good.
But I will tell you that most people that watch this movie will want to copy the Halloween costumes because they are so awesome!
This review is obviously way after the film release, but I love this movie so much I had to show my appreciation.
Murder Party is without a doubt one of my quintessential Halloween movies I watch every year.
I love this film and it's a shot in the arm for seasonal movies like this.
A horror-comedy about murder as performance art, this movie has pacing problems; the slow build becomes a drag, and then suddenly everyone's dead in thirty seconds.
It was very unpleasant to look at, not in a dark or creepy kind of way like in movies such as The Omen (1976) or The Fly, both of which are great and disturbing.The main character was a bore, just someone leading a quiet life and then put into a strange situation.
Alexander brings to the party a drug-dealing foreigner with a gun named Zycho(Bill Tangradi)who has a barbiturate which works as a truth serum and doping agent..this will bring out the buried secrets which will compel murderous acts along with a very unstable painter modeling his costume after the baseball furies from "The Warriors" who needed such a place to unleash his hidden desires for bloodshed.While the graphic violence rears it's ugly head at the end, most of this film is a satire on artists and their pursuit for achieving success.
There's even an ax attack on artists during an exhibit performance.I'm pretty sure many will be wondering whether or not(..as they are watching the film)this will ever have murders during the party because the director builds up to it by exposing the artists and their MANY faults as they seem to delay the inevitable.
Who cares?Photographed, written & directed by Jermey Saulnier I am amazed at how many good reviews Murder Party but at the same time I am not surprised by all the terrible reviews it has also, maybe this is a love it or hate it film & if it is then put me firmly in the latter camp.
Just flicking through some of these reviews & apart from wondering if I saw the same film I get the impression that Murder Party is meant to be funny, I must admit while watching it I didn't laugh once & I honestly can't remember a single instance of intentional humour, I really can't.
The IMDb says this has a runtime of eighty odd minutes but it felt like hours to me last night, a slow paced, unfunny, unscary mess of a film that might have worked better as a thirty minute telly show with a twist ending of some sort.The opening credits to Murder Party are revealing as the same names keep coming up & it seems clear this was made by a small number of people who obviously did several jobs.
The best aspect of the production is that each character is dressed in some sort of Halloween costume which gives the film a certain vibe.This probably had a budget that wouldn't stretch to a round of drinks at your local pub & it shows with the virtually entire thing set in one part of a warehouse.
The acting didn't do anything for me although I have seen worse.Murder Party is a film that I pretty much hated apart from the the basic plot & the fact the lead character's are all dressed in odd Halloween costumes, despite that I still didn't like it & thought it was a complete waste of my time..
The story behind this movie is genuinely heart-warming and inspirational, especially to anyone who's even vaguely considering film-making as a career.If you like senseless gore, making fun of pretentious hipsters, watching people take hard drugs, or seeing a middle aged man running around in a stupid looking cardboard costume, this movie is for you..
When i started to watch Murder Party, i was definitely expecting a pretty typical horror movie, since neither the plot, nor the poster would promise anything more.
But as soon as Chris follows the invitation and we get to know our "bad guys", you begin to realize that this is really not your typical movie.
My favorites are the beautiful Lexi and Macon, which are both people that i'd like to be friends with (without the killing though^^).In short: A great movie for Halloween, which just is fun from the beginning to the end.
Hawley (a solid and likeable performance by Chris Sharp) finds an invitation to a Halloween costume party that he discovers is actually a trap concocted by a group of unhinged artists who plan on killing him.
Murder Party comes to my attention by the Nostalgia Critic in one of his videos, which I find weird because he don't talk about indie ever, that make me think maybe this movie was that movie we all find at 3 a.m. in some obscure corner of TV and just give it a chance, pretty much what happened to me with "Stitches" another dark comedy I really recommend.
Well, about Murder Party, I really love the subtle humor in it, they have this extravagant characters and they know how to use them.
So Chris decides to go to this dubious Halloween "Murder Party".
Furthermore he finds out in a painful manner that he is the guest of honor of this "Murder Party" and that his life will be exhaled in an artful way this night
Halloween inspired a lot of horror movies since it is a nice frame for a movie of this genre. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.