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
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
tt0022235 | L'opéra de quat'sous | === Overview ===
Set in Victorian London, the play focuses on Macheath, an amoral, antiheroic criminal.
Macheath ("Mackie," or "Mack the Knife") marries Polly Peachum. This displeases her father, who controls the beggars of London, and he endeavours to have Macheath hanged. His attempts are hindered by the fact that the Chief of Police, Tiger Brown, is Macheath's old army comrade. Still, Peachum exerts his influence and eventually gets Macheath arrested and sentenced to hang. Macheath escapes this fate via a deus ex machina moments before the execution when, in an unrestrained parody of a happy ending, a messenger from the Queen arrives to pardon Macheath and grant him the title of Baron. The details of the original 1928 text have often been substantially modified in later productions.
A draft narration by Brecht for a concert performance begins: "You are about to hear an opera for beggars. Since this opera was intended to be as splendid as only beggars can imagine, and yet cheap enough for beggars to be able to watch, it is called the Threepenny Opera."
=== Prologue ===
A street singer entertains the crowd with the illustrated murder ballad or Bänkelsang, titled "Die Moritat von Mackie Messer" ("Ballad of Mack the Knife"). As the song concludes, a well-dressed man leaves the crowd and crosses the stage. This is Macheath, alias "Mack the Knife".
=== Act 1 ===
The story begins in the shop of Jonathan Jeremiah Peachum, the boss of London's beggars, who outfits and trains the beggars in return for a slice of their takings from begging. In the first scene, the extent of Peachum's iniquity is immediately exposed. Filch, a new beggar, is obliged to bribe his way into the profession and agree to pay over to Peachum 50 percent of whatever he made; the previous day he had been severely beaten up for begging within the area of jurisdiction of Peachum's protection racket.
After finishing with the new man, Peachum becomes aware that his grown daughter Polly did not return home the previous night. Peachum, who sees his daughter as his own private property, concludes that she has become involved with Macheath. This does not suit Peachum at all, and he becomes determined to thwart this relationship and destroy Macheath.
The scene shifts to an empty stable where Macheath himself is preparing to marry Polly once his gang has stolen and brought all the necessary food and furnishings. No vows are exchanged, but Polly is satisfied, and everyone sits down to a banquet. Since none of the gang members can provide fitting entertainment, Polly gets up and sings "Seeräuberjenny", a revenge fantasy in which she is a scullery maid turning pirate queen to order the execution of her bosses and customers. The gang becomes nervous when the Chief of Police, Tiger Brown, arrives, but it's all part of the act; Brown had served with Mack in England's colonial wars and had intervened on numerous occasions to prevent the arrest of Macheath over the years. The old friends duet in the "Kanonen-Song" ("Cannon Song" or "Army Song"). In the next scene, Polly returns home and defiantly announces that she has married Macheath by singing the "Barbarasong" ("Barbara Song"). She stands fast against her parents' anger, but she inadvertently reveals Brown's connections to Macheath which they subsequently use to their advantage.
=== Act 2 ===
Polly warns Macheath that her father will try to have him arrested. He is finally convinced that Peachum has enough influence to do it and makes arrangements to leave London, explaining the details of his bandit "business" to Polly so she can manage it in his absence. Before he leaves town, he stops at his favorite brothel, where he sees his ex-lover, Jenny. They sing the "Zuhälterballade" ("Pimp's Ballad") about their days together, but Macheath doesn't know Mrs Peachum has bribed Jenny to turn him in. Despite Brown's apologies, there's nothing he can do, and Macheath is dragged away to jail. After he sings the "Ballade vom angenehmen Leben" ("Ballad of the Pleasant Life"), another girlfriend, Lucy (Brown's daughter) and Polly show up at the same time, setting the stage for a nasty argument that builds to the "Eifersuchtsduett" ("Jealousy Duet"). After Polly leaves, Lucy engineers Macheath's escape. When Mr Peachum finds out, he confronts Brown and threatens him, telling him that he will unleash all of his beggars during Queen Victoria's coronation parade, ruining the ceremony and costing Brown his job.
=== Act 3 ===
Jenny comes to the Peachums' shop to demand her money for the betrayal of Macheath, which Mrs Peachum refuses to pay. Jenny reveals that Macheath is at Suky Tawdry's house. When Brown arrives, determined to arrest Peachum and the beggars, he is horrified to learn that the beggars are already in position and only Mr Peachum can stop them. To placate Peachum, Brown's only option is to arrest Macheath and have him executed. In the next scene, Macheath is back in jail and desperately trying to raise a sufficient bribe to get out again, even as the gallows are being assembled. Soon it becomes clear that neither Polly nor the gang members can, or are willing to, raise any money, and Macheath prepares to die. He laments his fate and poses the 'Marxist' questions: "What's picking a lock compared to buying shares? What's breaking into a bank compared to founding one? What's murdering a man compared to employing one?" (These questions did not appear in the original version of the work, but first appeared in the musical Happy End, another Brecht/Weill/Hauptmann collaboration, in 1929 - they may in fact have been written not by Brecht, but by Hauptmann). Macheath asks everyone for forgiveness ("Grave Inscription"). Then a sudden and intentionally comical reversal: Peachum announces that in this opera mercy will prevail over justice and that a messenger on horseback will arrive ("Walk to Gallows"); Brown arrives as that messenger and announces that Macheath has been pardoned by the queen and granted a title, a castle and a pension. The cast then sings the Finale, which ends with a plea that wrongdoing not be punished too harshly as life is harsh enough.
=== Musical numbers ===
Prelude
11. Ouverture12. Die Moritat von Mackie Messer ("The Ballad of Mack the Knife" – Street singer)
Act 1
13. Morgenchoral des Peachum (Peachum's Morning Choral – Peachum, Mrs Peachum)14. Anstatt dass-Song (Instead of Song – Peachum, Mrs Peachum)15. Hochzeits-Lied (Wedding Song – Four Gangsters)16. Seeräuberjenny (Pirate Jenny – Polly)17. Kanonen-Song (Canon Song – Macheath, Brown)18. Liebeslied (Love Song – Polly, Macheath)19. Barbarasong (Barbara Song – Polly)
10. I. Dreigroschenfinale (First Threepenny Finale – Polly, Peachum, Mrs Peachum)
Act 2
11.a Melodram (Melodrama – Macheath)
11a. Polly's Lied (Polly's Song – Polly)
12.a Ballade von der sexuellen Hörigkeit (Ballad of Sexual Dependency – Mrs Peachum)
13.a Zuhälterballade (Pimp's Ballad or Tango Ballad – Jenny, Macheath)
14.a Ballade vom angenehmen Leben (Ballad of the Pleasant Life – Macheath)
15.a Eifersuchtsduett (Jealousy Duet – Lucy, Polly)
15b. Arie der Lucy (Aria of Lucy – Lucy)
16.a II. Dreigroschenfinale (Second Threepenny Finale – Macheath, Mrs Peachum, Chorus)
Act 3
17.a Lied von der Unzulänglichkeit menschlichen Strebens (Song of the Insufficiency of Human Struggling – Peachum)
17a. Reminiszenz (Reminiscence)
18.a Salomonsong (Solomon Song – Jenny)
19.a Ruf aus der Gruft (Call from the Grave – Macheath)
20.a Grabschrift (Grave Inscription – Macheath)
20a. Gang zum Galgen (Walk to Gallows – Peachum)
21.a III. Dreigroschenfinale (Third Threepenny Finale – Brown, Mrs Peachum, Peachum, Macheath, Polly, Chorus) | satire | train | wikipedia | Life is Money, Food, Sex, Nothing. Feels a bit odd being the 1st post as I would have thought Artheads would have been here years ago describing this one's social significance, contextualising it, contemporary relevances, and dissecting comparisons with the simultaneous German version. As I only happen to like "old" movies I can only offer some humble humdrum opinions on a few points instead.I've seen Die 3groschenoper a number of times now, but this was my 1st visit to the French version, my first impressions being favourable as it is an exact scene-for-scene re-run after all - for the story refer to everyone's comments for 3G. The French runs 7 minutes faster - is that just down to the language differences? I wonder how many of the background extras acted in both (and did they get paid for 2 movies!), but the speaking parts of course were handed to French actors and actresses - the whole reason why this talkie was made. I can almost get by in French - but German is a real tongue-twister for me, so to me a lot of the earthy harshness and Weimar cynicism is lost here for a typically French airy artiness, even down to the song lyrics. Without that overpowering cynicism it becomes for me simply a very good film, not a great one like the simultaneous original. Otoh it's easier to follow, meaning it enlightened me on some aspects of the German release I'd struggled over. Here, in the English translation of the French the people in the shadows ultimately "melt away" - I prefer the "lost to sight" translation of the German. Etherial compared to material.If you enjoyed 3G then you're sure to enjoy this. Overall, for an Englishman a very enjoyable (French) curio, but for instance if I ever feel that I need a shot of Cynical Sleazy Singing I'll be heading back to Ernst Busch, Carole Neher, Lotte Lenya and Co.. Pretty much "Die 3 Groschen-Oper" but made with a French-speaking cast.. If you've already seen the German language version of this film that was directed by G.W. Pabst, you've pretty much seen this film. Let me explain. In the early days of sound films, film producers figured that most audiences didn't want to see a talking picture with subtitles--this was the prevailing feeling at the time. And, because they really hadn't figured out the process for dubbing films in various languages, the studios did something pretty freaky. With 'big' productions, they often made multiple versions for international consumption. In the case of Laurel & Hardy, who were huge international stars, they literally had them make versions of their films where the pair phonetically delivered their lines--mostly to an all-new supporting cast who spoke this other language (although James Finlayson appeared in some of these dual language films). They made French, German, Italian and Spanish language films--longer and often very different from their American shorts. In the case of most other prestige films, the film actually had two separate casts that used the exact same sets--the international one filming after hours. This is the case with "L'opéra de Quat'sous", as the German director G.W. Pabst literally made two versions of his film--one German and this one French. I have no idea if he made any other versions of this film.Because this film had the same director making both, the subsequent films are a lot more similar than many similar types of films. For example, the American version of "Dracula" and the Spanish one had totally different directors and so many of the scenes looked very, very different. Because "L'opéra de Quat'sous" and "Die 3 Groschen-Oper" BOTH had Pabst at the helm, the two are, at times, pretty indistinguishable and I'd rate them both to be roughly equal in quality. Both look simply marvelous--but both also are a bit tough to watch because they are musicals--unless you know the language. And, musicals translate much poorer to subtitles than an ordinary film.If you DO want to see both films, they are included together in a collection from Criterion. Worth seeing if you are a cinemaniac! |
tt0492481 | Puccini for Beginners | The story begins with Samantha (Julianne Nicholson) breaking up with Allegra (Elizabeth Reaser), a lesbian author who has had relationship problems in the past. Allegra meets a man named Philip (Justin Kirk) at a party, with whom she feels a connection. The next day, she meets Grace (Gretchen Mol), Philip's ex-girlfriend, although Allegra does not know about it. Allegra and Philip begin seeing each other, and Philip leaves Grace for good. Allegra sees Grace outside of a movie theater and Grace cries about her boyfriend leaving her. Allegra goes on a date with Philip, but she leaves after thoughts in her mind tell her it is wrong to be with a guy.
Allegra goes back and forth on dates with Philip and Grace. After several more dates, Grace shows Allegra a picture of her ex-boyfriend, and she learns that Philip and Grace were together. Philip and Grace go out for dinner, where they reveal to each other that they are seeing someone else. Meanwhile, Allegra caters at a party, which turns out to be Samantha's engagement party. Philip and Grace show up at the party, and they both discover that they have been seeing the same woman. In the end, Allegra is back with Samantha and never sees Philip and Grace again. | romantic | train | wikipedia | Likable Romantic Triangle Comedy Hamstrung by a Lackluster Lead and Plodding Pacing.
Directed and written by Maria Maggenti ("The Incredibly True Adventures of Two Girls in Love"), this disheveled 2007 romantic triangle comedy has several likable elements, but it never seems to coalesce into something more resonant.
The chief problem is that the protagonist, a neurotic, opera-loving lesbian writer appropriately named Allegra, is so perpetually self-absorbed that her dilemma never elicits much sympathy.
Elizabeth Reaser is an appealing character actress but frankly not charismatic enough to get away with the commitment-phobic shenanigans that Maggenti throws her way in the acerbic script.
The gap causes an odd imbalance with her more intriguing co-stars Justin Kirk and Gretchen Mol. Kirk, who soared as Prior Walter in Mike Nichols' epic 2003 adaptation of Tony Kushner's "Angels in America", harnesses his quirky persona effectively to play Philip, a bored philosophy professor who becomes attracted to Allegra.In turn, Allegra finds herself drawn to Philip but is still reeling from a break-up with her conflicted girlfriend of nine months.
Meanwhile, Mol (refreshingly frank as "The Notorious Bettie Page") seems to be channeling a bit of Meg Ryan's flaky self-righteousness in playing Grace, a pert glass-blower who just broke up with Philip.
Even with the lesbian angle, which Maggenti handles with aplomb, the indie movie feels more like a throwback to a 1930's screwball farce, especially seen in a hectic party scene where all three principals converge in a most haphazard way.
Emotional isolation is a worthy theme to explore, but Maggenti can't make the film snap with the strength of her witty observations.
One would have also expected a reference to Puccini, in particular, his tragic opera "Turandot", to be reflected more fully than it does here through the plodding plot structure.
I really wanted to like "Puccini for Beginners" but it is a heavily flawed film.1.
It steals too much from the Woody Allen films "Annie Hall" and "Manhattan" but is not nearly as clever as it wants to be.4.
With a title that contains the name "Puccini," I was expecting opera to play a bigger part.Despite that, there are some mildly funny parts and the cast is attractive, especially Gretchen Moll.
I wish she had been in the film more."Puccini for Beginners" is not a really bad film but it is disappointing because it could have been much better.
If you are looking for a good lesbian themed comedy, watch "Gray Matters." It was much funnier..
central character flaw.
Nice NYC comic romp with a fatal flaw: central character just isn't likable.
She's cheating, she's lying, she's whining, she only talks about herself -- so why is everyone falling all over her, aside from sex...Ms. Mol was a true bright spot in this film.
Central character needed some of her charm and warmth -- both in writing and delivery.This was Closing Night film of a very successful 11th Seattle Lesbian and Gay Film Festival with director and star Justin Kirk in attendance.
It received a very warm reception.Filmed in 18 days 9/05 and doesn't look nearly as low budget as it was..
Better than Woody Allen's last five movies combined, PUCCINI FOR BEGINNERS is that snappiest, funniest, romantic comedy in recent memory.
I can't say enough good things about this movie.
I am not one to buy the hype so I just let the movie fade from memory.
Put simply: this movie is cute.
Elizabeth Reaser is a dream come true; she delivers her dialogue with the skill and precision of a government trained sniper.
This is one of the most delightful romantic comedies I've seen in a long time and one which should get wide distribution and a crossover audience in major cities as well as out-of-the-way communities.
The San Francisco Lesbian & Gay Film Festival audience last night were stamping their feet and whistling along with the bravos as Maggenti attended the premiere...While it has yet to find a distributor, I'm confident, if last night was any indication, that one will be ringing her phone any minute...funny, witty, smart, a New York scene with wonderful actors, Justin Kirk, the adorable Gretchen Mol and beautiful Elizabeth Reasor...wait till you see it...you'll fall in love with all the characters...congrats, Maria, another success (The Incredibly True Story of Two Girls in Love; The Love Letter, Without a Trace (TV)...).
Written and directed by Maria Maggenti, "Puccini For Beginners" is a tres chic romantic comedy set in a movie-spawned Manhattan where virtually everyone we meet is Caucasian, trendily upscale and sexually conflicted.The strained setup lands somewhere between a labored screwball sex farce and a recycled Woody Allen angst-fest: Allegra (Elizabeth Reaser) is an opera-loving, afraid-of-commitment lesbian who finds herself inadvertently and simultaneously dating both a man (Justin Kirk) and his longtime girlfriend (winningly played by Gretchen Mol).
As Allegra bounces back and forth between her two oblivious paramours, the characters talk out the issues of their relationships as if they were channeling left-over bits from "Annie Hall" or "Manhattan." "Puccini for Beginners" is one of those small-scale independent features that thinks it's being smarter and more insightful about romantic relationships than it really is.
Actually, after all those really sharp Woody Allen exposes on the same subject, very little in this film feels like fresh observation.
To be truthful, with the exception of Mol's winsome Grace, most of the characters here are more annoying than they are appealing.
Not only are the plotting and much of the writing too cutesy by half, but so is Maggenti's directorial style, which relies heavily on smart-alecky narration, freeze-framing, and dopey fantasy sequences to generate laughs."Puccini for Beginners" offers a few genuinely funny moments within its blessedly short 81-minute running time, but throughout we're plagued by the nagging and irreverent suspicion that the film might have been more accurately entitled "Puccini for Idiots.".
I saw this film at Sundance and can't wait for it to get distribution so that I can see it again and again!
This is the kind of film that doesn't really get made anymore: witty, fun, intelligent, truly entertaining, reminiscent of classic Hollywood screwball comedy.
Wonderful use of New York City as a set, sparkling script, winning performances.
The late-night audience at Sundance LOVED this film, gave a standing ovation for the director.
I am hoping nationwide audiences will soon have the same opportunity to enjoy this delightful film..
Uninspired musings on love and relationships.
"Puccini for Beginners" is yet another independent relationship comedy.
We have love triangles and writers waxing on neurotically about love and relationships.The lead is a writer, a lesbian who is unable to admit her true feelings, and she goes from a break up to a man.
He's a philosophy professor who loves everything about her that it doesn't matter that she's a lesbian.
In addition to their differences in sexual orientation, there are other love entanglements that get in their way - "with all the twists and turns of a classic Puccini" as the DVD case says.
I would agree with that if the twists and turns in Puccini operas are obvious and uninspired with contrived culminations.I enjoyed the casting, Elizabeth Reaser has a fresh face and isn't your typical romantic comedy lead.
The actresses who play her friends actually look like regular friends.
But the cast wasn't able to save the characters.
We have a lesbian with the prosaic name of Allegra, a writer whose neurotic, and a philosophy professor who pontificated on her vocabulary and the virtues of love and relationships.
And none of them had interesting character traits.The characters, the love triangles and the imperious dialogue were all flat.
And the references to Puccini?
Allegra likes going to the opera.
I think that sums up all the imaginative aspects of "Puccini for Beginners"..
Allegra (Elizabeth Reaser) gets caught dating both Grace (Gretchen Mol) and Philip (Justin Kirk).
The movie flashes back to the time when she's dating Samantha (Julianne Nicholson).
She's a Puccini opera loving New York writer.
Samantha hates opera, questions her lesbianism, and breaks up with Allegra to go back to her former boyfriend Jeff.
As Allegra resigns herself to be alone, she meets first Philip and then Grace.
Then she sleeps with Grace without knowing that they're actually in a stale long-term relationship together.It's a quirky little rom-com.
I love all the actors although Reaser may not be up to being a manic comedic lead.
She's not quite big enough to fill the character's shoes.
There is a little bit of an interesting take on lesbian relationship struggles.
It's way cool and hip.Thing is, it doesn't make for good movies.
And when an entire film is centered upon a self-absorbed lesbian's facile and pointless introspection on her lesbianism, it takes the reasonably intelligent viewer about fifteen seconds to know that spending even another fifteen seconds upon the movie is fifteen seconds wasted.
The characters are the typical Manhattanite stereotypes, are acted amateurishly, and aren't the least bit interesting.Rubbish - pretentious and insulting rubbish.
Steer way clear unless you like to watch trash films just for the sake of watching trash films..
I was a little leery at first when I read the synopsis, but this is one movie I thoroughly enjoyed.
The characters were interconnected, well chosen, and delivered good performances.
However, I think the magic in this movie is the script and direction.
As a gay person who loves gay themed movies, this one really stood out with a bizarre quad love story.
One of the things I liked most about the story had nothing to do with the main characters but the sushi chefs who added comedy at the right moment.
I recognized the main male character from TRICK and I'm glad to see him in something else, his character free flowing style and intellect was the perfect counterpart for the main lesbian character to be mesmerized by.
Anyway, I say let's add this to our top 20 list gay movies that hits the A list as far as I'm concerned.
Film-making for Beginners – plus Advanced Left-wing Propaganda 501..
"She voted Republican, you should have known." Only in American movies does voting Right automatically equate to being a Nazi supporter or being a serial-killer.
Nearly every character behaves like a pre-election politician trying to rake in votes among his liberal electorate, by injecting as many asinine politically-correct statements into the vapid dialogue as they can; so much so in fact that half-way through this painfully unfunny turkey I was musing on whether the film's incompetent writer/director had the primary goal of entertaining people i.e. making them laugh (remember: a comedy, so that's her job), or whether this terribly lame script was merely an excuse for her to voice her painfully predictable and utterly mindless left-wing views.
After all, isn't this the same Maria who molested us with "The Incredibly Lame Adventure of Two Girls in Love"?
PFB is bizarre pile of rom-com (all rom and no com) horse-manure about an unbearably unattractive/unappealing lesbian who is at the center of a love square, meaning that she has affairs with three people, almost all at once.
In the absurd "reality" of this stupid movie, this ugly woman is desired and lusted over by every man and woman she meets – while Mol Gretchen (the ACTUAL beauty here) is the one getting cheated on and dumped by both men and women.
It isn't.Elizabeth Reaser is such a mediocre and uncharismatic actress and – as I will mention at least ten times more – bearing such a horrendous face, that my nepotism radars immediately switched on.
Furthermore: the movie portrays Republicans as greedy elitists – while the movie's writer/director hires some rich preppie daughter from a powerful and wealthy American family to play a left-wing lesbian?
Perhaps one needs to be daft in the extreme in order to "understand" liberal ideology and the self-contradicting means by which they attempt to impose their views on the rest of us who lack this extreme daftness.But hip social issues aren't Maria's only pointless obsession.
Instead of focusing on making the movie FUNNY (something she's clearly incapable of anyway), this fool tries to impress us with pseudo-intellectual piffle, while making boring left-wing insinuations every 5 minutes – as if Manbearpig itself had hired her for the job.
The characters aren't believable; they are politically-correct cardboard cut-outs, walking indie-film clichés.
Credibility is stretched to breaking point as the entire script relies heavily on absurd coincidences – while Maria desperately tries to justify these too-numerous-to-mention chance meetings with some pretentious, unconvincing gobbledygook about why Freud thought there was "no such thing as coincidence".
It's like quoting what Plato thought was the best way to cook spaghetti.
Or what Agassi thinks about French poetry.And nice try, attempting to portray New York's left-wing lesbian "elite" as smart and well-educated.
Bad movies?.
Photography and sound is generally good except for interior lighting that in places seems a little too flat for my taste.
Yes, it follows in the "screwball comedy" tradition to some extent.
Two sushi chef characters are funny and provide more zest and unity end-to-end than the operatic theme.
But the thought that this might be lifted from Woody Allen never occurred to me while watching the film first without, then with, the commentary.
Any resemblance this film may bear to certain W.A. hallmarks as others have suggested is coincidental.
This isn't a mere goofy / silly wisecracking comedy, either.
This core aspect of the narrative reduces the film to a subculture where it needs to succeed within a limited cult following to become commercially successful.
Several comments in the narrative reemphasize the writer-director's gender orientation and politics.
Given key career and relationship choices that most of the lead female characters make during their arc, it's questionable whether this film is going to engage a lot of general public sympathy.
The outcome here is more positive and carries with it greater depth that gives this film its charm..
Don't get the point of this film or if it even makes any point.
None of the characters are likable, they're all dishonest with themselves and each other, and selfish.
The film is all too self aware of itself and the writer/director self-gratifies with small genitalia.
I watched this film because I have seen most of the players in other things I liked, ironically they were better scripted and directed in TV shows.
The film's climax is that it has no climax, you see it coming a mile away and has all the energy and appeal of a televised senior golf tournament.
How & why the character are always bumping into each other, or espying the other in NYC was lamely explained using some old Freud comment about peripheral awareness.
Watch only if you like selected players and you are amused by the cliché'd script penned by a lesbian who completely negates men and understands even less about the man-woman dynamic..
NOT a lesbian movie.
I say this is not a true lesbian movie-why?
Because I as a lesbian I don't think having a lesbian-male relationship is good enough!
If you enjoy watching a movie about a woman who cheats on her lovers (both male and female) while simultaneously claiming to be a lesbian, this is for you!
Sure, the movie is funny, but its not really when you realize it's just playing with people's lives.
Overall cheeky but not a good movie and not worth it.
Not recommended for lesbians either-its mainly female-male sex and relationships..
I liked this film from the outset because of the screwball/Woody Allenish style of it but it really kicked in for me with the following paraphrased quote: Allegra: Phillip Roth is a misogynist...I'll buy the first round if you don't tell anyone about Martha Stewart.Philip: I'll buy the second round if you can think of something more original to say about Phillip Roth.The word "misogynist" is overused and misused by some women and it was nice to hear it dealt with so easily.This film has a potential to be misandrist/women-empowering but it never really goes there which is GREAT.
Quoting Allegra: "Just because I love women doesn't mean I hate men." "Puccini" points out a lot of irritating female behavior by having Allegra play the man-stereotype (who happens to be a woman), thereby vindicating men of some of their "flaws".
Reaser WAS "like a man" but an interesting, good, CHARMing man with some of his more understandable flaws, like fear of commitment and romantic curiosity.
I've never seen Elizabeth Reaser before but I loved her choices and acting style in this film.
Following are two quotes from her character to Philip: "When a woman runs out of a restaurant that's your cue to run after her." "Phillip, when a woman says she has to leave a restaurant you have to let her leave." I liked the sushi commentators and the lonely lesbians drinking their coffee in unison.
When Allegra vomits on Philip's shoes, the sound-effect is masterful.
Gretchen Mol is charming and I liked the absurdity of the battling men in the background while she is mouthing the usual, boring, general complaints about men.
At the closing party, while Allegra is talking to Philip and looking for her coat, a mating couple wanders in.
"Puccini" had a lot of nice comic touches.Allegra's character arc follows Redford's in "Out Of Africa", without the lions, but Reaser has the humor that Redford needed.
She is unwilling to commit for reasons that are less idealistic and more vague but, in the end, comes around to the idea that commitment has it's charms when it's the right person.
She IS a commitment-phobe but, like Redford's character, for most of the right reasons.
She's not stupid enough to LOOK for commitment but she's not inhuman enough to live without romance and passion.Maria Maggenti has created something fresh, classic and modern here.
(She seems to know a few things about women).
"Puccini For Beginners" does away with a lot of feminist cliché and propaganda which is refreshing as hell. |
tt1988816 | The Red House | Handicapped farmer Pete Morgan (Edward G. Robinson) and sister Ellen (Judith Anderson) live on an isolated farm with their adoptive daughter, Meg (Allene Roberts) who is actually their niece. They keep to themselves and are viewed as mysterious by the nearby town. Now a teenager, Meg convinces Pete to hire one of her 12th grade high school classmates, Nath Storm (Lon McCallister) to come help with chores on the farm. Everyone gets along great, until one evening Nath says he is going to take a shortcut home through the old woods to go home. The woods are part of Pete's property and he forbids anyone from entering them. Pete becomes agitated, insisting the woods are dangerous and contain a haunted house which is painted red, and that Nath must stay out.
After traveling though the woods in the dark, Nath returns spooked, after hearing moans and yells. However, a few days later, Nath is embarrassed at his cowardice and goes through the woods again after dark. Nath is struck from behind and knocked out. Nath returns to the farm and insists that Pete hit him, but Meg and Ellen say Pete has been in the room with them since Nath left. Soon, both Nath and Meg become obsessed with searching for the mysterious "red house", but can't find it in their daily travels to the woods to look for the house.
In the meantime, Meg begins to fall in love with Nath, but his jealous and shrewd girlfriend Tibby (Julie London) has other plans for him. Meanwhile, Pete secretly gives local handyman and petty thug Teller (Rory Calhoun) rights to hunt on the land as long as he keeps everyone else off of the property.
One Sunday, Meg goes off on her own to look for the red house and she finds it located in a small gully a few miles from Pete's farm along an unused dirt road. Teller fires at her to scare her away. Running away, Meg falls and breaks her leg. That evening, when Meg does not return, Nath ventures into the woods to find her and brings her back to the farm. Pete is furious that both Meg and Nath defied his warning to stay out of the woods and he outright fires Nath and banishes him from the farm and from seeing Meg again.
Some months later, Nath has been working for his mother at a local general store in town. His mother marries a regular customer and goes off on her honeymoon for several weeks, leaving Nath to mind the store. Nath soon takes other work at another farm close to town for the summer. As Meg recovers from her broken leg, Pete begins to crack up. Pete starts calling her Jeannie, and is becoming controlling and domineering. Ellen and Pete have a conversation; it is revealed that several years ago they rented the red house to a young couple. Pete was having an affair with the wife, Jeannie.
Nath catches Tibby flirting with Teller. He confronts her and finally learns how vain and selfish Tibby is, and Teller beats up Nath while Tibby watches with satisfaction.
One evening, Ellen decides to burn the red house down, and to end Pete's obsession. However, Teller fires at her. Although he meant only to scare her, he hits and kills her. Meg finds Ellen's body and calls the police and Nath. Teller approaches Tibby and persuades her to leave town with him, only they both get pulled over and arrested by the state police while driving out of town.
When Meg tells Pete about Ellen's death and demands the truth about the red house and who Jeannie is, Pete finally tells Meg that he was having an affair with a married woman named Jeannie. The husband found out, and the couple decide to move away and try and start over. Pete claimed that he went to the red house one day to demand that Jeannie leave her husband and stay with him. Jeannie refused and they heard her husband returning, and Jeannie started yelling. Pete covered her mouth to stop the yelling, but suffocated her. Pete claims he was just trying to keep her quiet, and her death was accidental. However, he admits he killed the husband in cold blood when he entered the red house. Pete buried the bodies in the basement of the ice house that sits next to the red house, and he lives in fear that they will be discovered. However, since Jeannie's husband told everyone they were leaving town, no one ever suspected they were murdered. The couple had a baby, Meg, so Pete and Ellen adopted her rather than leave her as an abandoned infant.
Pete takes Meg to the red house, where he starts calling her Jeannie. Pete has completely gone crazy by this point, and thinks Meg is Jeannie leaving him again. He begins choking her to re-live the experience. Nath and the sheriff show up in time. Pete takes off in his truck, but drives into the ice house, where the truck sinks in the large pond formed by the melted ice, and Pete drowns.
The final scene shows Nath and Meg a few days later, talking about starting a new life together, as they watch the smoke from the red house. Nath has burned it down to put it in the past. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0020815 | The Dawn Patrol | During World War I, the pilots of an RFC squadron deal with the stress of combat primarily through nightly bouts of heavy drinking. The two aces of the squadron's "A Flight", Courtney (Richard Barthelmess) and Scott (Douglas Fairbanks Jr), have come to hate the commanding officer, Brand (Neil Hamilton), blaming him for sending new recruits directly into combat in inferior aircraft.
Unknown to them, Brand has been arguing continually with higher command to allow practice time for the new pilots, but command is desperate to maintain air superiority and orders them into combat as soon as they arrive. Brand is so disliked by the two he cannot even easily join the men for the nightly partying, drinking alone and clearly breaking under the strain. The tension grows worse when an elite German squadron led by "von Richter" takes up position just across the front lines from them.
After losing several of the squadron's veteran pilots, the ranks become increasingly made up of new recruits, who have absolutely no chance against the German veterans. Von Richter issues a taunt that Courtney and Scott answer by attacking the Germans' airdrome in defiance of orders from Brand not to go up against them. Brand gets revenge when he is recalled to headquarters and Courtney is made squadron commander. Courtney quickly learns the misery that Brand endured when four patrols a day are ordered and his pleas not to send green men ignored.
Scott and Courtney have a falling out when Scott's younger brother is one of the new replacements and is immediately ordered on a mission. He is killed flying the Dawn Patrol. Brand returns with orders for what amounts to a suicide mission far behind enemy lines. Courtney is forbidden to fly the mission, so Scott angrily volunteers. Courtney gets him drunk and flies off in his stead. He shoots down von Richter returning from the successful mission but is killed by another German pilot. Scott becomes squadron commander and reads orders to his new replacements. | revenge | train | wikipedia | Terrific war film starring Richard Barthelmess as a veteran British pilot in France whose job is to make raids behind enemy lines in what are basically suicide runs.
What follows breaks up the friendship between Barthelmess and Fairbanks, but the war drones on.Excellent cinematography of aerial fights and bombing raids.
The ending is simply superb, one full of heroism and irony.Barthelmess and Fairbanks are excellent, and Hamilton is also good.
This fine movie directed by Howard Hawks is more potent for its absolutely dazzling aerial photography and filming, one of the best I've ever seen - much better than the eighties Top Gun. First, let me say the late twenties to late thirties was the height of what is known as the Aviator movie.
Like the pilots of Top Gun, they tend to go against orders given by their boss, silent screen leading man, Neil Hamilton who has the tough job of sending men on their missions, missions in which lives will surely be lost.
Barthelmess eventually takes Hamilton's job and in his shoes feels the pressures the man felt and the toughness of following necessary orders.
This is an early talkie starring Richard Barthelmess as Dick Courtney and Douglas Fairbanks Jr. as Doug Scott, a couple of World War I aces and the best of friends, at least at the beginning of the film.
When they return, their success causes Brand to be promoted just as he is about to punish Courtney, and now Barthelmess' Dick Courtney is named as replacement and the new commander of the unit.Now instead of risking death himself, Courtney is the one ordering others into harm's way, and it is cracking him up as he turns more and more to drink.
Now it is Scott who not only has no use for Courtney, but no use for life itself, and it is up to Courtney to make sure that Scott doesn't throw his life away.This film, like many early talkies, is long on talk but short on the kind of aerial action you'd probably expect in a film about World War I fliers.
Barthelmess gives a great and poignant performance as Dick Courtney, and he lasted longer in talking pictures than most silent film actors due to his great skill.
By the beginning of the depression, WWI seemed a wasted effort in both money and manpower, and these early talking picture war films reflected that attitude.The version of this film starring Errol Flynn is what most people remember.
Although William Wellman is the Hollywood director most associated with air films, not counting of course the self indulgent Howard Hughes, Howard Hawks with The Dawn Patrol and with Air Circus and Only Angels Have Wings can certainly hold is own against the formidable Mr. Wellman on his own turf.This may have been Howard Hawks's first sound feature and he debuted magnificently with a story about a group of fliers from the United Kingdom's Royal Flying Corps of World War I.
Group commander Neil Hamilton who has to send his men up against some of Germany's best fliers and two of his senior pilots, Richard Barthelmess and Douglas Fairbanks, Jr. Hamilton is a troubled man indeed, having to send barely trained kid pilots and he hears about it from Barthelmess and Fairbanks.One fine day, oddly enough to do a daring assault that Barthelmess and Fairbanks pull off, Hamilton gets a promotion up to the staff headquarters.
What he does and the choices he makes are the basis for the rest of this story about some of the United Kingdom's most gallant generation lost in the first terrible total war of the last century.As Fairbanks and Barthelmess criticize Hamilton in what he does, I do wonder about when they were the fresh recruits.
They were so good that they got used again in the 1938 remake of this film.The Dawn Patrol also marked the film debut of Frank McHugh who graced Warner Brothers films for the next 20 years.
In France for World War I service, British pilots Richard Barthelmess (as Dick Courtney) and Douglas Fairbanks Jr.
(as Doug "Scotty" Scott) clash with commander Neil Hamilton (as Drake Brand) over his decisions to send young fliers out on suicide missions in rickety planes.
Taking the lead, Mr. Barthelmess decides to go over Hamilton's head, completing a dangerous mission with Mr. Fairbanks co-piloting.
Hamilton threatens to have him court-martialed, but a worse fate awaits Barthelmess - he is promoted to commander of the "Flight Squadron"...Now in charge, Barthelmess must order young fliers out on suicide missions in rickety planes.
Responding to his own superiors, Barthelmess includes his pal's bright-eyed young brother William Janney (as Gordon "Donny" Scott) on "The Dawn Patrol" - although it could lead to tragedy.
The command post scenes are vivid and the aviation exciting, with director Howard Hawks performing double duty as the dreaded "Von Richter".******* The Dawn Patrol (7/10/30) Howard Hawks ~ Richard Barthelmess, Douglas Fairbanks Jr., Neil Hamilton, William Janney.
'The Dawn Patrol' is not one of Hawks' best and there is a preference for the 1938 film with Errol Flynn, despite there being the argument of it being pointless it did feel more polished, more natural and every bit as emotional.1930's 'The Dawn Patrol' does suffer a little from limitations caused in the transition from silent to talkie.
The flying sequences still come over as remarkably powerful and rousing today, and most of the script is thoughtful and gripping, heavy-handedness wasn't too big an issue here.'The Dawn Patrol' has a compelling story, perfectly conveying the futility and passion of war, the comrades' horrors and conflicts and showing grace even under pressure.Characters are not stereotypes in any way, instead compellingly real characters with human and relatable conflicts.
Can find nothing to fault Richard Barthelmess, Douglas Fairbanks Jnr or Neil Hamilton, who all perform with authority and poignancy.Overall, a good film if not the greatest air epic.
7/10 Bethany Cox. Air War. Many on this board have compared this movie to TOP GUN which is a good movie but lacks Dawn Patrol's depth.The early version of DAWN PATROL tells a complex tale of leadership and command best illustrated by the scene in which the commanding officer is promoted out of the unit and command falls into the hands of his highly critical, hot dog, second in command.
Top Gun is more of an adventure story of a hot dog pilot.Movies comparable to Dawn Patrol in the military war genre which attain the understanding of the conflict at the top.are Major Dundee, Twelve O'Clock High and surprisingly the John Wayne film Flying Leathernecks.This film was remade in 1938 with Errol Flynn in the lead role.
However, this wasn't really a bad thing, as the story itself did have more depth than the other two films--focusing on the pressure on WWI pilots and the fragility of their lives.
In many ways, it reminded me of WWII films, COMMAND DECISION and 12 O'CLOCK HIGH because they, too, talk about the burden of leadership and responsibility of sending men to their deaths.
I thought no one could beat Errol Flynn and David Niven in the two lead roles, until I saw the original, "Flight Commander" which starred Richard Barthelmess, Neil Hamilton and Douglas Fairbanks,Jr.
(Basil Rathbone played the Neil Hamilton role as Commander of the doomed fliers in the '38 version).
It seems some of the same great aerial footage was used in both films.If I had to pick one, I like this (1930) version better as it was emotionally more satisfying; it had more 'heart'.
Details fairly well the burden of command, of sending pilots to almost certain death.Incredibly good flying action scenes, especially for 1930.
Pity that American actors had to be used for some parts, as it ruins the authenticity somewhat.For some reason the movie was remade 8 years later, also as The Dawn Patrol, and with Errol Flynn in the lead role.
There are always casualties and he faces challenges from his more experienced flyers, especially Richard Barthelmess (Courtney) who questions the decisions to send out inexperienced pilots in sub-standard aircraft to take on German military veterans.
The dawn patrol must continue.James Finlayson of Laurel & Hardy fame pops up in this film and within seconds he throws out a "Doh!" - a quality moment.
The Dawn Patrol tells the story of a British flying squadron in WW I.
Dick Courtney (Richard Barthelmess) is the ace pilot facing the problem that his squadron is sent on mission impossible almost every day.
Major Brand (Neil Hamilton) is his commander who suffers under the circumstances that he has to send inexperienced pilots on those missions with the knowledge that every time his squadron is at least halved.The first half of the film we see the struggle between Courtney and Brand.
Taking into account that this movie was made in the early thirties the war in the air is very well pictured.
Still I don't think that The Dawn Patrol gives a realistic view of the lives of RAF pilots during the Great War. It wouldn't be possible to consume so many alcohol and still control those early airplanes to survive the missions into enemy territory.The film shows a lot of respect for the pilots but also for the enemy.
The most striking moment in the film is the salute that Courtney gives the German pilot who has just shot him down.
The pilots are portrayed as modern knights whose war in the air knows other rules and the dirty war on the ground.So in a year wherein legendary anti war films like All Quiet on the Western Front and West front 1918 were made The Dawn Patrol was already a bit old fashioned.
Although the harsh reality of war is shown by the losses of young men's lives and the hard choices that the command of squadron had to made the film also glorifies the pilots, their loyalty and their respect for their enemy.
As said better movies are made about the Great War and the circumstances the soldiers were in..
The troubles facing a World War I British flying squadron with a high casualty rate.
It's a somewhat conventional war movie that's a little rough around the edges as an early talkie, but wins you over with strong character work, especially from the leads Douglas Fairbanks Jr., Richard Barthelmess and Neil Hamilton.
Although the film could use some scoring to enhance the experience (there's only a bit of diegetic music from the phonograph), there are two fantastic action sequences with stunning aerial photography and stunts, particularly the raid on the German camp.
(Note: although IMDb calls this film "Dawn Patrol" like its 1938 remake, the original title was "Flight Command," and it is occasionally screened under that title by TCM.
Neither should be mistaken for the much-inferior 1940 "Flight Command" about Navy pilots, which starred Robert Taylor.) In either version, "Dawn Patrol" is a stirring and exciting story of the courage shown by pilots who know they or their friends will likely be killed on one of their missions, and the anguish their commanders feel when sending them to their deaths.
Set on the battlefields of WWI, it is filled with exciting and realistic (because it IS real) flying from the age of "knights of the air." In fact, whole sequences (especially flying scenes and the climactic attack) were lifted directly from this film for use in the remake.
1938's Errol Flynn (as Dick Courtney) was more involving than 1930's Richard Barthelmess, a veteran actor whose performance retains the somewhat stilted quality of silent film era.
And although Douglas Fairbanks Jr. was excellent in the 1930 version as pilot Doug Scott, David Niven in the same role positively sparkles in several more light-hearted, even comedic scenes.
And of course, 1938's sneery Basil Rathbone makes for a much more despicable Major Brand (as the story calls for) than the original film's Neil Hamilton.Furthermore, current (as of 2012) releases of 1930's "Flight Command / Dawn Patrol" are not as visually clear in all scenes as the later version, and also have a lot of scratchy sounds and low rumble in the soundtrack, which are especially distracting in quieter scenes, particularly since the 1930 film did not have a musical soundtrack.
The Dawn Patrol is a 1930 war film focusing on the aviation aspects of the Great War. The story follows Dick Courtney, an ace pilot fighting for the Royal Flying Corps.
As the plot progresses, Courtney's unit is faced with endless suicide missions and heavy casualty rates.The movie is a true-to-form war story.
There are also many great action shots, such as aerial views of bombs being dropped and the resulting explosions.Unfortunately, the movie is faced with many moments of bad acting.
Pretty good story of airmen in the First World War, flying desperate missions against German troops and superior German airplanes and pilots, including the dreaded Baron von Richter.
The gramophone plays a scratchy "Poor Butterfly" (how apt) and the men drink and sing "The world is made up of lies/ So hurrah for the next man who dies." The pilots are in good shape, pretty chipper, compared to their commander, who is filled with guilt and rapidly becoming a neural shambles.
The men can't understand this until one of them, Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., is promoted to Flight Commander and takes his place.The film is an early talky.
The 1938 version of The Dawn Patrol is one of those remakes which is a perfectly fine film in its own right but you do have to question is it necessary especially when it is largely a shot for shot remake with various changes made to the dialogue.
The original Dawn Patrol from 1930 is a superb film to begin with and one of the better films of the early sound period.
However, when your remake has Errol Flynn, David Niven and Basil Rathbone, I can't be too critical on its existence.The Dawn Patrol from 1930 was Howard Hawks' first feature-length talkie.
Watching a film about an armed conflict made by people who saw it first-hand really adds that extra element.Hawk's Dawn Patrol is an early talkie which I believe benefits from being just that.
I know many dismiss early talking pictures as being static but some films from this period would not have been as effective in my eyes if they had been made a few years later; films which benefit from the rough and gritty nature of early talkies such as war movies like All Quiet on the Western Front, Hell's Angels and War Nurse or others like the prison drama The Big House.
Surprisingly, however, The Dawn Patrol is one pre-code film which appears to be absent of any pre-code material making the process of remaking it in 1938 easier.Who succeeds more in the role of the Squadron's leader Courtney; Errol Flynn or Richard Barthelmess?
As strong as Flynn's performance is, the contradictory traits in Barthelmess' Courtney makes for a more interesting performance in my eyes.The Dawn Patrol would be one of Basil Rathbone's few outings as one of the good guys, well kind off; he still has to perform the dirty work.
It's interesting to see him playing a character who shows sympathy towards others and even gets revenge on Errol, one-upping him when he gets promoted to wing and names Courtney in the new in command of the patrol.
Rathbone also has my favourite moment of the remake (a moment which isn't in the original) in which his assistant Phipps (Donald Crisp) speaks of how wonderful it would be if they had a dog at the squadron headquarters, only for Brand to be completely zoned out that he doesn't hear him, only to then look over at him and ask him why he's pretending to play with a dog - a great piece of dark comic relief.But who comes on top as the better Major Brand; Basil Rathbone or Neil Hamilton?
While Hamilton's performance does have more to it, Rathbone is simply a far more charismatic and cool screen presence.Who makes for the better role of Courtney's closet friend Scott; David Niven or Douglas Fairbanks Jr?
David Niven, on the other hand, is an actor I have great esteem for while his real-life friendship with Errol Flynn translates into the film, making the friendship aspect is stronger and more endearing in the remake than in the original.
Fairbanks is my only big complaint with the original Dawn Patrol so it's David Niven all the way.The aerial footage from the original is reused in the remake and there is a noticeable difference in image quality between reused footage from original and the newly filmed material.
It's still exciting stuff none the less.There are no good guys or bad guys in The Dawn Patrol.
He speaks in German but from what I've gathered in the original version of the film he calls them friends and how the fighting has "absolutely nothing to do with personal hate" and that "it is a sport/game and our duty as soldiers is clear".Would The Dawn Patrol be classified as an anti-war film?
Watching the action scenes in The Dawn Patrol I do feel the same kind of feeling I get when I watch an action/adventure film but then I have to remind myself of the horrors of war.
Is The Dawn Patrol condemning war altogether or just the tactics used during this war such as the use of young inexperienced pilots?
COMMENT: You won't find The Dawn Patrol on any Best Films of the Year lists.
These scenes - and in fact all the exciting action material - were re-used (slightly trimmed) in the 1938 re-make directed by Edmund Goulding), which has the rare honor of being a re-make which is better than the original, thanks to the skills of its superior cast - Basil Rathbone, Errol Flynn, David Niven, Donald Crisp, Melville Cooper and Barry Fitzgerald. |
tt0040723 | Raw Deal | Prisoner Joe Sullivan (Dennis O'Keefe), who has "taken the fall" for an unspecified crime, breaks out of jail with the help of his girl, Pat (Claire Trevor), who also serves as a first-person narrator in the story. Neither is aware that the escape has been facilitated by mobster Rick Coyle (Raymond Burr), a sadistic pyromaniac, who has arranged for Joe to be killed in order to avoid paying Joe his share of $50,000 for the crime. When the break-out succeeds, Rick decides that he must have Joe done in some other way.
Pat and Joe kidnap a social worker, Ann (Marsha Hunt), who has been visiting Joe in prison, trying to reform him. This begins a doomed film noir love triangle. A fight with a vicious thug (John Ireland) ends when Ann shoots Joe's attacker in the back. After acting in Joe's defense, Ann realizes she is in love with him. Relenting, he sets her free and prepares to flee the country with Pat. In their hotel room, Pat receives a phone call warning them that Rick has seized Ann and will harm her unless Joe and Pat come out of hiding. Pat lies to Joe that it was a call from the hotel desk clerk since she does not want him to go back to Ann.
After boarding a ship, Joe attempts to convince Pat that they can start a new life in South America together. A guilt-stricken Pat now confesses to Joe that Ann is in danger. Joe races to save Ann from her captor, Rick. Under the cover of a thick fog, Joe manages to get past Rick's thugs and sneaks into Rick's room. A gunfight erupts with Rick and Joe shooting each other and inadvertently starting a fire. Joe and Rick, both wounded, fight hand-to-hand with Joe finally pushing Rick through an upper story window to his death. Mortally wounded, lying in the street, Joe dies in Ann's arms as Pat, under arrest, looks on. Seeing the happiness in Joe's face, Pat comments in voice-over that "This is right for Joe. This is what he wanted." | violence, romantic | train | wikipedia | This movie, a cheap b-production with only one actor with stand-out talent, Claire Trevor, and a young powerful Raymond Burr, manages to seem authentic all the way through because it doesn't hold back on the violence or the threat of violence.
O'Keefe uses two women he knows, his floozy Trevor and the good-girl counselor he really loves (she's cast in light and draws him like a moth) as cover.
The movie then follows O'Keefe as he does a mini-FUGITIVE, like the television show, making love to his women and encountering a raging lunatic in the woods who doesn't have anything to do with him, but might get O'Keefe caught anyway by swarming police on the hunt for the maniac.In this rough noir, you get a suicide by cop, a guy fighting not to get his face impaled on a set of wall antlers, a flaming friccasee thrown in a drunk woman's face, a nasty deception and the good girl getting tortured, and a bloody final encounter between psycho Burr and O'Keefe, with plenty of face-ripping and falling from burning buildings.
That's not standard stuff, and if you can get into babe Trevor with light shimmering on her lips as she tries to figure out how to save her thug O'Keefe from the police, Burr, and the younger angel ready to steal him away, then you will enjoy hell out of this film..
It really is a beautiful, brooding movie.The key theme is escape, as a convict is on the run and he takes two women with him, one his girlfriend who is sort of "bad" and one an admirer who is basically "good." The two don't get along of course, and in the process of fleeing from one situation to another (pretty much always at night) we see the man switch from one kind of woman to another.
It stars Dennis O'Keefe, Claire Trevor, Marsha Hunt, John Ireland & Raymond Burr.
Paul Sawtell scores the music and John Alton is the cinematographer.Convict Joe Sullivan (O'Keefe), incarcerated after taking a fall, breaks out of jail with the help of his girl, Pat Cameron (Trevor).
Kidnapping Joe's social worker, Ann Martin (Hunt), Joe & Pat hit the road, it's a road that will lead to desperate consequences for many.A raw fatalistic film noir that sees the ace pairing of director Mann and photographer Alton.
One of the best decisions made by Mann and Sawtell is that of the narration by Trevor, in itself unusual for a woman of noir to narrate, it's sorrowful and mournful in tone anyway, but with Sawtell scoring it with the theremin it plays out as part of a nightmarish dream-state.O'Keefe was not the leading man type, but that's perfect for this film, he offers a credibility to a man whose life has taken a down turn, where his only comfort is being a thorn between two roses, but with that comes more problems as he seeks to only breathe the fresh air of freedom.
Mann's film would have been great and got through on his direction and script anyway, but with Alton's camera it ends up being essential for the film noir faithful.From the opening, where the credits show up on the background of prison bar shadows, to the no cop out-classic noir-ending, Raw Deal hits the mark.
John Alton's cinematography perfectly captures the noir-like atmosphere of San Francisco as does Trevor's voice-over narration accompanied by the haunting sound of a theremin playing..
Gripping film noir with Dennis O'Keefe as Joe Sullivan, a man who escapes from prison with help from Pat, the woman (Claire Trevor) who's loved him and stuck by him for years.
Claire Trevor is especially good playing one of her washed-up floozy roles, and Raymond Burr is at his most diabolical as a pyromaniac crime boss.
Joseph Emmett "Joe" Sullivan (Dennis O'Keefe) is in the State Prison for taken the blame for the gangster Rick Coyle (Raymond Burr) that owes him US$ 50,000.00.
"Raw Deal" is a film-noir with a triangle of love between an ambiguous criminal that wants to be a good man, his experienced lover and a naive young woman that also falls in love for him.
Raw Deal is Anthony Mann's 1948 crime noir follow-up to the slightly better T-Men. Again it stars James Cagney-wannabe Dennis O'Keefe this time as bad apple Joe Sullivan.
And I think it's interesting how the sexual dynamics between Dennis O'Keefe and both women (played by Claire Trevor and Marsha Hunt) are continued throughout the story.
He Shoulda Stayed in the Can. Good, tough stuff from director Anthony Mann and a real film noir to use that battered term.
Pat (Claire Trevor) narrates the story of her involvement with boyfriend Joe (Dennis O'Keefe) from the night that he escapes from prison until she is arrested.
Raymond Burr who plays "Rick" and John Ireland who plays "Fantail" make a couple of good bad guys and there is one disturbing scene where Burr's character throws a dish which is on fire onto his girlfriend's face - we didn't really need that.
Dennis O'Keefe stars in this crackerjack noir film directed by Anthony Mann.
O'Keefe plays a man who took a rap for gangster kingpin Raymond Burr and now he's thinking he's gotten the bad end of a Raw Deal.
As dark as that classic was, Raw Deal is a good deal darker as O'Keefe's world is getting smaller and smaller due to the bad choices he made in life.With cops and Burr looking for him, Dennis also has himself involved with two women, steady streetwise Claire Trevor and the secretary of his lawyer Marsha Hunt.
And like any classic O'Neill play there is an inevitability about these people especially O'Keefe.Before Anthony Mann moved on to westerns and bigger budgets he did some good noir work in the Forties and Raw Deal is a fine example..
In this picture, Dennis O'Keefe,(Joe Sullivan),"Las Vegas Shakedown", plays a convict in prison, who takes the rap for Raymond Burr,(Rick Coyle),"Ironside TV Series,'69, who is a big time hood who promises Joe Sullivan he will give him $50,000.
"Raw Deal" from 1958 is directed by Anthony Mann and stars Dennis O'Keefe, Claire Trevor, Marsha Hunt, Raymond Burr, and John Ireland.The film is narrated by Pat (Trevor), who is the girlfriend of escaped convict Joe (O'Keefe).
Mann kept moving up the director ladder, but in his early days directed some terrific noirs.The cast is excellent, with Trevor's aging floosie, desperately in love with Joe, a standout.
"Raw Deal" is one of the best film noirs I've seen, with seedy production values that enhance the seediness of the story.Dennis O'Keefe plays a man who escapes from prison with the help of his girlfriend, Claire Trevor in a fabulous performance.
He then sets off on a plan to get vengeance against the crime boss (Raymond Burr) that landed him in prison in the first place.This is as cynical, brutal and jaded as noirs get, reminding me in its nearly total absence of moral considerations and its lack of redemption for just about any of its characters of another supremely cynical noir, "Detour." One of the most interesting things to me about "Raw Deal" is how much it's actually about the women around our main character, almost more than it's about the main character himself.
It's as if the women can't help but be dragged down by the criminal world they've attached themselves to -- the social worker ironically becomes a killer, while the gangster moll is the one who faces the film's primary moral dilemma.Terrific off-kilter compositions and camera work by John Alton (a surreal scene late in the movie filmed through fog is a stand out) heighten the sense of decay and sleaze.
Movies like "Raw Deal" are what got me hooked on film noir in the first place.Grade: A.
Claire Trevor proves her superior acting talents once again as a "Corkscrew Alley" woman with 100% noir values and outlook on life.You also get brutish sick noir from Raymond Burr, and classic John Ireland tough-guy thug action.This movie is a definite recommend for anyone interested in the genre or for anyone interested in sincerely motivated performances by stars at the peak of their talent..
The point of view here isn't from the hard-boiled Joe (Dennis O'Keefe, one man you don't want to mess with, unless you can 'get under his skin') who's just escaped from prison to settle old scores, but from his old lady Pat (Claire Trevor), a dame with years behind her waiting and waiting, and after being patient for so long (as she tells us in a constantly eerie, mournful voice-over, almost something one might expect from The Magnificent Ambersons) she busts him out.
But her good side pushes Pat away from Joe, and a little closer to Ann despite the danger of a guy with a lot to lose holding a gun and with a score to settle via gangster Rick (Raymond Burr, playing well as a dirty fat heel).The music set behind her, which doesn't change all that much, sounds as if it's out of a chilling dream, where the fatalism has rocketed through the roof and there's not much she can do about it.
Yet Mann and director of photography capture so many beautiful and stark moments, pivotal ones as part of the artistic peak of film-noir, especially in the scene on the boat as Joe rattles on about the good things to come.
The mood is near perfect, the character actors are all up to snuff (Hunt actually delves a little into how she's changed forever by the trip, by the firing of a gun that carries more implications than a less ambitious film would allow), and in a fairly short running time there's a substantial amount of craft to go alongside a crackerjack story where conventions are given added weight by attitude and a predilection to imagery that might not make it in some noirs (the climax with Joe and Rick, the flames of hell right around them in the office).
Knowing he is looking to escape, Rick greases some wheels to help Joe's girlfriend Pat to organize an escape – all with the knowledge that once he is out he will be certainly caught in the resulting police dragnet and either killed or sent back to prison for even longer; either way he'll be out of Rick's hair.I have watched a few noirs recently and the last couple in particular were a lot slower than I would have liked, so part of the appeal of Raw Deal was the short running time, which suggested that it wouldn't be taking too long over anything.
Hobbled from the jump by the first uninspiring sight of Dennis O'Keefe's flabby medicine ball of a face, Raw Deal is a film that will only please those who giggle automatically at noir tropes and who think of the 1940's as some kitschy wonderland of slang and fedoras instead of real people backed, as they are in every era and every country, into existential corners.Let's take the scene where Raymond Burr shoves a hotpot of cherries jubilee in a groupie's face.
Into their midst comes miss sweetness and light, young Marsha Hunt, and we have a bizarre escapees-a-trois throughout the film, with tough gal and good gal not speaking as they compete for whose heart can throb the most for O'Keefe on the run, who treats them both pretty rough and is more interested in who might be shooting at him than which woman's eyes are on fire with stuff that can keep for later.
Marsha Hunt and Claire Trevor are both brilliant in their roles, as are O'Keefe and the cowardly, double-crossing and oily gangster, Raymond Burr.
He's sensitive."On top of this, we have the overall gray and "noir" mood of the picture, about a man with very bad odds (Joe Sullivan/O'Keefe), and two women, one of them his loyal accomplice Pat (Claire Trevor), who is also narrator of the story, and Ann (Marsha Hunt) who is forced to join them.
This is a movie in which there are not many surprises for the viewer.Cardboard characters:the hero,who ,when he was a child ,saved his mates from a fire,and then became naughty when he turned 16;the sadistic treacherous gangster;the two female parts:the good virtuous girl who struggled hard to live decently;the bad gal who hides a big heart though.This villainess is played very well by Claire Trevor who's given a special treatment by the director:every five minutes,we know about her frames of mind ,thanks to her voice-over,with an ominous musical background.It does not amount to much, anyway,because the actress is gifted enough to convey what she is feeling without that.
It's got Genre Icons...Director Anthony Mann...Cinematographer John Alton...Actors Dennis O'Keefe, Claire Trevor, Raymond Burr, and John Ireland.
The Villain Rick (Burr) is Sadistic, Selfish, Flashy, and a Pyromaniac.The Story is a Downbeat Display of Duality where Joe (O'keefe), Pat, and Ann (Marsha Hunt), All have a Conflicting Conscience and a Constant Struggle to Redeem the Opposing Oppression of Psychological Maladies.Once Pat's Narration Begins at the Start of the Film with its Ethereal and Creepy Music and She Visits Joe in a Prison, a Scene Filled with Odd Angles, Barred and Sprawled with Geometrical Intrusions, the Film Presents Itself as Something Unordinary and Compelling.It Also Includes Typical, Cynical, and Off-Beat Dialog
"Keep your eye on her, she might go soprano."
"I'll be through with this in three-quarters-of a-half-an hour.".A Must See for Fans of Film-Noir, B-Movies, Anthony Mann, John Alton, Crime Movies, and Expressionistic Surreal Cinema..
It was that bad.Journeyman actor Dennis O'Keefe was fair enough as the escaped convict, but the really good parts were John Ireland and Raymond Burr as tough hoods.
Dennis O'Keefe, Claire Trevor and Marsha Hunt all shine in this 1948 film.Though as a child O'Keefe saved other kids from a fire,he became a criminal and supposedly took the rap for a sadistic person, played by the reliable Raymond Burr.O'Keefe plays the part perfectly as a deprived person seeking to live a better life in a world that has condemned him.In the same year that she won her supporting Oscar for "Key Largo," Claire Trevor again plays a moll.
Although the film runs a scant 78 minutes, it manages to tell its story and hold the viewer's interest throughout.Dennis O'Keefe stars as a convict who's escape is engineered by the crime boss (Raymond Burr) who had set him up for the fall in the first place, with the hope that O'Keefe wiil be killed in the escape attempt.
John Ireland is along as Burr's hitman who gets into an exciting fight with O'Keefe in a darkened storeroom."Raw Deal" is a good movie that didn't get the praise it deserved..
Of course that doesn't happen and so he finds himself on the run with two vying women in tow, the first, his long-standing, long-suffering girl-friend played by Claire Trevor, the second, his lawyer's clean-living secretary, Ann, played by Marsha Hunt whom he inveigles into his getaway against her will, but who falls for him anyway as things play out.It all ends on a dark, misty night (naturally) with O'Keefe confronting Burr and a fiery, violent and naturally pessimistic ending, with nobody winning, in true noir style.
RAW DEAL – 1948Director Anthony Mann and cinematographer John are both firing on all cylinders in this hard hitting film-noir.
The top flight cast includes Dennis O'Keefe, Claire Trevor, John Ireland, Marsha Hunt, Regis Toomey and Raymond Burr.
Ann Martin (Marsha Hunt) is a legal assistant who tells him that with good behaviour he could possibly get released in 2 or 3 years time and his girlfriend Pat Regan (Claire Trevor) informs him that arrangements have been made for him to escape.
And, when O'Keefe slapped Claire Trevor across the face, I knew this was a Noir film with little sentiment (a hallmark of better Noir).Unfortunately, while the film had so many elements I liked, there was one clichéd role that seriously detracted from the gritty realism and that was the character played by Marsha Hunt.
Tremendous film from director Anthony Mann is a tour de force in the noir department, bringing in a whole barrage of nifty visual cinematic treats and noir elements like: prison escape, jealousy, kidnapping, bitter darkness, criminals on the lam, fistfights, gunfights, revenge, a cold femme fatale and a fire-happy, sadistic crime boss.Mann's direction is the star, but Dennis O'Keefe, Marsha Hunt, Claire Trevor and Raymond Burr give excellent, realistic performances as the prison escapee, a kidnapped female lawyer, faithful femme-fatale and crime boss, respectively.Favorite scenes: * Trevor surprised by a speeding train as she waits for her boyfriend to escape from prison and get into the getaway car * The hellacious fight between Joe and Rick's thugs (at the supposed meeting place with Rick)* Bad-ass, agitated boss Rick throwing his blazing dessert on some chick who spills a drink on him!If you like film noir, this is a must-see, one-of-the-best, don't-missers..
Director Anthony Mann teams again with Dennis O'Keefe for another Film-Noir crime drama.
A hard-boiled criminal Joe Sullivan(O'Keefe) escapes from prison to take out revenge on the killer who framed him and owes him $50 Grand, Rick Coyle(Raymond Burr).
Pat (Claire Trevor) helps bust erstwhile boyfriend Joe Sullivan (Dennis O'Keefe) out of prison.
She falls for a common street thug like Joe Sullivan (Dennis O'Keefe), has a bleeding heart for a wife killer who crashes Oscar's Tavern, and then turns around and shoots one of the henchmen sent by big Rick Coyle (Raymond Burr) to put Sullivan away.
Overall, Raw Deal is a well-made noir film from Anthony Mann, one of the best directors ever to have worked in Hollywood.
I know it was directed by Anthony Mann, who was to go on to do some really interesting things over the next decade, but this is for the most part a routine flick.Basically, Dennis O'Keefe breaks out of the slams with the help of his moll, Claire Trevor. |
tt0069097 | Play It Again, Sam | Set in San Francisco, the film begins with the closing scenes of Casablanca, with Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman. We then see that the main character, Allan Felix (Woody Allen), is watching the film in a cinema, mouth agape. He leaves the cinema regretting that he will never be like Rick.
Apart from apparitions of Bogart he also has frequent flashbacks of conversations with his ex-wife, who constantly mocked his sexual inadequacy.
Allan Felix has just been through a messy divorce. His best friend, Dick Christie (Tony Roberts), and Dick's wife, Linda (Diane Keaton), try to convince him to go out with women again, setting him up on a series of blind dates, all of which turn out badly. Throughout the film, he is seen receiving dating advice from the ghost of Humphrey Bogart (played by Jerry Lacy), who is visible and audible only to Allan. Allan's ex-wife Nancy (Susan Anspach) also makes fantasy appearances, as he imagines conversations with her about the breakdown of their marriage. On one occasion, the fantasy seems to run out of control, with both Bogart and Nancy appearing.
When it comes to women, he attempts to become sexy and sophisticated, in particular he tries to be like his idol, Bogart, only to end up ruining his chances by being too clumsy. Eventually, he develops feelings for Linda, around whom he feels relatively at ease and does not feel the need to put on the mask.
At the point where he finally makes his move on Linda (aided by comments from Bogart) a vision of his ex-wife appears and shoots Bogart, leaving him without advice. He then makes an awkward move. Linda runs off but returns, realizing that Allan loves her. The song "As Time Goes By" plays as they kiss, with flashes from Casablanca.
However, their relationship is doomed, just as it was for Rick and Ilsa in Casablanca.
Dick comes home early from Cleveland and confides to Allan that he thinks Linda is having an affair, not realizing that her affair is with Allan. Dick expresses to Allan his love for Linda.
The ending is an allusion to Casablanca's famous ending. Dick is catching a flight to Cleveland, Linda is after him, and Allan is chasing Linda. The fog, the aircraft engine start-ups, the trenchcoats, and the dialogue are all reminiscent of the film, as Allan nobly explains to Linda why she has to go with her husband, rather than stay behind with him.
Allan quotes a closing line from Casablanca, saying, "If that plane leaves the ground and you're not on it, you'll regret it; maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon, and for the rest of your life." "That is beautiful", Linda says, causing Allan to admit, "It's from Casablanca. ... I've waited my whole life to say it!" His journey is complete. The music from the scene in Casablanca resumes the theme "As Time Goes By", and the film ends. | psychedelic, satire, romantic | train | wikipedia | Directed by Herbert Ross, "Play It Again, Sam" (1972) is Woody Allen's film from the beginning to the final credits.
I am not a fan of "Casablanca" at all but if my favorite Artist is so much in love with it, maybe I should give it another try.When Allan's wife Nancy leaves him, his best friend Dick (Tony Roberts) and his lovely wife Linda (Diane Keaton) try to fix him up with several eligible pretty young ladies.
"Play It Again, Sam" is a remarkable movie for several reasons and one of them - it was the beginning of a wonderful working (and not only) relationship between Allen and Keaton that would result in the movies "Bananas" (1971), "Sleeper" (1973), "Love and Death" (1975), "Annie Hall" (1977), "Interiors" (1978), "Manhattan" (1979), "Radio Days" (1987), and "Manhattan Murder Mystery" (1993) and will bring them both well deserved fame and Oscars.
My first and foremost thought about this movie is that you MUST see "Casablanca" (1942) first, for two reasons:First, "Play it Again, Sam" contains not only archival footage from the 1942 classic, but numerous dialogic and other references which would be lost on someone who hasn't seen "Casablanca."Second, and more important, is that the surprise ending of "Casablanca" is revealed in the *very first scene* of "Play it again, Sam."Beyond that, "Play it again, Sam" is probably second only to "Annie Hall" among the Woody Allen / Diane Keaton films.
Woody fans will enjoy the neurotic, psychosexual ramblings of the central character, which are typical of his movies, as well as the numerous elements of physical comedy, which are not as common in Woody Allen films.
This classic 1972 comedy written by and starring Woody Allen gives him two, one the specter of Humphrey Bogart, the other a young Diane Keaton just working her way into film.Woody plays Allan Felix, a film critic who has just been dumped by his wife and sets off to fill the hole in his heart.
Keaton is a terrific foil for Allen, both platonically and as it turns out, otherwise, while Tony Roberts as her husband (this being his first of many Allen films, too) makes for a wry straight man with his constant phone calls and his appearances in some fun fantasy send-ups, the best of them in Italian.You really like the characters in this one.
But you laugh a lot watching this film, a nice vehicle for Woody's observational humor and for seeing the game of love played in its most ineptly enjoyable form..
Back in the day when Woody was just as slapstick as he was verbal, "Play It Again, Sam" tells the story of Allen as a divorced film critic crushed by the failure of his marriage.
He is aided by his best friend Dick and his wife Linda (Woody regulars Tony Roberts and Diane Keaton), who assist him in setting up one disastrous date after another.
Because the film was directed by Herbert Ross, the typical rambling dialogue and back-and-forth editing is toned down a bit, so for an Allen vehicle, the movie feels more mannered and has more of a narrative strength than Woody's other wacky 70's productions.
The plot of the movie plays out like a tribute to Casablanca, and it sees recently dumped Allen falling in love with his best friend's wife, all the while under the watchful eye of the great Humphrey Bogart, whom he sees in his daydreams.The humour in this film is awesome and also amazingly funny.
In San Francisco, the neurotic, awkward and clumsy film critic Allan (Woody Allen) that is a fan of "Casablanca" is left by his wife Nancy (Susan Anspach) that is tired of their boring life.
Easily my favorite movie with Woody that he did not direct, 'Play it Again, Sam' is a hysterically funny homage to Bogart, divorce, adultery, dating, an overactive imagination, meeting women in museums, and calling your office with all the telephone numbers you can be reached at..this is some great stuff and Woody's social awkwardness and pratfalls and neuroses will have you laughing throughout.
And Jerry Lacy is VERY funny playing Bogart and giving Allen advice.If you don't like Woody Allen movies this probably won't change your mind.
Naturally, the film is mostly funny when it doesn't.If not women, Allan has two friends, Dick (Tony Roberts), a fitting name for the workaholic real estate agent whose only running (sometimes irritating) gag consists on giving the phone number on each place he's in, and Linda (Diane Keaton), a gentle and sensitive soul, driven by a sort of maternal care toward Allan.
When Allan finally gets to play the role of his all-time idol Bogie, replaying the climax of "Casablanca", he precisely achieved his dream because he wasn't trying to be Bogie, the arc was closed."Play it Again, Sam" is adapted on a Woody Allen's play, and appropriately features all the Allenian trademarks: self-derision, ethnic references, a cute and tender romance that foreshadows the best coming between Allen and Keaton (in a way, "Play it Again, Sam" is like the ancestor of "Annie Hall").
It is filled with great comic lines and slapstick, but carries a serious undertone in it's reverence for Bogart and his movies, and particularly for Casablanca which this movie mimics in it's story of love between Woody and Diane Keaton, who is married to Tony Roberts.
The essential plot of Play It Again, Sam is the plot of Casablanca set to the comedy genre.Woody schleppy, nerdy character reveres old movies, and particularly Bogart's films.
Allen plays his usual nebbish character, this time a film critic named Allan Felix, whose free-spirit wife leaves him for being a boring observer of life.
Eventually, the inevitable happens when Linda and Allan fall in love.What makes the predictable premise unique is the way Allen celebrates classic movies, mainly Warner Brothers melodramas, and has the characters reenact famous scenes to move the story along.
Jerry Lacy does a reasonable impersonation of Bogie, and the long missing Susan Anspach plays Allen's wife with spacey vitriol.While the film obviously lacks the emotional depth and improvisational style of Allen's later films (the obvious comparison being 1977's "Annie Hall" starring the same three leads), it still has a quaint charm to go with its romantic comedy conventionality.
A warmly funny, enormously likable film, it contains some absolutely hilarious moments (watch for his first blind date and the scene where he follows - and overdoes - the advice that Bogart's ghost gave him to tell Diane Keaton how beautiful she is).
With the help of his two friends (Diane Keaton and Tony Roberts) and an imaginary Humphrey Bogart, he attempts to find a mate, but falls for the wrong one.Like I said in the summary, I really don't find Woody Allen to be that great of an actor.
Woody wrote this brilliant comedy, based on his own stage play, and starred as Allan Felix, a (neurotic, of course) film critic that, after being dumped by his wife, is constantly visited by the ghost of his idol, Humphrey Bogart (Jerry Lacy).
The only woman who seems to be ideal for Allan is Linda Christie (Diane Keaton), a close friend and, also, the wife of Allan's best friend, Dick (Tony Roberts).I think "Play It Again, Sam" is easily one of the best comedies ever made, almost in the same level as the classic "Annie Hall".
If you love old movies, or great comedy, or Woody Allen and Diane Keaton in their early prime, then PLAY IT AGAIN, SAM will still deliver the goods 30+ years after its first release.
While technically not a Woody Allen film (he wrote it, based on his own Broadway play, but it was directed by Herbert Ross), it bears the mark of the Woodster during his funny, soulful early period.
Also, another weird effect of this film (and this may just be because i've watched 8 woody allen movies in two weeks) is that i've developed a crush on Diane Keaton.
The "imagined" conversations with Woody Allen's mind's eye view of Humphrey Bogart (or Rick) and the weaving of references and movie clips of the original "Casablanca", take a story that could be flat and merely a run of the mill "Tale of 2 Cities", romantic triangle clone and elevate it to brilliance.
Woody Allen is another comic genius who has been able to get away with playing essentially the same character in most of his films and still managing to come up with a fresh angle every time.
(Or, at least, almost every time).Allan Felix, Woody's character in "Play It Again, Sam" is, as anyone familiar with the great man's oeuvre will not be surprised to learn, a nervous, self-doubting, self-deprecating, angst-ridden, neurotic Jewish intellectual.
(The film makes reference to all these and other Bogart movies).Allan's two friends Dick and Linda (a married couple) try to persuade him to go out with women again, leading to a series of hilariously disastrous blind dates.
In its stress on human relationships, however, it looks forward to later, more intellectual, comedies such as "Annie Hall" and "Manhattan".As always with Woody, there is a great supply of one-liners ("I wonder if she actually had an orgasm in the two years we were married, or did she fake it that night?"), but a lot of the humour in this film is character-driven.
For all Linda's eccentricities, she is clearly a loving and lovable person, and it was the ability to play characters like this that made Keaton, although not really a classical beauty, one of the sexiest actresses of the seventies."Play It Again, Sam" may lack the philosophical depth and insight into human nature of films like "Annie Hall", "Manhattan" and "Hannah and Her Sisters", but it shares their brilliant wit and humour.
Realising it is too good a piece of work not to direct, Herbert Ross takes up the reigns, and it becomes a clever, interesting experience; to see Woody playing the fool, so bad at dating, but directed by not-Woody.He seems to be slightly freer on-screen here, as if the directing shackles have been lifted and he can concentrate on his performance, the slapstick edge makes it seem like a cross between Annie Hall and Sleeper; it's really funny, and it would make a good film for couples to watch, such is the spectacular ineptitude of Woody's characters.In short, he dates women, and a vision of Humphrey Bogart dispenses advice on how he (Bogart) would handle the situation, helping him along the way, it makes for brilliant viewing.
After meeting several girls in some hilarious gone-wrong dates, Allan falls in love with Linda and has an affair with her while Dick is on a trip.I watched this movie so many times that I know most of the lines by heart.
The sketches on the dates are brilliant; Diane Keaton is as pretty as ever and they make THE perfect couple; Casablaca's references are just delicious; what can I say, its a movie that gets you smiling for a whole week.One may wonder why Woody Allen didn't want to direct this one.
Here's looking at you kid, the number one life lesson that Allen Felix takes a bit to literally, in Woody Allen's remarkable play adaptation.Herbert Ross directs Play it again Sam, the film based on the play written and Starring Woody Allen, with Diane Keaton, Toney Roberts, and Humphrey Bogart.
A sensational funny witty classic Woody Allen piece, easy to watch and just impossible to dislike.Allan Felix is traditional Woody Allen, a neurotic divorced writer who struggles to get back in the swing of things, when his friends Linda (Keaton) and Dick (Roberts) attempt several times to set Allan up with women.
Allan is however a devoted film fan and possess a passionate love for the classic Casablanca, which leads his imaginary figment of Humphrey Bogart (Jerry Lacy) to help Allan become a stud in the game.An absolute genius as always in the art of rom com, and general Woody Alleness.
Then as events go along, Allan finds he's falling in love with Linda, and the feelings may be mutual.This film is quintessential Woody Allen, playing the neurotic persona, desperate to the point of exasperation.
Coupled this with a simple plot and references to one of the great classics of all time and the result is this wonderful, funny movie.Allen plays Allan, a movie critic crushed by his divorce.
The plot naturally evokes the triangle at the centre of "Casablanca" with the move cleverly ending up by recreating the same sacrifice also at a misty airport with Woody quoting Bogey's immortal words in exelcis.Along the way, Allen crams in loads of largely self-deprecating jokes and comedic situations, like his "1-2-3-4" chat-up line on the dance-floor, his description of his roughing up by two hoods chasing his girl and his imaginings of love-rival Tony Roberts' various reactions to the news of the affair between him Allen and his wife, Diane Keaton.The playing is delightful, Roberts, whose character would have been rendered redundant if mobile phones had been around and Keaton at her kooky best (and you should see some of her outfits too!) provide great background support to Woody's monologue.
Which showed just how little he thought of Allen as someone who can impress a woman, like Linda or anyone else, to leave him!The movie touchingly recreates the final scene in the film "Casablanca" with Allen Felix doing his best Humphrey Bogart imitation by having Linda leave him for her husband Dick whom she was going back to, if very reluctantly, anyway and forget about him with both her.
Woody Allen plays Allan Felix, a divorced film critic, who wants to get back on the dating scene.That he does with the help of his friends Dick and Linda Christie (Tony Roberts and Diane Keaton).He's also a huge fan of the movie Casablanca, so he gets some help also from Humphrey Bogart (Jerry Lacy), who comes to life in his mind.But Allan isn't very smooth with girls, in fact he gets pretty nervous around them.Play It Again, Sam (1972) is a hilarious movie, that was originally a Woody's play.He wrote this movie, too, but the directing he left for Herbert Ross.Woody does what Woody does best, which is playing a neurotic Jewish man.At its funniest the movie is when Allan is trying to be cool with the ladies, failing terribly.I couldn't stop laughing when Allan caused disaster and things got thrown out of his hands when he was with women.There is also a tragic side in this character.After all, he is a man who wants to be somebody else, someone better.Mr Allen turned 70 the first day of this month and sadly he hasn't had the same success in movie business as he used to have.Hopefully his new movie Match Point changes it all.But all the fans of Woody, the present and the future, should have some time for laughter and maybe some tears watching his masterpieces from the past..
In fact, as directed by Mr. Ross, Woody Allen responds well and makes a great appearance and contributes tremendously to the success of this film.Diane Keaton, who plays Linda Christie, shows an affinity for what would follow later as she became an invaluable collaborator of Mr. Allen.
Desperate to become a swinger he is aided by friends, Diane Keaton and Tony Roberts, and by an imaginary Humphrey Bogart (Casablanca is Felix' favourite movie)to find a new woman.
Woody Allen adapted his own hit play and stars in this modestly amusing comedy about a recently-divorced film historian in San Francisco, cartoonishly insecure around women, who is fixed up on dates by his best friends and advised on relationship matters by the spirit of Humphrey Bogart in his "Casablanca" period.
His friends Dick (Tony Roberts), a workaholic businessman, and his lovely wife Linda (Diane Keaton) talk him into dating again, setting up encounters with a string of women that Allan routinely makes a mess of.
His favourite film of all time is Casablanca (he watches it on the big screen in the opening scene with his mouth agape during that famous climax), and is occasionally visited by the ghost of Humphrey Bogart (uncannily played by Jerry Lacy).
The scene between Keaton, Allan, and the imaginary Humphrey Bogart having dinner in Alan's apartment is one of the funniest pieces of material Woody Allen has ever created.
And, of course, Keaton, in her first on-screen work with Allen, displays the chemistry that would make their pairing every bit as legendary as that of Bogart and Ingrid Bergman in CASABLANCA.Woody would go on to make other movies that are arguably better and more challenging, as well as colder and more cynical, but he would never quite recapture the sense of whimsy that makes this one of his best films..
Allan Felix (Woody Allen) is a neurotic film critic and loves Casablanca.
Play It Again Sam (1972) **** (out of 4) Hilarious film has Woody Allen struggling in the dating scene, getting advice from Humphrey Bogart and then falling in love with his best friends wife (Diane Keaton).
He's your classic Woody Allen schmuck, perpetually trapped between the musings of the mind ("What's the point of anything!?") and the lusts and longings of the body ("Why won't she love me!?").Divorced from his wife and desperate to hook up with another woman, Allen spends the film bouncing from one bungled romantic date to the next, until he realises that he's in love with a character played by Diane Keaton, wife of his best friend.
It's just time when pressure from Bogart and Allan's own growing gumption will make him take the next step.One of the most remarkable things in PLAY IT AGAIN, SAM is how it becomes the first Woody Allen story to incorporate fantasy as a part of reality in a way that doesn't seem gimmicky.
His best friends, married couple Linda (Diane Keaton) and Dick (Tony Roberts) try to introduce Allen to some eligible women but none of them really like him. |
tt2639254 | A Little Chaos | After being given responsibility by King Louis XIV of France for designing and building the Gardens of Versailles, André Le Nôtre interviews candidates for the project, one of whom is a woman with an unconventional sense of gardening, Sabine de Barra. When noticing her move a potted plant in his garden prior to her interview, André confirms Sabine is not a conformist in gardening. She tells him she wants to give them something uniquely French and not follow classical and renaissance models.
On the night after her interview, André surprises Sabine at her home and tasks her with responsibility for an outdoor ballroom surrounded by a fountain and landscaping. André's plans had called for a constant supply of water from a great distance at great expense. Sabine devises an alternate engineering solution based on a reservoir from which water can be continuously recycled through the fountains she has designed. She makes little progress at first because she uses workers recommended by those who lost the contract to her and hope to see her fail. One of them, however, Thierry Duras, intervenes and offers his crew's help.
Sabine is soon noticed by the elite at court and is befriended by the King's brother Duc Philippe d'Orleans and his wife Elizabeth Charlotte, Princess Palatine. At several points as the story develops, Sabine is haunted by brief glimpses of a young girl in white or a girl's voice she hears calling. She appears incapable of demonstrating her romantic feelings for André, who suffers from his marriage to the haughty Madame Françoise Le Nôtre, who insists on her right to take lovers and tells her husband he has only achieved professional success because of her influence at court. She has insisted on her sexual freedom, but when she challenges his interest in Sabine, he quotes her own speech of freedom back at her and becomes resolute in his intention to pursue a relationship with Sabine.
Queen Maria Theresa dies suddenly. André informs his wife, who is shaken at the prospect that this will lessen her influence at court. The king is shocked at the loss of his wife and takes refuge in contemplating plants, one of his great sensual and aesthetic pleasures, in his gardener's work area. Sabine accidentally encounters the king there, first mistaking him for the gardener, and then when he reveals his identity she befriends him and offers him the consolations of nature. She finds great favour in the king's eyes, and he invites her to travel with him and his court to his palace and gardens at Fontainebleau.
On a stormy day, Louis XIV visits Sabine's work site and assesses the project skeptically but decided to allow it to proceed. After he leaves with his retinue, Sabine is visited by Françoise, who tells her that André's passionate intentions are only a whim and will prove short-lived. After she and Sabine each depart, Françoise's lover opens the sluice gates from the reservoir and floods the work site, destroying much of the earthworks and plants.
In the partly destroyed works site, André finds a glove that he recognizes as belonging to his wife Françoise. He returns the glove to her, indicating he is aware of her role in the destruction of Sabine's work, and ending their relationship.
Sabine goes to King's court and meets Duc de Lauzun, who introduces her to the king's mistress, the Marquise de Montespan, who in turn introduces her to the women of the court. They greet her warmly and invite her into their discussion of topics the king forbids at court, notably death, especially the death of their children. Sabine reveals her enduring pain at the loss of her husband and daughter. When the King and his male entourage arrives, the Marquise presents Sabine to him. Sabine offers him a four-seasons flower, which inspires a conversation between the King and Sabine on the metaphorical nature of the rose and its life cycle, a metaphor intended to warm him toward his mistress.
André waits for Sabine outside her room that night, having fallen completely in love with her. Sabine lets go of her remorse for her husband's death years ago, and they finally make love. In the morning, André finds himself alone in bed. The scene jumps to Sabine years earlier during the events leading to the death of her daughter and adulterous husband. He admits his adultery and leaves to visit his mistress with his daughter along in the carriage. Sabine sees that the carriage has a faulty wheel and races after the carriage calling for it to stop. She rushes in front of the carriage, the coachman pulls on the reins, the wheel breaks and the carriage topples off the road and down a hill, killing both father and daughter. André finds Sabine in the grip of this memory and convinces her to stop blaming herself for their deaths.
Sabine's fountain-arena project is complete. The king and his court arrive to evaluate and inaugurate it. To the music of a hidden orchestra, the king and the court, including Sabine and André, enter and dance on the center ballroom surface, as the fountains send water coursing down the tiers surrounding the dancing surface. | flashback | train | wikipedia | Rickman plays the French King Louis XIV, Matthias Schoenaerts plays the landscape architect André Le Notre, and Kate Winslet plays Sabine De Barra.
The gardens are just the plot device that brings together all of the main characters in one place at one time.Matthias Schoenaerts is excellent in this movie, as he was in "Far from the Madding Crowd." However, as Farmer Oak he had to be intelligent but grounded in the necessities of his situation.
From what we know of the historical "Sun King," he wasn't exactly the kindly, gentle monarch that is portrayed in "A Little Chaos."Kate Winslet is a wonderful actor, and she looks right for the role.
There's a lovely scene when Sabine finds King Louis (Alan Rickman) alone and unwigged on a bench and mistakes him for the chief gardener.I worried that A LITTLE CHAOS might be like one of Peter Greenaway's movies, a triumph of style over substance, but it's got almost as much substance as an Oscar Wilde adaptation.
Stanley Tucci and Jennifer Ehle play the top dogs/bitches in His Majesty's court and I'd like to have seen more of them both.OK this movie is a bit overdone and artificial (like the gardens at Versailles), but the cast are believable and lovable, and the story delivers comedy, romance and intrigue.
Good that I did, because A Little Chaos is currently streaming on Amazon with a run time of 1:53 minutes.It's an interesting and unique story about a woman named Sabine, who has a gift for gardening.
The story is rich with sidelines about others who are close to the King as well.Alan Rickman plays Louis, but he also directs the movie.
I wanted to push it a bit myself but later scenes redeemed whatever discomfort I felt while waiting for the story to unfold.You will see many characters played by British actors that you will recognize - Rupert Penry-Jones (Captain Wentworth in Jane Austen's Persuasion); Steven Waddington (who played the Duke of Buckingham in The Tudors); Adrian Scarborough (who has done his share of British television roles including Midsomer Murders); Stanely Tucci (who has been in plenty of movie roles that you can remember); and many other well-known faces.
No heavy themes, impeccable acting (Kate Winslet, Matthias Schoenaerts, Stanley Tucci, and Alan Rickman), beautiful scenery, and gorgeous late 17th c.
After interviewing numerous candidates, he chooses the wildly fictional Madame Sabine de Barra (Winslet) to create the garden's ballroom, for the reason that she will introduce new ideas (a shaky premise, there)—and, as the title suggests, a little chaos.
Critics who pooh-pooh the film as a failed feminist fable miss its many pleasures: the absurd courtiers, Stanley Tucci as the king's gay brother, the interplay among the women when they're alone behind closed doors, scenery to drool over, the joy of bringing dirt and greenery to beautiful life, and, especially, Alan Rickman playing Louis XIV—"a character worthy of his imperious, reptilian charisma," as Stephen Holden said in the New York Times.
I just wish I enjoyed it more.There really was a King of France named Louis XIV who built an impressive palace in the Paris suburb of Versailles and surrounded it with spectacular gardens which included an outdoor ballroom, but he didn't look like Hans Gruber from "Die Hard" and young Rose from "Titanic" was not involved.
Nevertheless, Alan Rickman (who also wrote and directed this film) plays The Sun King and Kate Winslet plays a fictional woman named Sabine De Barra, who the movie shows receiving a commission to design and build the outdoor ballroom portion of the gardens at Versailles.
Of course, she's working for a male landscape artist named André Le Nôtre (the real life royal landscaper), played by Matthias Schoenaerts.Rather than just showing the building of the gardens as it actually happened, the film adds interest and intrigue to the true story with the creation of Winslet's character.
Alan Rickman is one of the many talents we lost in 2016 and this was one of the few films he directed.It's not a fantastic film, more a collection of good moments that sadly never join up, but you can't fault Rickman or Kate Winslet, who shine when on screen.It was released in a year with a lot of other similar films, and perhaps that hurt it in terms of acclaim, as did the fact that the plot isn't the easiest to explain, but as I say, there are certainly moments within it that make it worth a watch.We miss Alan Rickman terribly..
Modestly enjoyable but unexceptional.Set at the court of the French King Louis XIV (Alan Rickman) in Versailles (but wholly shot at some splendid British locations), this a well-intentioned, mildly feminist work that presents a woman landscape designer - the fictional Sabine de Barra (Kate Winslet) - in a world (like most) dominated by men such as the real-life Andreé Le Nôtre (Belgian actor Matthias Schoenaerts).
Not only does she cause a little chaos in the gardens, but in the court where, in a surprising couple of scenes, she discovers and exposes the sexism and ageism towards the female aristocracy.At one level, this is Rickman's film: it is only the second he has directed, he contributed to the script, and he steals certain scenes as the Sun King.
Schoenaerts plays Andre Le Notre, the real landscape architect who designed the park of Versailles for King Louis XIV.
In this romantic historical, Kate Winslet plays Sabine De Barra an imaginative landscape designer who breaks the convention of "order" and is hired to build a garden at Versailles for King Louis XIV, played by Alan Rickman, also the film's director.Kate Winslet was absolutely lovely in this film along with Matthias Schoenaerts (Far from the Maddening Crowd) who I predict will be blowing up movie screens with his strong, yet quiet presence on-screen.
Although I enjoyed the perfect acting of the different actors in the film, Kate Winslet is remarkable as usual, Matthias Schoenaerts is perfect in the role of Le Nôtre as well as Rickman a great actor as usual, not to forget to mention the very and only concordant personification of Stanley Tucci in Philippe d'Orléans, I was really disappointed by this movie and there is no nationalism whatsoever in my critic.
The "Win-against-all-odds" plot is highly predictable and really not much.The love story comes somewhat inevitable and - although nicely played by Winslet and Schoenaerts - does not really add to excitement; it has hardly any twists and turns.The gardening aspect could be interesting, but without in-depth knowledge of the history of garden architecture, we viewers are kept at loss to see why Mme de Barra's concepts might have been groundbreaking to gardening.For an breathtaking period drama the visuals are too modest and small.Personally, I would have liked to take this little episode as the exemplary and decisive turning point in the history of the ancien régime.
6.5 Okay, first, here is what I liked: Costumes, sets, and cinematography that kept me watching the full two hours Kate Winslet's acting Alan Rickman's diction What did not work for me: Sketchy, slight story for 2 hours.
Rickman also directed the movie and he did cover the period well, with the amazing costumes and great cinematography but the script was weak and the love story was predictable and corny.
Kate Winslet hasn't really hit the heights that she had, after starring in Titanic, the biggest film ever but she has put in some great performances in movies like Revolutionary Road, Eternal Sunshine of a Spotless Mind, Carnage and Little Children.
Anyway, the movie was put together well but the script wasn't that great.Budget: N/A Worldwide Gross: $4millionI recommend this movie to people who are into their period dramas about 2 architects who fall in love whilst making a garden for King Louis XIV.
That was the inspiring part of the movie.The film has beautiful shots of Versailles and how people worked in those days with nice costumes that supported the scenes very well.
The three main characters are Sabine De Barra (Kate Winslet), André Le Notré (Matthias Schoenaerts), and King Louis (Alan Rickman).
Rickman directed the film but doesn't seem to be able to coax any spark out of most of the characters.The story moves between Madame De Barra's landscaping work, and her awkward introduction to the court of the king and royal society.
Of course, without that the film would have needed something else to fill the time slot.But for the scenery, costumes and excellent camera work, "A Little Chaos" would be a royal bore for most.While several of the characters are historically true, Madame De Barra and others are fictional.
Am a big fan of Alan Rickman, one of the biggest acting inspirations of my childhood (mostly for Snape in the 'Harry Potter' films and 'Sense and Sensibility', but getting older love even more in 'Die Hard' playing one of the greatest screen villains).
The concept sounded nice enough and the cast (with Kate Winslet, Stanley Tucci, Matthias Schoenaets, Helen McCrory and Rickman himself) are immensely talented.'A Little Chaos' is one of those films that has people liking it but judging from the mixed critical reception it is one of those films that hasn't clicked with everybody.
Couldn't help feeling emotional too, knowing that it was one of Rickman's last roles and projects, 2015's very good 'Eye in the Sky' being his last (he's excellent in that), before his ultimely death two years ago.Getting the flaws out of the way, there are parts that drag a little and are a little muddled as a result of the story being very slight with not an awful lot to it.
This is often passed over in silence but many workers died during those titanic (no pun intended) works:sometimes crushed under blocks ,they had to drain the swamps:a suicide because of the mosquitoes who transmitted marsh fever ,in other words,Paludism:men fell like flies.Saint-Simon talks about wagons of corpses ;they forced the workers into this living hell ,they had to live on the spot and were not allowed to see their wives and kids anymore ;some of them rebelled and threw blocks onto the foremen from the scaffolds ;the king called on the army.Many men were sentenced to death and hanged .Les Jardins Du Roy,it's a paradise (as depicted by the Sun King himself in the movie),but it's also that.Let's be lenient for the historical mistakes :Le Nôtre was 25 older than Louis XIV -and was not the vivacious handsome landscape gardener who woos Madame De Barra .He would not begin,in the kingdom of France , his letter with the word 'dear"!!Madame De Barra is pure fiction :one cannot imagine,at the time ,a female landscape architect -think that a hundred years later ,mathematician Sophie Germain had to take a male pseudonym to be able to continue her work on prime numbers- is thoroughly implausible ;it takes all Mrs Winslet's talent to make the character endearing.On the plus side ,in spite of an obvious lack of means (we are in the grandiose court of the Sun King,all the same!) ,there's an interesting depiction of the atmosphere of the courtiers;It's the first time I've seen a portrayal of Philippe D'Orleans ,Monsieur Frère Du Roi ,in accordance with historian Philippe Erlanger's book,which was not so in previous "Vatel" ,let alone the "Angélique Marquise Des Anges" saga : he is gay but his second wife ,La Princesse Palatine depicts him as " a brave man at war ,generous with the defeated ";actually they mutually agreed they would sleep apart,after she gave birth to heirs .A nice cinematography(superb finale) ,good acting by the whole cast ,let's forget history,and let's not deny ourselves a good moment..
André Le Nôtre (Matthias Schoenaerts) is a respected landscaping working for King Louis XIV of France (Alan Rickman) after his mother Queen's death.
The story juices up a fictitious character, Sabine de Barra (Winslet), a widow and unconventional horticulturist, to the life of landscapist maestro André Le Nôtre (Schoenaerts), who is appointed by King Louis XIV of France (Rickman) for the demanding task of designing gardens of Versailles.Whenever a well-known thespian takes a crack at the director chair, one's knee-jerking reaction might be, is it a one-off deal as a personal vanity project running off the rail or, in a rarer case, an endeavour truly resonates with the right vibe.
On the contrary, the film stay calms, most thoroughly, a prosaic but righteously refrained emotional arc trickles in unhurriedly, owing to an unshowy methodology of the main cast (Stanley Tucci's preferentially homosexual Duke Philippe d'Orleans and Jennifer Ehle's effervescent Madame De Montespan are the exceptions), Winslet is ever so plain, detached, sometimes even absent-minded, in channelling a woman obsessed with a past tragedy and when eventually a new romance catches up with her, she must uncover her carefully concealed wound in order to move on.Schoenaerts is currently the go-to guy for British period outputs, he emerges even more reserved than in FAR FROM THE MADDING CROWD (2015), his André is almost too rational to carry conviction in this storybook tale (in reality, he should be around seventy during the time), all the more, he is completely devoid of any detectable emotion during the heightened two- hander between him and Madame Françoise Le Nôtre (a deliciously devious McCrory), there must be a thin fine line between unresponsiveness and strategic downplaying.Well, the best of pick, is naturally, Mr. Rickman himself, handsomely juggles between Louis XIV's monarchical grandeur and his more humane side with a poker face, particularly in the scenes shared with Winslet, a belated reunion between Colonel Brandon and Marianne Dashwood, it accurately strikes the soft spot of the dewy-eyed.A LITTLE CHAOS, where the chaos is mostly buried underneath the surface, is a quaintly small- scaled drama-romance, a thoroughly-stewed course pandered to those suckers for period production who has an even-tempered heart..
I did not believe any of the characters, I will overlook the Frenchman who spoke with a thick Northern English accent, but if this was an amateur play, maybe I could forgive it, but these are well known seasoned actors and no one seemed convincing at all.Kate Winslet was particularly dull, I am sure she was almost asleep in some scenes but the main problem was that nothing lifted the film from being so very dull.The sabotage scene was almost interesting, but even that was as wet as the garden project became.I cannot understand why anyone liked this dull, dreary, lifeless movie..
I really liked the fact that Rickman created a very fictional female character from the 17th century who is a landscape architect (Kate Winslet) and is building a garden at Versailles for King Louis XIV (Alan Rickman).
I really liked their shared scenes and dialogues, it gives a warm touch to the storyline.Kate Winslet really shows here that no matter how many actresses want, or properly said, get to play roles in period dramas, she is still the number 1 in these kind of films.
Alan Rickman struts his stuff as writer (with Alison Deegan and Jeremy Brock), director , and actor (he plays King Louis XIV) in this love story loosely based on the creation of the gardens of Versailles.
But it is refreshing to see an old fashioned love story presented without potty mouth dialog and X rated sex – just simplicity and fine acting.The plot is a romantic drama following Sabine de Barra (Kate Winslet), a talented landscape designer, who is building a garden at Versailles for King Louis XIV (Alan Rickman).
Kate Winslet plays the fictional landscape gardener Madame Sabine de Barra, hired to create a water feature at Versailles.
Her work defies conventions of the time and Madame Sabine falls for the master designer André Le Nôtre even though she is haunted by her past.The film was directed by Alan Rickman, who also co-wrote it and plays the Sun King.
Still, to enjoy this movie, one needs to avoid adopting a judgmental stance of condemning the outrageous extravagance of royalty, but focus on the appreciation of beauty and art and the admiration of the protagonist, a female architect by the name of Sabine De Barra, so brilliantly portrayed by Kate Winslet.Without belaboring the details, I'll just report that the simple plot surrounds Louis XIV's (Alan Rickman) wish to have created something of an esthetic perfection in the form of gardens in the lavish Palace of Versailles.
"Chaos was the law of nature; Order was the dream of man." - Henry Adams"A Little Chaos" stars Alan Rickman as Louis XIV, a French king who hires landscaper Andre Le Nortre to design a lavish garden.
She and master Gardener Andre de Notre are attracted to each other, but de Notre is married.Alan Rickman directs (and stars as Louis), Kate Winslet is Mme de Barra, current flavour of the month Matthias Schoenaerts is de Notre, and the supporting cast includes Stanley Tucci, Helen McCrory and Jennifer Ehle, the film is handsomely mounted and beautifully photographed.
To put it another way, "But it's slow and often boring." There are a couple of pleasing scenes – one between Winslet and Rickman when she thinks he's the Head Gardener at Versailles, and one between Winslet and the women of the Court, which is rather touching.
The film was directed and co-written by Alan Rickman, who plays King Louis XIV of France.Kate Winslet is (looking quite buxom and older than I remember her) quite good here as the gardener.
Le Nôtre observes this from a high window and later comments on her use of "a little chaos" in her designs.Alan Rickman, who also wrote and directed, is King Louis XIV.
This is a low key romance set in the court at Versailles under Louis XIV, the Sun King, played by Rickman himself in support.
The main thrust of the story is a romance between gardener Kate Winslet and a landscape artist in the king's employ. |
tt0032643 | It All Came True | Aspiring songwriter Tommy Taylor (Jeffrey Lynn) pins his hopes on the promises of his employer, gambler and gangster "Chips" Maguire (Humphrey Bogart). However, Chips uses the gun he had registered under Tommy's name to kill Monks (Herb Vigran) when he betrays Chips to the police. It turns out Chips had Tommy carry the gun for just such a situation, to provide him with a fall guy. Needing a place to hide out, Chips blackmails Tommy into taking him to the boarding house owned by his mother, Nora Taylor (Jessie Busley), and her longtime friend, Maggie Ryan (Una O'Connor), by threatening to turn the gun over to the police.
Nora is overjoyed to see her son after an absence of five years. Tommy introduces them to Chips, who pretends to be a man named Grasselli recovering from a nervous condition. By chance, Maggie's showgirl daughter, Sarah Jane (Ann Sheridan), returns the same day. The two mothers dream of their children getting married, but Tommy seems indifferent to Sarah Jane.
Sarah Jane becomes suspicious of Grasselli, who does his best to avoid being seen. She eventually hides in the hall bathroom and recognizes him, having worked for him once. Unwilling to get Nora and Maggie in trouble, she agrees to keep Chips' secret. Nora starts mothering Chips, as does Maggie after a while. Tired of hiding in his room all the time, Chips emerges and becomes acquainted with the other boarders: Miss Flint (ZaSu Pitts), Mr. Salmon (Grant Mitchell), washed-up magician The Great Boldini (Felix Bressart), and Mr. Van Diver (Brandon Tynan). In the parlor, Chips enjoys an amateur show put on by Tommy, Sarah Jane, and the boarders.
When Sarah Jane learns that Nora and Maggie are about to lose their house due to unpaid taxes, she turns to Chips for help, encouraging his attentions, even though she is in love with Tommy. He provides the money, but as that will only postpone their financial problem, he suggests (out of sheer boredom) that they set up the boarding house to bring in money by turning it into an exclusive nightclub, with the added advantage that Tommy and Sarah Jane can showcase their talents. Nora is enthusiastic, but it takes some persuasion to get Maggie to go along.
In the meantime, Miss Flint, the housekeeper, sees Chips' picture in a crime magazine. Sarah Jane intimates that Chips will have her killed in a gruesome manner if she tells anyone what she knows. But on opening night, after drinking too much champagne, she becomes frightened by Chips' taunts and goes to the police station. Two detectives spot Chips in the nightclub, but agree to let him watch the rest of the show. Tommy sees the cops and assumes the worst. He goes to the roof to be alone. When Sarah Jane joins him there, he finally admits he loves her. She urges him to flee, but he refuses to run away. Though he can easily incriminate Tommy, Chips decides to confess to the murder, allowing the young lovers to make a clean beginning. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0032427 | Earthbound | EarthBound takes place a few years after the events of Mother. The player starts as a young boy named Ness as he investigates a nearby meteorite crash with his neighbor, Pokey. He finds that an alien force, Giygas, has enveloped and consumed the world in hatred and consequently turned animals, humans, and objects into malicious creatures. A small, fly-like creature from the future instructs Ness to collect melodies in a Sound Stone to preemptively stop the force, but is killed shortly after when Pokey's mother mistakes him for a pest. While visiting these eight Sanctuaries, Ness meets three other kids named Paula, Jeff, and Poo—"a psychic girl, an eccentric inventor, and a ponytailed martial artist", respectively—who join his party. Along the way, Ness visits the cultists of Happy Happy Village, where he saves Paula, and the zombie-infested Threed, where the two of them fall prey to a trap. After Paula telepathically instructs Jeff in a Winters boarding school to rescue them, they continue to the city of Fourside and the seaside resort Summers. Meanwhile, Poo, the prince of Dalaam, partakes in a seemingly violent meditation called "Mu Training" before joining the party as well.
The party continues to travel to the Scaraba desert, the Deep Darkness swamp and a forgotten underworld where dinosaurs live. When the Sound Stone is eventually filled, Ness visits Magicant, a surreal location in his mind where he fights his personal dark side. Upon returning to Eagleland, Ness and his party use the Phase Distorter to travel back in time to fight Giygas, transferring their souls into robots. The group discovers a device that contains the alien, but it is being guarded by Pokey, who is revealed to have been helping Giygas all along. After defeating him in a fight, Pokey turns the device off, releasing Giygas and forcing the group to fight a battle known for its "feeling of isolation, ... incomprehensible attacks, ... buzzing static" and reliance on prayer. In a post-credits scene, Ness, whose life has returned to normal following Giygas' defeat, receives a note from Pokey, who challenges Ness to come and find him. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0034694 | Edge of Darkness | === One: Compassionate Leave ===
Yorkshire police officer Ronald Craven (Bob Peck) is returning home with his daughter Emma (Joanne Whalley) having picked her up from a meeting of an environmental organisation at her university campus. On the doorstep of their home Emma is shot dead. The police concentrate their effort on the theory that her murder was a botched attempt on Craven's life by a criminal he had been responsible for convicting. However, as Craven goes through Emma's belongings, he discovers a geiger counter and a gun. He also learns that Emma's body and her possessions are radioactive. Travelling to London to assist with the inquiry, he is contacted by Pendleton (Charles Kay), a polished official “attached to the Prime Minister's office”, who informs him that Emma was known to them as a terrorist and that it may have been her, not Craven, who was the gunman's target.
=== Two: Into The Shadows ===
As he continues his investigations, Craven is visited by Emma's ghost. The fingerprints on the getaway car used by Emma's killer match that of Lowe, a man Craven arrested ten years previously. Meanwhile, Pendleton takes Craven to meet his colleague, Harcourt (Ian McNeice), who informs him that Emma was a member of a subversive anti-nuclear group called GAIA. A team of six GAIA members, led by Emma, had broken into a low level radioactive waste facility at Northmoor; all are now either dead or missing. After Craven makes a televised appeal for information about Emma's killer, he is contacted by CIA agent Darius Jedburgh (Joe Don Baker), an associate of Harcourt and Pendleton. Jedburgh shows Craven the CIA's file on Emma's activities: GAIA had become suspicious of Northmoor when a nearby reservoir had become contaminated with radioactive material, an occurrence that had also alerted the CIA, leading them to believe Northmoor was illegally storing plutonium. Jedburgh is played as a hard-bitten professional with a wry sense of humour and a passion for ballroom dancing. Along with Harcourt and Pendleton, he is keen to find the source and purpose of the plutonium.
=== Three: Burden Of Proof ===
The police close in on their suspect, Lowe (Roy Heather), who is severely injured in a fall while trying to escape. Dying, he tells Craven he was working with McCroon, a terrorist Craven had had convicted in Northern Ireland. Emma's boyfriend, Terry Shields (Tim McInnerny), tells Craven that she was investigating a hot cell in Northmoor; he is later killed. Craven meets Harcourt and Pendleton at the House of Commons where an inquiry is taking place into the sale of International Irradiated Fuels (IIF) – Northmoor's owners – to the Fusion Corporation of Kansas, owned by Jerry Grogan (Kenneth Nelson). Pendleton tells Craven that he believes Grogan was behind Emma's death. Returning to Yorkshire for Emma's funeral, Craven is refused permission to seek a warrant to enter Northmoor. Returning home, he is observed by McCroon (Sean Caffrey).
=== Four: Breakthrough ===
McCroon breaks into Craven's house intent on killing him. Craven demands McCroon tell him who he is working for but McCroon is shot by a police marksman before he can say anything. Through a contact of Mac (Struan Roger), a colleague from his time in Northern Ireland, Craven gains access to a terminal connected to the MI5 computer. He checks the MI5 records for GAIA, Northmoor and Emma and learns that McCroon was acting on the orders of Northmoor Security. He also obtains a three-dimensional map of Northmoor from the computer. Craven contacts Jedburgh and asks him to accompany him inside Northmoor.
=== Five: Northmoor ===
Craven and Jedburgh penetrate Northmoor and discover the hot cell which has been sealed off following an explosion - a consequence of GAIA's attempted break-in. Jedburgh, under orders from the CIA, enters the hot cell and steals the plutonium. At the House of Commons inquiry, IIF chief executive Robert Bennett (Hugh Fraser) is forced to admit the presence of plutonium at Northmoor and the deaths of the GAIA team.
=== Six: Fusion ===
Craven and Jedburgh escape Northmoor but both are dying from radiation poisoning. Jedburgh makes for the Gleneagles Hotel in Scotland, which is hosting a NATO conference on directed energy weapons. Also present at the conference is Grogan who announces that the British government has approved the purchase of IIF and speaks with cold passion of harnessing the power of the atom to conquer the galaxy. The audience of military and civilian officials applauds but Jedburgh in U.S. uniform takes the dais to denounce nuclear proliferation and a vainglorious crusade amongst the stars. He finishes by bringing together two bars of plutonium he has removed from Northmoor, causing a criticality accident and irradiating himself and the nearby Grogan.
Emma's ghost appears to Craven and tells him of a time when black flowers grew, warming the Earth and preventing life from becoming extinct. She tells him that the black flowers have returned and will melt the polar icecaps, destroying mankind so that life can continue. Craven goes to dissuade Jedburgh from the next step in his plan, which is to cause a nuclear explosion in Scotland with the rest of the plutonium. He succeeds, though the secret service follow him and kill Jedburgh. Craven, like Jedburgh and Grogan fatally exposed to radiation, wanders into the mountains to die, calling Emma's name. On the mountains, as Emma predicted, the black flowers are growing, foreshadowing the planet's war against humanity. | romantic, murder | train | wikipedia | For those who haven't seen this film the message was an excerpt from a speech he made probably in late 1940 or 41, and it refers to the resistance of the people of Norway to the occupation by the Nazis.
One of the things that all of the films about Norway during World War II fail to mention is why the Nazis were there in the first place.
He's a fisherman, but his natural qualities of leadership come through as he leads the resistance.Edge of Darkness is the story of one coastal Norwegian village who put up with Nazi occupation beyond what was humanly bearable.
Edge of Darkness is a study of the various townspeople and the way each one of them deals with the Nazi occupation.Walter Huston and Ruth Gordon are the parents of Sheridan and John Beal.
He's the kind of villain you love to hate as is Helmut Dantine the commanding officer of the Nazi garrison.We learn Dingle's fate at the beginning of the film and as the action unfolds in flashback the audience really rejoices in that fate.No mistake about it, Edge of Darkness is a World War II propaganda film, but still entertaining today.
One interesting thing here as the movie's nominal star, Errol Flynn (playing a Norwegian named Gunnar (!) ), takes a back seat to riveting and magnificent performances by the supporting cast.
The story of a revolt brewing against Nazi occupiers by the people of a Norwegian fishing village, scripted by Robert Rossen, is reeled out in Milestone's fluid, sensuous cinematic style with spellbinding suspense from beginning to end.
Thanks to consummate acting skill, Rossen's intelligent script, and Milestone's precise direction, you will come to know these characters as well as your neighbors by the shattering end of this two hour movie.Franz Waxman's florid score themed on Martin Luther's stirring hymn "A Mighty Fortress Is My God" with snatches from Wagner sweeps the action along to a rousing climax.Sid Hickox is credited for the sublime cinematography, but as I have stated elsewhere (see my review of The General Died At Dawn), Milestone's graphic statement was the same no matter who was behind the camera or in the editing room.
Ann Sheridan, Nancy Colman, and Dame Judith Anderson all bring vividly to life the choices women are forced to make during an occupation, and Walter Huston, Helmut Dantine, John Beal, and Morris Carnovsky are equally memorable in their roles.
"The Edge of Darkness" is a 1943 propaganda film about a Norwegian fishing village rising up to fight the Nazis.
The cast is excellent, top-notch all the way: Errol Flynn, Ann Sheridan, Walter Huston, Ruth Gordon, John Beal, Helmut Dantine, Judith Anderson and Morris Carnovsky.
It's probably not at the top of everyone's list because it was released while Errol Flynn was fighting statutory rape charges, which was a distraction to audiences, certainly, and also because it followed "Casablanca." Norway was dragged into the World War II conflict because Hitler was very concerned about protecting the Norwegian shoreline so that the Russians could not receive supplies if they joined the Allies.
In the story, the village is being occupied by the Nazis, who are taking the people's shipments of basic necessities and oppressing the entire town by their very presence - curfews, patrols, and the commandeering of the local hotel as their base.
I'm sure when audiences left the theaters, they often were energized and it gave them a sense that "we're all in this together".Errol Flynn is cast in the lead as a Norwegian patriot who is slowly and very covertly trying to plan for a rebellion against their Nazi overlords.
This was a good decision, as the usual "comic relief" style of support is --replaced with a gritty yet believable group of actors.What I also liked about the film was that while the Nazis were very brutal and evil, they were not quite so over-the-top as they were in many propaganda films of the day.
Yes, they murdered and even raped, but the whole thing was handled more realistically than many films--the Germans were not parodied or ridiculous--making them all the more scary.The film ends with a terrific final confrontation scene between the Norwegians and the Nazis.
After two years under German rule , a small Norwegian fishing village rises up and revolts against the occupying Nazis .
A fisherman (Errol Flynn) along with his loyal fiancée (Ann Sheridan) leads the local (Walter Huston , Ruth Gordon , Judith Anderson and several others) underground movement against a Nazi nasty captain (Helmut Dantine).
The second part is quite starkly moving developing account of deeds that befall about the villagers and when they go into action.A surprisingly very strong version about Norwegian resistance with career-best interpretations from Errol Flynn and Ann Sheridan .
Rating : Above average , the flick earned big high marks for its superb scenarios , credible acting and dramatic scenes .This War/drama is compellingly directed by Lewis Milestone , he was born in the Ukraine , but emigrated to America at 18 and he served in WWI becoming an assistant director on Army training films .
As he showed WWI , winning Academy Award for ¨All quiet on the western front¨ , and WWII such as ¨Purple heart¨ , ¨Halls of Montezuma¨ , ¨Edge and darkness¨ , the best of which is ¨A walk in the sun¨ with remarkable intensity at times and Korean war as ¨Pork Chop Hill¨ ; and directed several others excellent movies in different fields , dramas as ¨Of mice and men¨ , Noir cinema as ¨Strange love of Martha Ivers¨, adventure as ¨Mutiny on the Bount¨ and heist-comedy as ¨Ocean's eleven¨, among others.The picture is set during German invasion of Norway and subsequent Nazi conquest , the historical events are the following : The invasion began on April 9, 1940.
After that , Nazi conquest was completed with help some collaborators as the famous ¨Quisling¨ who was a Norwegian prime minister whose collaboration with the Nazis meant his name became a term meaning traitor and in this film is represented by the Walter Huston , Ruth Gordon's son , John Beal ..
There is the immediate plot, about an ally who was occupied by the Nazi Germans, and there is the wider allegory about ordinary people (the Americans watching the movie) rising up against true tyranny.
"Edge of Darkness" is set in a small Norwegian village during the time of the Nazi occupation of Norway.
The film examines the lives of the villagers and their resistance to the Nazis.Errol Flynn plays Gunnar Brogge, the accepted leader of the villagers.
Helmut Dantine is notable as the zealous Nazi commander and as is Charles Dingle as an opportunistic village business leader that labels himself as a "man of facts" and collaborates with the Nazis.While there are some interesting themes, characterizations and scenes like the church scene in the film's first half, the first half as a whole is somewhat plodding.
"Edge of Darkness" is a decent war-time film about opposition to Nazi repression..
EDGE OF DARKNESS reminds us that there are things worth fighting for, and that it's not shameful to unite against an oppressor, in this case the Third Reich.The deftly-written script pulls us into the story slowly, as two German airmen wonder why a Norwegian flag is flying over a town supposedly overrun with Nazis.
Early on, it seems that there's a strong possibility of the power of its story being diffused by the introduction of too many characters – despite an intriguing Gunga Din-like opening - but once all the main players are introduced the strength and suspense of the storyline shines through.The townspeople of a small Norwegian fishing village overcome a number of obstacles to covertly organise an armed rebellion against their Nazi masters with the aid of allied spies.
There is Walter Huston's kindly doctor who is unsure of the wisdom of an armed revolt (but slowly brought around to the cause), his feisty daughter (Ann Sheridan) and her fisherman boyfriend (Errol Flynn) who are at the forefront of the resistance, his son who, having once been seduced by Nazi rhetoric finds himself unable to break away from them now that the scales have fallen from his eyes, the cheap tramp who collaborates with the Nazis before seeing the light, the cowardly shopkeeper who overcomes his fear of his German tormentors, the wise (but misguided) schoolteacher who mistakenly believes one man making a stand can make a difference, and the kindly matriarch who simply wants to go to bed later like she used to.You'd think that such a roll call of characters might result in something formulaic, but writer Robert Rossen knits together the various strands of the story in such an accomplished way that you are drawn in from the start.
Nevertheless, Hollywood law decrees that he must meet the same fate as his comrades because the only good Nazi's a dead one – and all Nazis are cowards at heart.For all the familiar tropes of its genre, this Lewis Milestone film stands head and shoulders above most other films from this era, simply because it makes you care about the characters and delivers just as much action as it does propagandistic speeches.
The film begins with the showing of the total destruction of the town and then backtracks to the events that led to the local uprising by the people.Charles Dingle, who was so good as Bette Davis's suspicious brother in "The Little Foxes," is equally good as a Nazi collaborator.
It's a WWII tale of Norwegian resistance and it's given Grade A treatment from the studio with some eye-popping camera work under the inspired direction of Lewis Milestone.WALTER HUSTON is a doctor, at first reluctant to show fierce opposition to the cause; RUTH GORDON is his worried wife; JUDITH ANDERSON is a strong-willed resistance fighter who is also resisting the advances of a Nazi officer; HELMUT DANTINE is once again cast as a hateful Nazi who knows when he's outnumbered; NANCY COLEMAN is his neurotic sweetheart who wants to break away from the Nazi environment and return to Poland; CHARLES DINGLE is the wealthy man who owns the cannery and goes insane when he witnesses the slaughter his village falls prey to.The drawback is the obvious propaganda tone and overly melodramatic scenes of brutality strongly contrasted by the heroics of the townspeople, including the village pastor.
Directed by Lewis Milestone and starring Errol Flynn, Walter Huston, Ann Sheridan & Ruth Gordon.
If you do decide to watch this extremely upsetting, dark war movie, do yourself a favor and fast-forward for about five minutes before pressing play.In a small Norwegian fishing village, the Nazis think they've got everyone under control.
Errol Flynn is the star here, but his part is actually minor in the context of this panoramic insight into a small Norwegian fishing village in the far north of Norway and its villagers, their life under duress of the Germans and how an extreme conflict is unavoidable.
It was made in the most critical year of World War II, when the Germans at the height of their power started to lose.There are many memorable and eloquent scenes here, well up to the highest standard of Lewis Milestone's works, like the great scene in the church, when the villagers are having a conference under cover of a Sunday service, which actually introduces the drama.
Errol Flynn disappears almost entirely in this great drama of the necessity of at any cost resisting and fighting any foreign occupational force.It's a great film in spite of its tremendous bathos of exaggerations, and although in the beginning you encounter a village where everyone seems to have wiped out everyone, it's extremely interesting to see how this drama gradually evolves to its apocalyptic fatality.The music by Franz Waxman adds to it, making efficient use of the Norwegian national anthem, a Lutheran hymn and of course Siegfried's death by Wagner..
Another classic war movie from Milestone--and starring Errol Flynn, no doubt!.
I have always wondered how it must have felt to make a 'wartime' movie about a war you're currently living in, and lately I stumbled upon a quintet of films made during the Second World War with Errol Flynn, of all people, battling the Nazis.
Because of it both being by Turner Classic Movies AND had one film directed by Lewis Milestone (with one of the finest anti-war statements ever made, 'All Quiet on the Western Front', under his belt) and the others by none other than Raoul Walsh, I was, pardon the pun, 'in like Flynn'.
But this was weird for a war film (looking at the resistance put up by a village of 800 Norwegians) bizarrely cast (with Ann Sheridan, Walter Huston, Judith Anderson and Ruth Gordon--all as the GOOD guys!), and had taped speeches by BOTH Churchill and Roosevelt.
Made during the middle of WW2, "Edge of Darkness" tells how the Norwegian citizens of Trollness, led by a resistance fighter played by Errol Flynn, rose up and liberated themselves from their Nazi oppressors.Although the film is probably as close to real events as "Cowboys vs.
This mixture gives the film a somewhat mythical quality; we are drawn into the isolated, almost claustrophobic world of Trollness, where the battle, physical and ideological, is fought between the Norwegians and the Germans.These days we accept Errol Flynn as a far better actor than was probably acknowledged back then when his activities in the bedroom seemed to blur any appreciation of his talent.
Much of the action is filmed with the same brilliant tracking shots director Lewis Milestone used in "All Quiet on the Western Front" especially as the Norwegians advance against the German machine guns or fight them hand-to-hand in the streets.There are many dramatic speeches in the film.
The film then goes into flashback to describe the events that have led to this moment.There are pockets of resistance in the village that Nazi Captain Helmut Dantine (Koenig) has to contend with – small scale stuff but a continuous presence and fisherman Errol Flynn (Gunnar) and doctor's daughter Ann Sheridan (Karen) are usual suspects.
The heroic resistance of the occupied Norway attracted, for some reason, a fair amount of interest, in "The Commandos Strike At Dawn,""The Moon Is Down," and "Edge of Darkness."Lewis Milestone, who has made the pacifist "All Quiet on the Western Front, is a key figure in crusading films about war..His "Edge of Darkness" is a brave and interesting film ,and a touching tribute to Norwegian courage during the Nazi occupation...The characterization is cleverly drawn: Errol Flynn, the fisherman who assumes command of the resistance in his small Norwegian village; Ann Sheridan, the willful and obstinate daughter of the respected physician Walter Huston who didn't want to know but is led inexorably to aid the resistance after his innocent daughter is brutally raped by a German soldier; Ruth Gordon, his shy retiring wife, as the neurotic mother who lives in dreams of the past; her greedy brother, the opportunistic businessman Charles Dingle who owns the cannery which employs most of the villagers, a traitor who "deals in facts...
Accompanying this visuals, we hear a historic FDR speech, featuring the plight of the Norwegians, along with a stirring final rendering of the recurring Luther hymn "A Mighty Fortress Is Our God" in the background, making the resistance against the Nazis seem more like a 'holy war' against the forces of evil.
Koenig and his men they lead by Norwegian freedom fighter Gunnar Brogge, Errol Flynn, broke open the boxes of guns and ammunition that they got from the British and planned to have the German run out of town once and for all.
It's wasn't until after Gunner's girlfriend Karen Stensgard, Ann Sheridan, was assaulted and raped, off camera, by a horny German soldier who had the hots for her for some time that he finally got it, and the men and women of the town, all together and revolted against the Germans.It's when Gunnar himself and the leaders of Trollness were rounded up and forced to dig their own graves by the Germans that had the townspeople lead by the peace loving father of Karen Dr. Stensgard, Walter Huston, and town towns ultra-passive Paster Aalesen, Richard Prasen, take to the streets.What's makes "Edge of Darkness" a cut above your average war-time propaganda movie is that it keeps the action off the screen until the last fifteen or so minutes.
As good a World War II propaganda film as there is, emphasis on evil Nazis.
It's about the struggle against the Nazi occupation in Norway during World War II in the spring of 1942.Despite the fact that it's primarily a propaganda film, it's a very good drama which features solid performances by several of the more popular Warner Bros.
stars in their day, including: Errol Flynn, Ann Sheridan, Walter Huston, Helmut Dantine, Judith Anderson, and Ruth Gordon, among others.It's May 28, 1942 and a German patrol plane flies over a small fishing community in Norway.
In 1943 the Nazis were still far from beaten and this film shows the defiance of ordinary Norwegians against a brutal oppressor.Errol Flynn isn't somebody who many people would think of to play a Norwegian.
He provides his usual heroic performance, albeit more understated than normal, and shows the sort of determination that many people were showing in real life at the time to defeat the Nazis.The ending is good especially when the German captain played by Helmut Dantine shoots himself.
This was meant to show that by fighting back against the Nazis they could crack.An undoubted propaganda film made at a time when the war was still not definitely decided I thought it was very good at getting the message across that there was at least light at the end of the tunnel in the fight to rid the world of Nazism.. |
tt0318763 | Timecop: The Berlin Decision | In 2025, Time Enforcement Commission (TEC), the agency that monitors time travel, is still keeping the past safe. Society for Historical Authenticity (SHA) is established to ensure that TEC personnel do not alter history. But the Society's leader, Brandon Miller, believes he has the responsibility to change history based on a "moral obligation to right the wrongs of the past" and plans to do so by traveling back to Berlin in 1940 and killing Adolf Hitler. TEC agent Ryan Chang is sent back to stop him, but in the resulting fight, Miller's wife, Sasha, part of the SHA, ends up dead. Miller is imprisoned in the World Penitentiary for trying to change history, and Ryan Chang begins arresting Miller's close Society friends. In Atlantic City in 1895, Ryan prevents SHA member Frank Knight from robbing Andrew Carnegie. Knight accuses the TEC of being murderers when they execute him. Ryan is haunted by memories of when his father, Josh, died of a brain aneurysm in 2002. Josh was lecturing about time travel at the University of Southern California, and had a heated debate on the morals of altering history.
TEC agent Douglas illegally makes physical contact with his younger self and they are suddenly merged, causing the agent to wink out of existence. Without the agent ever existing, a key Brandon Miller associate wasn't arrested and Miller is able to leave prison on a technicality. Miller sets out to eliminate every TEC operative by traveling back in time and killing their ancestors, as if the agents never existed. Miller could then change history with impunity since there wasn't anyone to stop him. Eventually, Ryan Chang is the only agent left and he has to stop Miller.
Ryan fights his way through rioters at the World Penitentiary and confronts Miller, but is unable to convince him that what he wants to do is wrong. Back in his present time, Ryan finds changes to history; Doc is more irascible because her husband was "killed in the war". When he returns to the World Penitentiary, Miller was never there at all. Ryan, becoming less and less capable of surviving all these time jumps, returns to 2025 again. This time, the world is even more different due to Miller’s interference: Ryan's parents were "killed in the war", Doc has been executed for trying to save her husband and O'Rourke wears an eye patch and has never heard of Hitler.
Ryan is issued a tracker that enables him to follow Miller by jumping into the wake of his time leaps. He is sent to 1881 and prevents Miller from killing an ancestor named Jason in Springfield, Texas, then chases him to 1929 where he saves a Frances in a Chinese restaurant. In a nightclub in 1988, Ryan is embarrassed to see his young parents disco dancing and lures Miller away from them. Miller shoots Ryan, but the bullet is stopped by the pocket watch that his father bequeathed to him. Returning to his own era, where things are mostly back to normal, he realizes that his father died when Miller tried to kill Ryan at age 11. Barely surviving another time leap, Ryan goes to the University of Southern California in May 2002.
The student who disagreed with Josh was a young Brandon Miller. Josh tries to stop the older Miller from killing Ryan, but is killed by a Miller's weapon that induces brain aneurysms. The older Ryan intervenes, threatening to erase Miller’s existence by killing his younger self. The older Miller taunts Ryan by accusing him of hypocritically being willing to change history. He provokes him into a fight, watched by the younger Miller, younger Ryan and his mother, and Sasha. When Ryan has Miller at his mercy, he tells the younger Miller that “It doesn’t have to be this way.” Ryan and Miller then disappear, suggesting that the younger Miller changed his mind. In 2025, Ryan’s colleagues who were erased by Miller are back, although Doc still refuses to date Timecops. | violence, alternate history, murder | train | wikipedia | I thought this film was pretty good, considering a sequel to a movie like Timecop tends to be destined as a flop.
The moral aspects of time travel were touched on nicely enough to make you think, but not too much to tease you and leave you feeling unresolved in much of the theorising unlike Matrix Reloaded.I rate this perhaps a little higher due to 1 - Jamie Scott Lee's great performance, and 2 - The fact films like these tend to be a whole world worse than the original!.
Until Timecop 2, I don't think I had ever seen a cheap, direct-to-video sequel that was actually good and possibly even better than its theatrical predecessor!
Basically, the film is stuffed with great ideas, good acting, and decent action scenes.
I guess Jason Scott Lee has still been practicing since he did Dragon: The Bruce Lee Story all of those years ago.Bottom-line, give Timecop 2 a try.
It's also better at exploring the concept of a future where time travel is possible, with organizations set up to make sure that the past remains correct.
I thought that this Movie was very entertaining it kind of reminds you of a Back to the Future with the parents and the son.Jason Scott Lee brought more than an action element to the movie he brought a personal touch and edge to it that most action films do not display.The only thing is a lot of people still see him as the Bruce Lee character that he did on the movie "Dragon the Bruce Lee Story" and that is because he did so well in it.If people can look past that and just watch the movie for what it is an action adventure you will definitely enjoy this movie.And look forward to the next..
But if you went into this movie expecting something scientifically sound, just stop; remember that this is the sequel to a Jean-Claude Van Damme movie.Were a few things changed in this movie, specifically some of the horrid "special" effects, two or three of the more illogical and confusing points of the plot, the cheesy Direct-to-Video style overlays for the credits, and most importantly the unbearably long final 10 minutes of the film, it could have been worthy of a cinema release.Final verdict: 5/10.
In a future movie, I would love to see the characters spend more time with a particular historical event (They were in Berlin for a total of maybe 7 minutes in the beginning of the film).
I would love to see another Time Cop movie, but only if Jason Scott Lee plays in it again!
First, before watching this movie you should be aware that it is "about" time travel...therefore there is bound to be some inconsistencies and paradox problems; and yes...the film does "bump" into some of these rather clumsily.
If you are a movie viewer that demands perfect logic and continuity or a real "time travel" buff you will have to "let it go" for this film.
Viewers may also want to know that the "Timecop" story, about cops that monitor consistency & prevent history from being altered; was a comic book before it was a movie.
However as an "action" movie (that makes you "think") it generally succeeds.In my opinion it is far better than the first "Timecop" movie starring Jean-Claude Van Damme (1994).
Jason Scott Lee (as hotshot Timecop Ryan Chan) does very well given the script & direction.
In one fight scene there is deliberate homage paid to Bruce Lee. Timecop Ryan Chan (after getting hit in a fight) gets "really mad" and takes off his shirt; flexing his muscles in the famous "Enter the Dragon" style.
When you see this scene you will know why Jason Lee was picked to play Bruce in "The Dragon",..., and why the director (and likely the actor) must accept & work with the inevitable references.
Thomas Ian Griffith is quite good in the supporting role (even in the fight scenes); however the movie watcher doesn't really see his character's motivation until the end of the movie.
The movie's script is what you would expect given the "Timecop" movie history & story genre (somewhat in the "comic-book" style); although I have the impression that Lee did quite a good job fleshing out his lines.
There are a lot of things going on in this movie all at once; the good guy "chasing" the bad guy through different time periods, shifting realities due to the changing of past events, and even characters changing or existing / not existing depending on which "reality" you are watching.
Not only does the bad guy want to kill Lee's character, he also has the option of going back to almost any time period and kill his parents, thus ending the Hero's family line.
Although you probably won't want to watch "Timecop: The Berlin Decision" again and again; if you liked "Jet Li's - The One" you will probably enjoy this movie as well..
The story is even better.Jason Scott Lee, who's been absent for some time now, plays Ryan Chan, a time cop who takes his job seriously when he's not flirting with the TEC female doctor.
Insane with grief, Miller turns renegede and is intent on wiping out Chan's existence by time jumping and killing his ancestors.The production value is excellent for a straight-to-video release and the fight action scenes are well-done (Lee and Griffith are well-trained martial artists who have a few genre movies under their belts)..
The CGI made us almost queasy for a while; time travelling generates lots of SFX :)Lots of kung-fu style action in a SF movie with a not too complex script: Save the present by travelling to the past and stop the bad guys from messing up the to be time line while dodging bullets and other weapons.
Have you ever wondered if you have the power to go back in time knowing your past world history what would it be if you change it acccording to your good-right moral sistem, would it really be in for a better world?
For people who liked the original Timecop, I recommend that you at least rent the dvd.On another note, I am glad to see Jason Scott Lee back in an action driven movie.
While small mercies are appreciated - such as Jason Scott Lee being given a new character rather than trying to be passed off in Van Damme's role (which wouldn't have surprised me) and being marginally more charismatic than the total nobody who starred in the TV series - they're not enough to save the film from inconsequentiality.
Any and all attempts to make us sympathetic to Griffith's cause fail because of his fundamental Hollywood Baddieness compounding the gaping holes in the plot and reasoning: on one hand I suppose we should be grateful that the writers tried to ask 'meaningful' questions and stray from the standard good/evil action film templates, but on the other hand, if you can't do it properly then don't bother, because you'll end up with nowt but plot holes, mixed messages and viewers trying to stay awake just for the big fight at the end.
It's great to see such talents as Thomas Ian Griffith and Jason Scott Lee return to the action genre.
You know, if TEC actually did exist, they'd have to be guarding Hitler around the clock I'm sure, he'd be a pretty popular target for rogue time travelers.
I can olny imagine this was supposed to make the time jumps more dramatic having that risk, but really seems kind of pointless to me.Is unique in that the main antagonist is someone who wants to change history for the better rahter than just get short term gains from it like in the first.
I actually think first of all what happens when same matter and same place at same time thing was cool considering what happens to Douglas in this sequel.Plus the movie is better than the first in some ways.For instance what happens in this film to dangerous convicts such as the Frank Knight character who are brought back to trial is really cool.Plus the film brings up interesting questions about time travel and yet has a lot of cool action and special effects as well.I hope there is a Timecop 3 cause this one was really good..
Not great, but worth a look if you like time travel stories.
Time travel has always been my absolute favourite sci-fi sub-genre (with "post-apocalyptic" a close second) and so I actually shelled out my hard-earned cash last weekend to buy this movie.I got round to watching it tonight and am writing this review with mixed feelings.
The title "The Berlin Decision" and the cover blurb led me to believe that most of the story would involve the main protagonists travelling back in time to Nazi Germany, with that era being the focus of the film.
Unfortunately though, the Nazi Germany part of the film takes up only a few minutes at the beginning of the film, and after that - just like in the Van Damme original "Timecop" - the characters spend most of their time in the movie's present (2025) and recent past (2002) ...
in other words almost the present day now, which to me seriously reduces a movie's "time travel" feel (the same major beef that I had with the vastly over-rated "Quantum Leap" TV show).I also thought that the whole thing was rather rushed - it tries to be too clever for its own good, and while it does throw up some interesting paradox questions, the plot moves at such a rapid pace that the viewer has little time to ponder them, and the whole thing just gets confusing and not a little messy in places.
There's a fairly gruesome bit where one of the timecops arrives back in the lab fused together with his younger self and hideously deformed - a result of him having made physical contact with himself (in a continuity nod to the original "Timecop" movie, this was described as being a potential problem for time travellers in that film).
And some of the martial arts sequences are pretty good, if you like that sort of thing.Summary: Not great, but I've seen worse sequels and I'll probably dig this out again at some point and give it another go - maybe I've missed some of the subtleties..
This is pretty much the first Jason Scott Lee film I've seen.
In short: Don't waste time watching this movie, it's not worth it.
Led by former agent, Brandon Miller (Thomas Ian Griffin), the terrorist decide to go back and take out the agents before they are able to defend themselves, with them out of the way, they'll be able to do anything they want, but the only thing stopping them is Ryan Chan (Jason Scott Lee) The top Timecop, who they thought had been stranded in the past.
In this outing, Jason Scott Lee (DRAGON: THE BRUCE LEE STORY) takes over the role of the heroic timecop out to stop some nefarious bad guys meddling with time.
It's one of those tongue-in-cheek B-movies that never takes itself too seriously and delivers plenty of entertainment in the scant running time.The lack of decent plotting is a real problem, but the film manages at least a couple of impressive set-pieces.
Jason Scott Lee Takes Time.
Traveling back from the year 2025, maverick timecop Jason Scott Lee (as Ryan Chan) manipulates the assassination of Adolf Hitler.
As any time traveler knows, changing history isn't always a good thing, because altering events inevitably leads to unexpectedly more dire consequences - that is, if the past can be altered at all, and herein it is possible.
Good story, but it breaks its own rules and doesn't fit martial arts in very logically.**** Timecop 2/ The Berlin Decision (9/30/03) Stephen Boyum ~ Jason Scott Lee, Thomas Ian Griffith, Mary Page Keller, John Beck.
The thing that spoilt it for me was the main character, Jason Scott Lee. Vann Damme would have played the part in a much better way like in the original film.
I've always enjoyed watching Time Travel movies (even bad ones), and this one was unfortunately not one of the better ones.What's good about it?
Jason Scott Lee does indeed shine in this movie, especially considering what he's been given to work with in terms of plot.What's not so good about this movie?
Cheers to Jason Scott Lee for giving an exciting and credible performance in a really bad movie.
STAR RATING:*****Unmissable****Very Good***Okay**You Could Go Out For A Meal Instead*Avoid At All CostsRyan Chan (Jason Scott Lee) is an enforcer for the Time Enforcement Commission which ensures those who attempt to alter the past to affect the present are caught and brought to trial.During one assignment transporting him back to 1940s Nazi Germany,his long time friend and fellow TE Officer Brandon Miller (Thomas Ian Griffith) suddenly decides to break the rules and tries to kill Hitler,causing Ryan to intervene and resulting in the death of Miller's girlfriend,who was in on the act too.He is incarcerated in a prison for the criminally insane,whilst Ryan is given a 30 day suspension.However,upon his release,Ryan learns of Miller's plot to eradicate the present,causing him to race back through time to catch him,as events build to Ryan learning shattering facts about how his past will affect his present.The original 1994 film,with Jean Claude Van Damme in the lead role,was a film that was ultimately destined for a sequel,even if it would be 10 years later and a smaller budget,straight to video effort.And,in Lee,the producers have found a worthy and credible successor to Van Damme.Griffith,who,many years ago was rather self righteously promoted on the front cover of his Excessive Force as the 90s successor to Steven Seagal and Chuck Norris,here appears in what must be his most high profile role in years (if not,surely in his whole career!) as the bad guy.He does have a rather engaging presence though,it must be said,and plays off well and has engaging chemistry with Lee in the hero and villain role respectively.Some of the action's nothing to sniff at,either.With both the lead stars being proficent martial arts experts,most of this revolves around some nicely chereographed fight scenes here and there,and in turn not disappointing in any way in that department.For it all,though,Timecop 2 is,as I stated,an avoidable experience,with it's disjointed,vaguely incoherent (and,sometimes it seems,none existent) storyline and ultra predictable script which offers little in the way of surprises.It's short running time means it can't be considered that much of an arguous ordeal,but,for it's duration,it strictly passes the time rather than going any way in making you think anyone should ever enforce it.**.
Timecop set in 2025, one "bad guy" Miller [Thomas Ian Griffith] try to change history by killing Hitler in 1940 and offiser Chan [Jason Scott Lee]sends to stop him , in the proses Miller's wife killed by Chan and Miller go to prison , after 2 years Miller run from prison and revenge by killing all timecop's in the past by killing they parents , so Chan must to stop him again ..........
this sequel to van dammes movie timecop [1994] very desapointed.
!!!WARNING MINOR SPOILERS!!!!!This sequel to the hit 1994 film TIMECOP stars Jason Scott Lee as Ryan Chang, a Timecop whose job is to prevent criminals from traveling to past to alter the future.
Timecop: The Berlin Decision starts in Berlin in 1940 where Time Enforcement Commission (T.E.C.) agent Ryan Chan (Jason Scott Lee) manages to prevent renegade Society for Historical Authenticity agent Brandon Miller (Thomas Ian Griffith) from assassinating Adolf Hitller & preventing both the Holocaust & World War II & thus changing history.
It turns out that Miller has escaped from prison & is going back in time eliminating the T.E.C. from history so they never existed & therefore no-one ever stops him from assassinating Hitler, Chan realises this & sets out on a mission across time to find Miller & stop him from killing his parents & restoring time to how it was...Directed by Steve Boyum this was a straight-to-video/DVD sequel to the rather good Jean-Claude Van Damme sci-fi action flick Timecop (1994) & a subsequent short-lived TV series of the same name which ran for a meagre nine episodes in 1997 before it was canned, while it's not a complete disaster & not as bad as I expected that's still no sort of recommendation & it's certainly nowhere near as good as the JCVD original.
As the title suggest the films main plot revolves around an assassination attempt on Hilter in Berlin by a time-traveller which JCVD's replacement Jason Scott Lee has to foil & thus sets up the rest of the film.
I did like the idea of the theme revolving around the moral questions about time-travel & whether it should be used to rectify past events like preventing the death's of eleven million innocent people as a result of Hitler & World War II rather than a plot that revolves around some bad guy wanting money &/or power.
Unfortunately not much is made of this angle & Timecop: The Berlin Decision quickly descends into a series of cheap action set-pieces in which B-Movie action stars Griffith & Lee battle it out across various points in time as Chan has to defeat Miller & prevent him from killing his parents & thus erasing him from history.
The opening sequence set in Berlin features the most unconvincing Adolf Hitler impersonator ever, Jason Scott Lee himself could have done a better job.
The acting isn't anything special, Lee does alright & a bleached blonde Griffith is an OK villain.Timecop: The Berlin Decision is a reasonable if unspectacular sequel to one of JCVD's best films & while it's not as good as the original it passes 75 odd minutes harmlessly enough & a fast paced story means you won't get bored or have to long to think about the plot-holes. |
tt1718714 | A Night in the Woods | The film follows Londoner Kerry (Anna Skellern) and her American boyfriend Brody (Scoot McNairy) as they travel to Dartmoor for a camping trip. Brody has decided to document their trip with his video camera. He grows irritated and jealous when Kerry invites her cousin Leo (Andrew Hawley), although Brody tries to hide this by acting friendly towards Leo. The trio stops by a pub, where they hear the story of a local legend called The Huntsman, who carves crosses into the foreheads of sinners before killing them.
Brody grows increasingly more jealous of Leo after seeing him and Kerry joking around, making him doubt Kerry’s claims that Leo is her cousin. Things grow more tense as he confronts Leo over footage of Leo sneaking into Kerry and Brody’s home. Brody attempts to catch Kerry and Leo by setting his camera up in the tent, which proves to be effective. It is revealed that not only are the two not related, but that they used to be lovers and Kerry lied to Brody in order to make things easier. Left alone, Kerry and Leo begin to have a fling, which is cut short when Leo hurts Kerry. He tries to apologize, but is rejected when he suggests that Brody is trying to replace her recently dead father. Leo then leaves Kerry alone in the woods.
Strange things begin to happen around the now alone Kerry such as strange noises and nooses tied to tree branches. Kerry is then chased into the woods by an unseen force, who knocks her out and carves a cross on her forehead. She manages to regain consciousness and returns to the campsite, where she angrily discovers the camera that Brody had set up in the tent as well as footage he had been secretly recording of her. This is further exacerbated by footage of her experiencing a nightmare while sleeping as well as a clip of Brody discussing plans to abandon Kerry in the woods so she can experience a solitude that he once experienced in exactly the same woods 10 years earlier. This infuriates Kerry, who then turns to the camera and threatens to hurt Brody. Her anger is cut somewhat short when the tent is violently shaken and she discovers a devastated Leo, all bruised and cut. Kerry tries to help him, but he attacks her in a fit of rage and chases her into the woods. She runs into a bruised and bleeding Brody, who convinces her that Leo is not himself and that they are being hunted by an unknown force. They try to find a way out of the woods, but Kerry fights with Brody after discovering Leo’s bracelet on the ground and suspecting Brody of wrongdoing. She manages to fight Brody off, killing him in the process but leaving her alone and hunted in the woods.
Kerry then discovers Leo’s digital camera on the ground, where she views a clip of Brody being attacked and dragged away by an unseen assailant. Frightened, Kerry tries to find a way out but is attacked, causing the camera to cut to black. | violence, dark | train | wikipedia | It all started with Blair Witch in '99.
There was the less-remembered 'Last Broadcast' which actually preceded Blair Witch but did not capture the imagination in the same way the viral marketing method pioneered by Haxan Films managed to.
Sadly, nothing about 'A Night in the Woods' is special, and it blows several good chances to be a great film, instead ending up a bit of a mess of a production which could have been so much more.The story sees 3 'friends' decide to go camping out in Dartmoor - the complete lack of explanation as to why they are going there is one mild flaw.
And after a very long and dragged-out first portion of the movie we finally end up on location for a night in the woods.This film tries insanely hard to be Blair Witch, in Britain.
The whole point of these films is you only ever see from the view of the camera they are holding.
As soon as you get an eye-view from a character who has no camera, it doesn't work.It was, as mentioned, also let horribly down by the unnecessarily long intro - the story took far too long to get going and created the criminal error of making every character dislikeable in the process.That all said it is not the worst cam film I have ever seen, but it was poorly-conceived and lacked sense and cohesion.
Its forced and contrived nature let it down horribly, even if the acting was actually half decent.Seen much better..
A British 'found-footage' movie that doesn't deliver..
This movie started off well like a lot of 'found-footage' movies, but then it slowly descends down hill from there.
It takes at least 45 minutes before anything actually starts to happen, and the movie is only 75 minutes long.
The movie is a cliché of most "people who go camping in the woods" type films, and there is a lot of running through the moors and through the woods that gets to be too much after a while.
There isn't that much action in it either really, in fact thinking back over it the movie seems to be a complete waste of time as you don't really get any answers to why or what is happening.
I felt like I wasted 75 minutes of my life watching this, but I do have to admit the acting was pretty good, which is a shame, as the movie wasn't.
Definitely influenced by The Blair Witch Project, this standard "terror in the woods at night" flick starts with a young couple embarking on a camping trip with the woman's cousin in tow.
Things and people turn out not to be quite what they seem, however, and as night grows near scary things start to happen.I found this one to have an interesting premise with some mildly interesting characters.The lead up to the actual horror part showed lots of promise, but never really delivered.
Lets start off with the PROS PROS: Many pop out scares (especially if watching on a high volume..), the few black and white night vision parts are excellent in making trees look like people (several times I thought I saw someone hanging from a tree, which is what the Hunter does in this movie) CONS: Too much inactivity, not enough stimulating dialogue, TOO MANY IDIOTIC DECISIONS (even for someone who is scared out of their mind..
this movie was pretty nice and really good at making your eyes deceive you, and then scaring you with distorted sound, blurred camera vision and pop out scares..
I viewed it during the day at high volume and it got me pretty good in the last 40 minutes of the film...FINALLY: One last thing I should mention is that this movie does tdo a very good job at making you hate the characters, then like them, then hate them again..
The camera-work was crass and amateurish, the plot non-existent, the characters unbelievable and totally unsympathetic.
This film was a bad steal from Blair Witch, transposed to an ancient copse on a Dartmoor tor, but with no suspense, no thrills, nothing remotely scary except that anyone had seen fit to distribute this nightmare of filmmaking.
It was repetitive beyond belief - just the same old camera shots seen over and over again, and people stumbling around among some rocks - and I kept glancing at my watch wondering how soon it would end.Fortunately I hadn't paid good money to see it in the cinema, but I resented using up one of my monthly rental DVDs after reading a favourable review in a respected British newspaper and imagining the film would be a bit of spooky fun.I recommend that no one should waste time or money viewing this film.
On the other hand, this movie does not have what it takes to really be considered a good entry into the "sub-genre".It's not so much about the actors (given the roles they get), more about the script and the execution of it.
But even if that's not what you are looking for, with logic out the window what does remain, that makes this movie at least a bit worth-while?
Blair Witch, but British..
Just from watching the trailer, there are too many similarities that can be drawn back to The Blair Witch Project.
The UK's answer to the Blair Witch.
It must have gone along the lines of: 'A Night in the Woods is a film that's shot entirely from the point of view of a single camera operator and is about three friends who go hiking in the woods, only to get picked off by an evil witch.'Surely the studio executive listening to that pitch would have said, 'Yeah, but...
isn't that the Blair Witch Project?' And they'd be right.
The film is a decent advert for the English countryside, showing some really scenic shots of Dartmoor.
These become increasingly creepy as the night vision techniques are used.However, from a promising start, we're soon treated to a pub-load of country bumpkins that happen to tell them sinister tales, foretelling what's to come (ala every other film of this type).
Then, after a long build up with nothing vaguely supernatural happening, odd things start to occur (and one of the three vanishes mysteriously, again, just like Blair Witch).I thought that perhaps it shouldn't have been filmed from the first-person and the film-makers should have stuck with a more simple approach.
At least that way it would be a little less like Blair Witch.
Plus, and I hope people won't think that this is too much like a spoiler, but the very first shot of the film is text explaining that these three people were never seen again and this footage has been edited together to 'explain' it.
If you know all three are never going to be seen again, it does kind of take away some of the mystique.If Blair Witch was never made, this might have been thought of more highly.
As it is, A Night in the Woods is sadly little more than a poor copy of a better film.
It's not bad, but it's hardly worth seeking out, unless you're really into these 'first person' films..
If you get the feeling you've "seen it all before" when watching this movie, it's because you have.
It's The Blair Witch Project.
Same character dynamics (one girl, two guys), same found footage style, same 'locals giving the background behind the evil that will ultimately befall the group', same directionless running around, same screaming, same distant calls for help...The only difference is that, instead of swapping between film camera and video camera, it's been brought up to date by switching between camcorder footage and mobile phone footage.
That or someone really thought that what the world of horror needs is a remake of The Blair Witch Project but with worse weather and worse acting..
To make a bad film is one thing; to abuse your audience is another.
The only thing scary here is the fact that a film this bad was actually made.
You are literally witnessing random nonsensical footage in the middle of the night, consisting mainly of people running around with a camera.But that is not all, because the point of view in this film is impossible to make sense out of.
It begins as a film being made with a camera carried by one of the protagonists.
But then we start getting flashbacks and then another camera suddenly appears making the whole thing utterly confusing.
Add to that the fact that even when the camera is present, half the time its positioning makes no sense at all, and the footage is already edited in an obvious way.
The film resorts to jump scares, which is the cheapest form of horror.
If you eliminate such brief moments of being scared by a sudden noise or movement, the film is just an irritatingly confusing mess.It boggles the mind that someone actually wasted time and money, filming night after night in these woods, just to produce this pathetic excuse for a film..
It took a while to get the film because you cant get it in Australia but finally I got it and watched it with a friend who also loves horror movies.
The trailer and cover looked really good but the movie was slow, boring, pointless, not scary and only had the final scene which had some form of action appear from that the characters did nothing but talk and sit around a camp fire.Very disappointing film, don't bother wasn't good at allThe acting was also not very goodThe twist at the end however was alright I guess but it could have been so much better if they added some more scares and a better twist at the end.
After watching this film last night I think it started off just like The Tapes.
It used the whole found footage style of film where it starts off with 3 people going on a trip & then it turning into a nightmare at the end.
***Contains Spoilers***I found this film similar to The Tapes & would say this one you couldn't figure out what was going on & what was happening.
I must say though that the scares were pretty good along with Kerry finding the 3 nooses hanging from the tree & Leo getting possessed.
This movie is horrible, the characters are despicable, it's not even scary.
Let me tell you the two biggest problems with this film, these two problems that pretty much ruined the whole film.Problem 1: Kerry, the girlfriend to Brody, and I also guess to Leo too.
That's one thing, but she brings Leo( her other lover) on her boyfriends camping trip.
She then continues to ignore Brody, and treat him like he is the bad guy.
But that still isn't it, when Brody goes off into the woods, she takes Leo into the tent and begins having sex with him.
But little miss prince throws Leo away too.
But that still isn't it, when Brody tries to take her safely out of the woods, she stabs him to death, then cries for him to come back.
Kerry is one of thee worst female characters in horror history, you just can't wait for her to get her come up-ins, but we don't even get to see it.Problem 2: There is maybe about two minutes of exposition about the woods, and it isn't even well done.
Compare that to The Blair Witch Project, we get tons of background history and stories about the woods, and the witch.
This film fails so hard it's not even funny, I think they added the horror aspect as an after thought.This movie is just a sad and anger fuelled mess.
A Night In The Woods is a British horror film.
It tells the messed up story of Leo,Brody and that girl,they all spend the night camping in the woods when they realize not only are they all in love with each other,that there's someone lurking in the forest..or something..woo.
This film had a good idea as in Leo was actually the guy the girl lost her virginity to and that the Brody guy was a messed up psycho was attacked a girl the year before;this was just messed up,this was good for a film..but the horror part..this i saw in The Blair Witch Project.
Its just Blair witch but if it was English,the film is copied,the only creepy scene in the whole film was kind off when the random person picked up the camera and followed the girl and she was unaware that he was behind her,that gave me chills but apart from that..BORING!
A night in the woods is a complete copied British version of The Blair Witch Project.
The Blair Witch as a relationship counsellor?.
Brody, girlfriend Kerry and her friend Leo go hiking in Dartmoor's Wistman's Woods, named because of its supposedly haunted past.That night, sexual tension and strained relationships come to a head turning what should have been a peaceful camping adventure into a nightmare.As paranoia reaches fever pitch it becomes clear that there is a much darker force at work in the ancient surroundings.Who or what is after them?
And who is carrying the camera in that scene where Kerry is running around on her own?
What he means is, he saw The Blair Witch Project, knows some people and decided to homage it/rip it off.But it's nowhere near as bad as what I feared.
But you cannot watch this film without comparing it to Blair Witch, because it's just too similar, and this is where the film is it's own worst enemy.There is a sub-plot involving the three, Brody has discovered something about Leo, but it concludes too quickly and it's obvious from the start.
And this is the films other problem, the characters are not very likable, so it's difficult to care for them.There are a couple of good scares, where the sound technicians just decide to make the film extremely loud, and some eerie imagery.And there is a huge issue regarding who on earth is holding the camera when Kerry is on her own, really makes it less 'realistic'.But, as i've already said, it's not awful, just too familiar..
Like so many found-footage crappolas that reveal a major spoiler in the first scenes, this one doesn't respect the viewer either because it tells us straight away that the three characters will all be killed.
(As if the film has so much else going for it that it can actually afford to give away a major spoiler!) So why should I hide the spoilers?
The **** is this dumb movie that makes no sense?
The hell am I doing watching three nincompoops stumble around in the dark?!"American Brody plans a night out in the woods with his English girlfriend Kerry, played by the ravishing Anna Skellern, but we soon find out that she is in fact a slag.
Brody straight away shows jealousy, but the slag isn't that bothered - for the moment at least.The viewers are first lead to believe that the trio will encounter some loony cult, then they find out that Brody is scheming something - because he knows about Leo and Kerry being former screw-colleagues.
For some reason he had never confronted Kerry with the damning evidence of Leo sniffing her underwear, or whatever, earlier on, but decided instead to teach her a lesson(?) by getting her to experience an "epiphany"(???) as he so stupidly says.
Or by making her watch all those pointless peeping-tom clips of her?) We never find out what bloody epiphany he's talking about because all hell breaks loose - as things tend to in horror films and especially in the woods at night - and nothing ever gets explained.
People just end up running around screaming, alternately chasing or following one another, stumbling in the dark - perhaps trying to entertain the viewers?
Even a standard love-triangle drama between those three buffoons would have been far more enjoyable than this pitiful excuse for a horror film.To cut a very long, very silly story short, the movie constantly lies to the viewer, but in a very clumsy way that makes no sense.
Kerry finally finds Brody, distraught and injured, and just as she finally regains her trust in him, she finds Leo's bracelet - and suddenly that makes her distrust Brody again!
Hence Kerry is an imbecile?Or how about Kerry being chased by someone (the hell knows who), then suddenly falling down (without explanation), taking a nap while being filmed by the mystery person, then getting up again and resuming her running?
This movie throws almost random stuff at you, as if desperately hoping that you're one of those nitwits who thinks that the more confusing a thriller is the more brilliant it must be.
Leo talks into the camera, saying how he knows that Brody once attacked a woman.
He totally failed in editing it in a way that would remotely be logical, which is why what you've just seen makes zero sense - and you're a gullible for hoping a found-in-sewage flick with a title that promises dark wobbly scenes with lost of pointless screaming might actually be good."Fine, I'm a gullible.
He Ain't Back yet Entire Movie Makes You Hate Leo, Whom is Obviously Involved With The Girl...
Its Got Night Vision, We Gon Run Thru The Woods Now :SPOILER: Ahhhhhh He's Chasing Us And I think its Like a Witch Or Something Take The Blair Witch Project, Take Away Any Suspense, Take Away Any Character Development, take Away Any Plot, Don't Explain What Your Looking For, Add Some Scenes About The Past We Don't Care About, Bring Us To A Point Where You MUST Explain, Then :SPOLIER: Its Night Time..
And There You Have A Night In The Woods...
More Like 10 Minutes In The Woods And A Buncha Creepy Kissing Cousin Stuff. |
tt0101788 | Dynasty: The Reunion | The series finale of Dynasty, broadcast in May 1989, had left oil tycoon Blake Carrington shot by a corrupt policeman, his beloved wife Krystle in an off-screen coma and his conniving ex-wife Alexis Colby plunging from a balcony. The Reunion picks up two years later as Blake — having survived the shooting but then convicted for the death of his attacker — is pardoned and released from prison.
Krystle has awakened from her coma during the two-year gap and returns to Denver where she is reunited with an overjoyed Blake. Steven Carrington is now an environmental lobbyist in Washington, D.C. and in a relationship with Bart Fallmont (recast with Cameron Watson), who has returned to Denver. Blake's daughter Fallon has split with husband Jeff Colby, while raising their two children and Blake and Krystle's daughter, Krystina. Fallon has also reunited with Miles Colby, with whom she had a former relationship some years earlier. Meanwhile, Krystle's niece Sammy Jo, having lost her fortune, is once again modeling in New York. On the catwalk for "Fashion Fury" she soon comes in contact with the company's newest investor: her ex-mother-in-law Alexis, who survived the fall from the balcony two years earlier after falling on Dex Dexter (whose fate was never made definitively clear, but simply stated he "was not as lucky").
It soon becomes clear that Blake's downfall had been orchestrated by The Consortium, a mysterious organization which now controls Denver-Carrington. The most insidious part of their plan comes to fruition as Krystle, brainwashed before her return, is compelled to make an attempt on Blake's life. Her love for Blake allows her to resist and overcome the programming, but The Consortium kidnaps Jeff. Miles, Blake's eldest son Adam and Jeff's ex-wife Kirby Anders rescue him. Despite Adam's involvement in The Consortium's takeover, he and Blake reconcile their differences. Adam and Kirby also rekindle their past romance and Blake regains control of Denver-Carrington with Adam's help.
The Carringtons reunite at the mansion as secret Consortium leader Jeremy Van Dorn, who is romantically involved with a clueless Alexis, attempts to both gain control of her company ColbyCo and kill her. He drags her to the garage and tries to asphyxiate her with carbon monoxide fumes from one of the cars parked inside, but she is rescued by Adam, as Van Dorn escapes (he is taken away by the police who are actually members of the Consortium in disguise). Fallon realizes she still loves Jeff and leaves Miles for him yet again. Blake and Krystle hold a family celebration at the mansion to which even Alexis is invited. After Blake makes a toast to his family, the miniseries ends as he and Krystle dance together, happy at last. | brainwashing, murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0233979 | Zapatlela | The Film begins with a Car approaching in Night. Tatya Vinchu (Dilip Prabhavalkar) a famous gangster and his henchman kubdya Khavis enters the cave of Baba chamtkar (Raghvendra Kadkol) in search for mrutunjay mantra, a voodoo spell which can transfer the soul of the chanter to any living or nonliving object. Tatya threatens Baba Chamatkar for his mantra. Baba, out of fear, gives it to him. CID Inspector Mahesh Jadhav (Mahesh Kothare), who is trying to arrest Tatya raids his warehouse. Mahesh finds Tatya, and gives chase until Tatya hides in a post office. There, they fight and Tatya gets hit by a fatal gunshot. He uses the mantra to transfer his soul into the body of a ventriloquist's doll lying nearby. Meanwhile, Kubdya Khavis is captured and taken into custody. The police believes that Tatya is dead.
Gauri (Kishori Ambiye) returns from USA to India for pursuing PHD in Criminal Psychology. In the meantime Gauri's Father gets transferred to Shrirangpur. She meets her brother Lakshya. Lakshya has a talent of ventriloquism, and Gauri gives him a doll as a gift she got from USA, which happens to be the doll in which Tatya Vinchu's soul is trapped.
Tatya tells lakshya that he is not a doll, he is a criminal. Later, the Sarpanch of the village is insulted when Lakshya publicly makes fun of him. He takes all of Lakshya's belongings on the pretext of unpaid rent. He also takes Tatya Vinchu. Tatya Vinchu shows his true identity and kills him. Lakshya gets home, only to find his house completely ransacked by Sarpanch's men. An angry Lakshya goes to the Sarpanch's godown where he sees that the Sarpanch is dead. Just then, Mahesh comes in the scene and thinks that out of rage, Lakshya has killed the Sarpanch.
In jail Lakshya desperately tries to explain, but fails to prove his point. The doll is also kept as evidence. Tatya rises from the evidence box and asks Lakshya about transport which would get him to Mumbai. Lakshya in fear of Tatya tells him. Post-mortem reports prove the innocence of Lakshya and he is freed. While Mahesh & Gauri confess to each other their love. Tatya reaches Mumbai in the Cave of Baba Chamatkar,where he asks him about how to get transferred from a puppet to mortal human body. Baba disagrees to give him further knowledge,but tatya threatens him and makes him to tell. He understands to become mortal again he has gain the body of the 1st person whom he has told his name and that person is Lakshya.
Tatya goes back to Shrirangpur to gain the body of Lakshya. One night he climbs through the window and attempts to possess Lakshya's body, but Lakshya manages to lock him in the cupboard. In the morning lakshya's lover Gangi takes Tatya out from cupboard and buries him underground, to cure Lakshya from his anxiety on the nights events. Tatya still manages to dig his way out and scares Lakshya. All the villagers think that Lakshya is going crazy and forcefully hospitalize him into a mental hospital. Taty attempts to possess Lakhya again, but Lakshya escapes just in time. Lakshya, scared, run away home.
Meanwhile, Mahesh gets whereabouts of Baba Chamatkar's cave. He approaches Baba and gets the truth about the possessed doll. Baba says that the only way to defeat the doll is to shoot him in between his eyebrows. Mahesh comes back to shrirangpur, in order to save Lakshya. Tatya meets Kubdya who has escaped from prison. He tells him about lakshya,and Kubdya takes him to Lakshya's house. Tatya once again attempts to possess him. Mahesh reaches lakshya's home just in time shrirangpur, where he and kubdya fight. Meanwhile, Tatya chases Lakshya all the way to the terrace of the house. Mahesh injures Kubdya and reaches there just in time. But Tatya pushes him and he almost falls, hanging to the edge of the roof. Tatya then takes advantage of this situation and starts saying the mantra to possess Lakshya. When Tatya is just about to say the last verse, Mahesh gets up just in time and fires a shot from his gun, and it hits Tatya vinchu in between the eyebrows. The doll falls down, now lifeless. Kubdya is taken in custody again.
The Film ends by renowned artist ventriloquist Ramdas Padhye giving a present to Lakshya in the presence of Mahesh. It is a doll. Already fearing dolls since this incident, Lakshya yells to Mahesh in fear and the movie ends. | haunting | train | wikipedia | null |
tt2275990 | The Bletchley Circle | Susan Gray, Millie, Lucy, and Jean work together at a secret facility at Bletchley to decipher German military codes for the British military, during World War II. After a brief introduction of the four women at Bletchley during the war, the series begins in 1952, seven years after the war's end, when Susan, Millie, Lucy, and Jean have returned to their ordinary lives. As the story begins, Susan learns about a series of murders that has occurred in the London area and begins to recognize patterns connecting the killings. This inspires her to return to her codebreaking past, and she reaches out first to Millie, and then to Lucy and Jean, after unsuccessfully trying to convince the police to follow up her theory about the crimes.
As they all signed orders of secrecy about their work during the war, the two married women (Susan and Lucy), disguise their activities from their husbands as a book club. Failing to secure police involvement, they move from codebreaking and investigation into the realm of field work, with dangerous consequences on several occasions. Scenes of domestic tranquility are contrasted with scenes of the killer stalking and torturing his victims. While initially skeptical about becoming involved, Millie, Jean, and Lucy are convinced to help Susan once they realize the lives of many women are on the line.
The series contrasts the conventional but very different lives of the four women and the sense of usefulness they felt while codebreaking during the war. In the Series 1 finale, the women are forced to confront the man they suspect to be the killer. | murder, historical fiction | train | wikipedia | A group of women who worked at Bletchley during the war return to their undervalued prewar existences until one of them happens upon a line of enquiry regarding a spate of murders of young women.
She finds old colleagues from the Bletchley years and they form the eponymous circle to crack the code of the killings.
Not believed and told to back down by all men in their lives and the authorities they fight alone to attempt to solve some pretty gruesome murders.
Each of the four women leads is rounded, true and touching in their different ways.
The only thing I would change is the over egged references to the murder being solved as a code: it was as if the writers felt it was a bit of a stretch and so had to 'explain' it all the time and thus made this one aspect a little clumsy and difficult to sustain suspension of disbelief.
A good look at the roles and struggles of women of the period but based on the murder mystery pace and style it is not preachy but accessible and exciting.There have been plenty of hinted at back story lines and there is lots of room for growth and new story lines in a second series - she says with fingers crossed and a begging nod to The makers/funders.
These four women had developed their minds to nearly super-human levels, only to let them rust in the decades following the war.
Great period drama....quite extraordinary how these women went from code breakers in WWII saving thousands of lives to the hum-drum of home life after the war.
Great actors and very interesting..I couldn't stop watching--I found this by accident and was truly impressed with the production quality.
If you like this...watch "Call the Midwives"--another great British show..
a thriller set in post-war England.
"The Bletchley Circle" from 2012 is about women who worked on cracking German military codes during the World War II.
After the war, though they were all very smart, they settled in everyday life that sometimes was less than satisfying.When young women start disappearing and wind up dead in 1952, one of the code-breakers, Susan (Anna Maxwell Martin) becomes interested in the case, sees a pattern emerging, and asks her husband to use a connection to get her in to see the Deputy Commissioner.
Unfortunately, her idea -- the location of the currently missing girl's body -- is incorrect.Discouraged, Susan is sure that she and her old code-breaker friends can find the killer using their code-breaking skills.
It also means putting themselves in danger.I thought this was a suspenseful, intriguing, and interesting story, with the '50s atmosphere, clothing, and hairstyles intact, with strong acting from the actresses.
Because it's a feminist story, meant to show that post-World War II, England didn't need its women any longer, the men in it are annoyed, angry, suspicious, and in one case, violent.
I would say the Deputy Commissioner, despite finding Susan a bit of a nuisance, does follow up on what she says, knowing the job she had during the war and her intelligence; and Susan's husband, though not particularly happy, knows she's a good woman and in the end, has patience with her long hours away from the house.My only question is, where is season 2?
Can't wait for second series, stayed up to was all 3episodes last night!
And yet still women were not considered able or intelligent!Loved the capture of the clothes and fashion from that period it is like stepping back in time!
Sure glad I don't have to though, those men would make want to bop them on the head!The characters are a lovely blend of the range of developing females during that time where they are confident and assured and yet still intimidated and daunted by the role men had them pigeon holed in..
I adore shows with woman as main characters, they are so rare, and this one is thoroughly involving, before you know it-it is over, you are so completely wrapped up in the story, acting; this thriller that you cant believe you drank it all in so sweetly.
Each of the woman has her own life story, each of them come with their own brilliant gift, and all care without being sentimental.
Just when I am excited to have found a new friend- ITV makes a gender biased call-women aren't a powerful enough audience-so why bother?
I enjoy the look of the show, the historical settings, and the impressive production values.The leads also impress with their acting chops and the 1950s milieu is richly evoked for the most part, with only occasional anachronisms.
I won't belabour the plot details (ably done by others here) but part of the 'perfect pitch' is the "Grrl-power" theme which is masterfully suited to our times and very much on-target when it comes to the pursuit of ratings.
The acting, the setting, the dialogues, the realistic problems women faced and still do face - everything is so brilliant.
I am growing more and more interested in British crime shows and have completely forsaken American TV.If you like a typical American style crime shows like How To Get Away With Murder with lots of pretty people having affairs and crying over and over for being 'misunderstood' on God's green earth, then The Bletchley Circle is not for you.It is a gripping and unbelievably realistic and down to earth show.
The pace is good, the character development is excellent, the show is not needlessly critical of our history, it only criticizes the chauvinism when it is necessary, which makes it all the more realistic and haunting.
There is no overcompensation of homosexuality either, like I said earlier, there is no overdose of sex of any kind.It is a plain, brilliant crime show, nothing else..
Gripping series- female characters are diverse in personalities and their non judgemental interactions are refreshing to see .
(Reviewing Season 1) I like British detective stories, I'm interested in problem solving, code breaking, crypts and logic reasoning.
They talk about code breaking, but there's never a real moment you'd feel like you/they actually figured out something relevant.
The story in general is quite interesting, but the script around it is quite yawning.The cast..
The youngest of the circle had a more solid background written in the script, but I'm not sure if I could even distinguish the two remaining women from each other, they were bystanders at best.And even tho one of the ladies had a more solid background written in the script, I'm not sure if it was relevant really.
The acting is great, the pacing and the writing are excellent, and the plot (where these things most often fail) works, too.
In the hands of the masters like Agatha Christie or Dorothy Sayers it can be brilliant, as long as we accept the formal quaint convention that a little old lady or an English lord might go around solving murders that baffle the police.
In Bletchley Circle instead of one amateur sleuth we get four: a committee of nerdy women who, having worked at code-breaking in WWII, now have not much to do and nothing to challenge their superior minds.
In fact, almost the entire first episode is spent having one of the ladies trying to convince the other three to join the hunt for a vicious serial killer.
They're supposed to be super smart and great at putting together clues from reading newspapers and other evidence they collect, but at the same time they're clueless, bumbling and squeamish.
One nearly gets herself raped trying to bait the killer and they commit various obvious offenses by contaminating crime scenes and stealing evidence.
In detective fiction the reader (or viewer) is supposed to have some idea of the steps that lead to the solution of the case.
In this we are just told the women are doing some heavy thinking and then come out with a result.Another very annoying feature is the heavy feminist bias that muddies the plot.
The mystery-thriller is an old standby and needs new elements to keep it fresh, but remember that gifted amateurs going around solving crimes is a literary convention that requires a willing suspension of disbelief..
Interesting concept, but facile execution.Like Foyles War, this can't get its transport history right.
Susan's husband's car is a 1954 Morris Oxford.Sorry if this sounds pedantic, but it does rather destroy any sense of historical context.I'd also like to know where, in the days before the internet, the intrepid ladies managed to get hold, so easily, of so much information on trains, work rosters and the like.
The viewer has no time to process the end of the previous scene before the next is upon us - often involving the same character arriving in a different location..
Mind you the principal lady,Susan,has incredible difficulty conveying the simplest bit of information to anyone else.Sighs and heaving bosoms convey little to the average chap.
The story itself is incredible.Things become unbelievably(Meldrew,not me) out of control in the last episode.
My feeling is,the Bletchley Circle would have been more gainfully engaged in confidence tricking.Either bringing scammers to boot with their code breaking talents or perhaps,chiseling "not very deserving outfits", themselves.And getting away with it of course.A bit the way Alistair Sim or Sir Alec tended to do things........
The acting is good, as is production and directing.
The idea of flashbacks to the real Bletchley story is clever.I would be more interested in more about the Bletchley days.
This three part murder mystery begins during the Second World War when we are introduced to our protagonists; Susan, Millie, Jean and Lucy; four women who work at Bletchley Park analysing intelligence data to try to figure out the German's plans.
The action then jumps forward a few years to the early fifties when Susan thinks she has spotted a pattern in a series of murders that have recently been reported.
Their analysis of the evidence leads them to the body of another victim and soon they have an idea about how the killer is finding his victims.
As they form theories some are proved wrong others initially lead the wrong way but eventually they learn who the killer is; the problem is by then he is aware that they are after him!This is a solid mystery with a plethora of false leads, suspects who turn out to be innocent and as is often the case a police force who isn't convinced by the evidence presented by the protagonists.
The four main characters are interesting and varied despite their similar wartime background.
Anna Maxwell Martin does a great job as chief protagonist Susan and is ably supported by Rachael Stirling, Julie Graham and Sophie Rundle as Millie, Jean and Lucy respectively.
The series doesn't concentrate on the mystery to the exclusion of all else; we see enough of their family lives to see how attitudes towards women were different back then; there are also subtle reminders to the period such as a newspaper sign mentioning rationing.
Viewers hoping to solve the crime before our amateur sleuths may be a little disappointed that we don't see the killer for some time and when we do attention is drawn to him in a way that makes it fairly obvious that he is the killer
I don't think that spoils the story though; there is still plenty of tension as the story approaches its conclusion.
On the strength of this story I'd be pleased if more instalments were commissioned so the four women can investigate further cases..
Many things come together to make a show good, and more are needed to make it great.
But to elevate a show to near-perfection requires far more than just great scripts, direction, settings, and acting, all of which TBC possesses in abundance.
The period sets look realistic enough to make me nostalgic for the land of my birth.
Careful watching of shows like Mad Men, sees props that have had a hard life when they're supposed to be new, harming the overall effect of an historical setting.On the topic of Mad Men, the gentleness of the sexism in TBC is a welcome subtlety, unlike the former show, where it is not just blatant, but at times brutal.Also absent (thankfully) is the mix of races that - along with sexual orientation - is increasingly common (if not mandatory) in many US shows.
There are four central characters, each with their own lives, and in some cases, husbands, but the males are of only superficial value to the scripts and have accordingly minor roles, only providing opportunities for the leads to develop their roles.The actors also bring to life the characters with superb conviction and credibility; the pace is just right, and so too is the idea of them taking a bus to get to a location.
At no stage have I felt like I was watching actors, it was more like being given a glimpse into the lives of real people.
The idea that, during WW2, a group of ordinary women (some of whom may or may not have special abilities -- that's a wee spoiler) could be so instrumental, so pivotal, in the war effort, and yet so ignored afterwards.
Followed by the idea that at least one member of this former squad, in the modern era, would eschew her life as an ordinary housewife to help the police catch a ripper -- and, in the process, re-unite her former team...?
Suddenly the ladies are in the field actually playing cat and mouse with a serial killer.
This is an old school detective movies where crime investigations are based on deductions, clues, etc.
There's no DNA, fingerprints, or other modern methods.The main characters are four British women that used to be code breakers.
They decided to investigate a serial murderer because they found the murderer left behind patterns that they can decode, just like breaking codes during the war.It was an OK movie.
Like when one woman pull out a math book to help figure out the killer's pattern, I thought that was kind of ridiculous.
Fortunately she did not pull out a calculus book or used differential equations.I was able to predict one murder in the movie just by thinking, if she goes to this person for help, wouldn't the serial killer also have guessed it?
It is disappointing these supposedly smart women never thought about the possibility.What is worse, the main character seems to enjoy putting herself in harm's way without thinking.
This thought never occurred to the main character.It is also stupid these women set a trap to lure the killer and then lost track of the bait.It is obvious the movie was written by not so intelligent writers.
There are other similar flaws.Also, the protagonists often reach conclusions without it being clear to the viewer how they have done so, and there are gaps in the logic of the plot.Another sorry example of how mainstream British drama has been dumbed down..
A group of women,each one gifted with a heightened ability, combine their powers of infallible memory,advanced logic,statistical analysis and advanced code deciphering in order to help the authorities capture a serial killer.There is periodic references to the post war psyche and the social oppression of woman.
The main character Susan (Anna Maxwell Martin) cant suppress her ability to recognize patterns, a skill she employed during the War as a member of a top secret government agency referred to as Bletchley (Bletchley Park).
Susan attempts to solve a series of murders to spite her war hero husbands demands that she put her role of dutiful housewife first.Even the police treat her with indifference.Unable to crack the case alone Susan appeals to her former colleagues for help.Each of our heroes are still bound by the values and sense of responsibility that helped win the War. There is a shroud of secrecy regarding their work for the war effort and our heroes cant discuss their experiences with anyone else.This all sounds pretty exciting and this interesting plot started out with some promise.....BUT.........The final climax of this story is a total let down.
The whole thing crash landed with a ridiculously rushed and contrived ending that totally unraveled everything i thought was clever about the story.Like a bomb that never went off this post war thriller was a dud that left me totally disappointed..
Odd. For anyone expecting anything to do with Bletchley Park and code cracking you will be disappointed.
The plot could be attached to almost any 4 women with time on their hands.
They just happened to have worked at Bletchley Park, though you wouldn't know it from the series.We never get to see any real sleuthing and eventually the foursome luck their way into capturing the perpetrator.
Indeed, he almost wills them to capture him so that he can "go out with a bang", with some girlies from the park, as a way of closing the circle that began in Bletchley.The acting was fine.
Unlike Williams in Upstairs Downstairs, I won't be watching this series again, years from now.A rather odd way of shoe-horning WW2 and Blethcley Park into a mystery/thriller but that is to be expected as the years pass.
The setting is good, 4 intelligent woman from the post WW2 era, who were codebreakers during the war.
There is very little actual code breaking, they often jump to conclusions, leaving plot holes behind and there is little logical reasoning or when there is it is often hasted and not worked out properly.
This kills exactly why this show could have been very good: we supposedly have intelligent women yet the show fails to show their intelligence and their work.
Some of the conclusions have not been used at all, or it was not clear for me why they were relevant (like Cotswolds at the end, or the spiral). |
tt5071886 | Kabali | A Kuala Lumpur–based don Kabaleeswaran alias Kabali (Rajinikanth) is released after spending 25 years in prison on a false charge of starting a massacre at a local Hindu temple that killed many, including his wife Kumudhavalli alias Kumudha (Radhika Apte). He immediately resumes charge of his old gang and soon confronts Loganathan alias Loga (Mime Gopi), a drug smuggler. Loga insults Kumudha, saying that she would have been sold into prostitution had she been alive. In retaliation, Kabali rams his car into Loga, killing him; however, the incident makes him believe that his wife may be still alive. Later, Kabali survives an assassination attempt by Tamizh Kumaran alias Kumaran (Kalaiyarasan), whose father Tamilmaaran (Charles Vinoth) was killed by Kabali when Kumaran was a young boy. The next day, at a function organised by the Free Life Foundation School, a school started by Kabali's friend Ameer (John Vijay) to reform youngsters involved in criminal activities, Kabali talks about his past.
Kabali was the protege of Tamilmaaran's father Tamilnesan (Nassar), a don who fought for the rights of the Tamil Malaysians. Tamilnesan was killed by Veerasekaran alias Veera (Kishore), who was also a part of Tamilnesan's gang, but disliked his rules such as not involving in illegal activities like drug smuggling and prostitution. Following Tamilnesan's death, Kabali took charge of Tamilnesan's gang. But Veera manipulated Tamilmaaran by telling him that he, being Tamilnesan's son, should lead the gang and not Kabali. Tamilmaaran invited Kabali and a pregnant Kumudha for a temple function. However, this was revealed to be a trap as Veera and his men confronted Kabali and Kumudha at the function. In the ensuing scuffle, Kabali was brutally attacked while Kumudha was shot and seemingly killed. Kabali then killed Tamilmaaran for his betrayal in front of a young Kumaran and was soon arrested on a false charge of instigating the massacre.
Kumaran, after hearing Kabali's speech, realises his mistake and apologises to him. He tells him that Velu (R. Amarendran), one of Veera's henchmen who was present at the temple massacre, is aware of what happened to Kumudha. Kabali then leaves for Thailand, where Velu is residing. On confronting Velu, he learns that his daughter is still alive. At this juncture, Kabali is confronted by Yogi (Dhansika), a contract killer hired by Veera and his boss Tony Lee alias Tony (Winston Chao), who heads the rival Gang 43 in Kuala Lumpur, to eliminate Kabali. But Yogi instead kills the men who had come with her and reveals herself to Kabali as his daughter, who had been raised by Velu. She also tells him that Kumudha is still alive and is living with a French family in Puducherry. Kabali and Yogi then leave for Puducherry, where, after several days of searching, they reunite with Kumudha and spend a few days with her there. While in Puducherry, Kabali and his family are attacked by men sent by Tony. However, Kabali and Yogi fight them off and escape safely with Kumudha.
Kabali and his family soon return to Kuala Lumpur, where he is told that Ameer has been severely injured in a car accident set up by Tony; his henchman Jeeva (Dinesh) was brutally chopped to pieces by Tony after refusing to join the Gang 43; and the Gang 43 had destroyed the Free Life Foundation School and started to control the Kuala Lumpur underworld, eliminating any gang who dared to oppose them. On hearing all this, Kabali decides to finish Veera and Tony once and for all. He and his family attend the 100th birthday party for a respected Malaysian don Ang Lee, who had invited all gangs, including the Gang 43. At the party, Kabali starts a shootout with the help of Kumaran, which ends with him killing Veera and Tony.
Some months later, Kabali, Kumudha and Yogi attend a function organised by the Free Life Foundation. One of the Free Life alumni, a youngster name Tiger (Hari Krishnan), who is known to be aggressive and reckless, walks up to Kabali, with scenes showing him speaking to the police prior to the function. The screen cuts to black, and the sound of a gun clicking and a gunshot afterwards is heard. | revenge, murder, flashback | train | wikipedia | Its Awesome!!!Makeup Artist has done a great job.Dunno why people said its draggy, which I totally dint feel.Watch the movie and come to a conclusion, don't listen to what people say( Includes my opinion too).Please do not read reviews and go with the same expectation because people have different tastes.I personally liked every bit of it.Overall a nice move.
Radhika Apte as Kabali's wife has done a decent job but one cannot expect her to save a plot so weak that even the great superstar Rajini couldn't infuse life into.
So I went to the theatre with minimum expectations on the story and logic, but I did expect it to be an out and out Rajni film.Watching Kabali for me was an inner struggle between the fan in me and the critic.
But the film takes a diversion as Kabali sets to find his wife (very neatly played by Radhika Apte) along with his daughter (a tomboy character played by Dhansika through which director wants to show that he is all in for equal opportunities).
The regular movie-goers would have seen Rajinikanth in different kinds of films, but what is special about Kabali is his collaboration with a two- film-old young director Ranjith which has played a big part in the curiosity levels of the audience.
Ranjith has used Rajini's swagger to his advantage, albeit at a different pace.There are hardly any scenes that pass which do not involve Rajinikanth in it but Ranjith has made sure that he has put all his acting resources to good effect.
Usually, when a new director works with a big star like Rajinikanth, they tend to adjust the flow of the film for the hero's stardom but Ranjith has extracted what he wanted for his script without compromising much.Verdict: Rajinikanth in a different dimension, but Kabali might not work for everyone.
Set predominantly in Malaysia, the movie is adrenaline pumping action scenes with enough emotional elements, quite like in any Ranjith film.
With a super screen presence of Rajinikanth and effective handling of the theme by Ranjith, Kabali ends up as one of the best films from superstar's hut.
Kabali (played by Rajanikanth), his wife (played by Radhika Apte), and several other Indian and Tamil characters in the film are supposed to be new generation Indians/Tamils in Malaysia whose ancestors were taken to the Malaya peninsula from the India as workers in plantations run by the British.
Sad...Really Sad. I really don't know what to say about this movie, me being a fan of Rajani sir
..it is a total disaster, I don't know what the director was thinking and how he convinced Talaivar to do this particular film.Absolutely no story line which is gripping, there is no concept of old wine in a new bottle
..he (director) just messed up with so many people's expectations and emotions
one should not toy with people like this.The movie is so cheap looking just like a B grade movie (I would say C grade but I could not because of Rajanikanth)There are no actors in the movie other than Thalivar himself and except glimpses of Nasser and Radhika Apte
.rest all are like rode side beggars picked from side walk
I cant even say over they overacted
they don't know how to act
it is so degrading of Rajani sir in this movie.How can someone make a mess out of Rajani sir's dates and call sheets
.it takes special talent to do something like this
.and this director did best of it
by far the WORST film Rajani sir did
..if I start what is worst in the film it is an endless list
.I couldn't find anything good other than Thalivar in this movie.Even Rajaini sir also should take some special care on his films from now on
.there were companies which declared holiday on the release day
..no other actor or star has that status today
he also have to take some responsibility.
It is sure that women will be willing to watch kabali on screen despite a gangster movie is a success for both the superstar and director..
Rajini sir acting is one of the major plus point of the movie, his simplicity, mannerism and stand back in few scenes n giving opportunity to other actors r worthwhile to mention.
PA.Ranjith should have made little more concentration on the screenplay and a bit on rajinism to satisfy rajini fans.Though movie may not offer rajinism at the whole,one can keep a little less expectation and enjoy this wonderful emotional life of kabaleeshwaran AKA kabali..
There's not much that you can appreciate except for Rajinikant ,who still can act at this kind of an age .The Story is Pretty Cliché', the movie Is nothing special not anything new it's an old , nothing new , same formula which has been tried tested and failed , the film has style , but not enough to save it from its lacking story , and overall interest.
Rajni Used to be a Great Star, Robot was a good Movie, Then Lingaa and Kabali, these are typical movies with flare of Rajni actions and style.It has no story line, poor direction, cheap CGI and VFX, Not worth watching, Now a Days Rajni Movies are all about Marketing Hype then Stories, Its a Bad Movie, Boring also and Mainly for Southern Indian Setting, Such Movies only represent Regional Cinema in more hypocritical manner and are made only with view to make commercial cinema, I think Hindi Movies, Marathi and Gujarati movies has much more depth and are more directed towards audience who values good cinema, Kabali, is a mixed and confused efforts to make a mix of gangster, melodramatic, family and crime movie, with tadka of Rajni, and in turn it becomes toxic mixture of boring monolithic cinematic effort, Over all good marketing effort but poor movie,Avoid at all cost, don't stand in queue for this, you will find more peace in Ekta Kapoor Daily Soaps.
From 70's to now he is the biggest star of Indian cinema.No wonder Kabali is a complete Rajinikanth's film and like 99% time, he appeared the central person of his screen presence.
The movie is a subtly nuanced low- brow drama for most part before the interval, post which we are handed out some bloated gangster scenarios and sheer bloodbath.What I liked most about Kabali is the fact that Rajni, for a good part of the run-time, held the elegant demeanor of a normal family- man (husband, father) and Pa Ranjith needs to be given a pat on his back for reminding us of the'actor' Rajni we'd been missing out all this while.
Agree the film would look more docu-dramaish than it already is, but at least it would've been a movie that drove home a solid point.In this case, the viewer just GETS TO KNOW that Ranjith had a REAL STORY to tell, but lost focus since he had to cater to SuperStar's massive fan-base and ultimately ended up fully satisfying neither the fan nor the general viewer.
At best, Kabali is a one-time watch for Rajni's on-screen charisma and Radhika Apte's womanly charm.Handed out lavish budgets and big stars to work with, quite a few small-time Tamil directors seem to have experienced setbacks in their recent ventures.
Kabali is a very good entertainer for Rajni fans, it's a movie with bounded script,Rajni has opted a character for his present age, BGM of movie sound well at many places, camera works were good, except the wide angle shots, screenplay needs some more clarity, rerecording is decent,but songs were the draw back for the movie, it reduces the speed of movie, some songs consist of good lyrics which did not sync with music ,the presentation of Nerupu da song was awesome, all the characters in the movie performed well to their roles, the passions between a husband & wife, father & daughter who meet after a long duration was well expressed, but the same was not expressed between mother & daughter, on an overall kabali is a movie which exhibits Rajnikanth's Acting..
The story is also good and direction by Pa Ranjith impresses big time.Overall, KABALI is a different Rajini film but has loads of entertainment.
The climax shocks all as it turns out to be one of the weakest with no conclusive ending.Film lacks commercial elements and there is no humour and romance in the film.Viewers get to see Kabali power only in couple of scenes as Ranjith failed to elevate the conflicts between Rajini and Winston Chao the villain in a more powerful manner.
My expectations were meant.What many people failed to realize was that the director, Pa Ranjith, constantly repeated ,whenever he had a chance, that this is not going to be a Rajni film before the release of the movie.
Other actors- The movie had consistently good acting throughout ranging from the excellent part done by Radhika Apte to pulling off a gangster look and feel from Dhansika and the comedy relief provided by Dinesh, the movie had consistent acting throughout.3.Commercial elements - To satisfy the audience the director had a great intro scene ( probably the best intro since Sivaji), a good action scene following the intro scene , the "mass scene" where Rajni rams the car and the climatic fight, were planted throughout the movie.4.
Not thinking about its BO collection and seeing it separately as a movie,this is probably the most realistic Rajinikanth aka Thalaivar movie we fans can get.Also the fact that it addresses multiple issues in the film,the film may feel slow at time and also with the high melodrama thrown in,but this movie breaks the notion of types Thalaivar has been doing,the same charisma is reflected in his solid acting,carrying the movie on his shoulders.The supporting cast is good,the music and bgm are also terrific.This the most down to Earh mass role Thalaivar has done.A different moviewatching experience,sometimes we feel we move along with the leads.On the whole a different Rajni movie!!!.
Some reviews said that movie is slowly paced and this is not close to reality, but the slow pace is because it is needed for the narration of the story, and if you are too close to reality the viwers may feel that they are watching a documentary...Sleek editing, Camera work, Music score, lightings, Action choreography were top notch...The Climax is predictable some say , yes its predictable, because everyone wanted that kind of climax in their mind so obviously its predictable.I loved this movie.
'Kabali' turned out to be a phenomenon across the globe prior to its release,being the most hyped film from India in recent times featuring Thalaivar Rajnikanth in a gangster avatar that was expected to be a treat for the fans of the veteran superstar in particular with sequences reminding his yesteryear blockbusters.The movie reached theaters amidst sky-high expectations in a massive count of 300 screens across Kerala,thanks to the combined effort from S.Thanu and Ashirwad Cinemas.If someone ask me a one word review for the movie,my immediate answer will be 'Disappointing'.Nothing surprising as the scenario isn't new to Kollywood where the major share of well-anticipated movies,particularly in this decade has failed to generate a satisfactory response from the common audience and the critics alike.In simple words,the mass hype generated was too much for a half-baked emotional thriller like Kabali that moves in a lethargic pace for the most part of the narration.Pa.Ranjith has made a mark on the Kollywood industry with his two odd films Attakathi and Madras that were utterly realistic and easily expected in the list of personal favorites of anyone who is seriously into Tamil movies.Kabali being helmed by Ranjith,there were clear assumptions from a major section that its going to be a realistic,slow-paced thriller rather than an out and out Rajnikanth film like Shankar's Sivaji or K.S Ravikumar's Padayappa.The movie gave me a feeling that Thalaivar Rajnikanth was casted in a role that had shades of typical Ulaganayagan Kamal Hassan portrayals,particularly coming to the emotional sequences.The goose-bump sequences were minimal and elevated only by the grace and dialogue delivery of the superstar.The pace was really an issue leaving side the initial sequences and choked a smooth narrative.The lack of logic in the screenplay was evident and turned a hiccup in multiple junctures in the clichéd storyline.The flashback sequences were comapritively realistic and presented well by Ranjith.The climax turned unintentionally funny due to poor execution and could have dealt much better..The action sequences too were a mixed bag,with two fights being well-choreographed and two,especially the climax fight being a big letback.Rajni movies are always known for repeated audience and cherishable mass sequences,but Kabali fails in this part too as there were only a hand full or even less number of memorable sequences that will stay in the minds once we are out of the cinema hall.
There were rumors about a superstar making surprise cameo in the movie but didn't materialize.None would point-out a single film where Rajnikanth failed to impress with his style and acting prowess and this time too the 66 year old actor has managed to pull off a really impressive performance as Kabaleeswaran,the good-hearted gangster.Another pick among the cast was Dhansika playing the role of a hit-girl giving out a refreshing performance.Radhika Apte was well-cast as the lead heroine,but couldn't deliver a standout performance as expected.Attakathi Dinesh's character was peculiar and made its presence felt ,the same time giving him a break from his usual village-oriented roles.The rest of the cast that includes Kishore,John Vijay etc did their part well.Taiwaneese actor Winsyon Chao failed to enact a menacing villain.The songs and background score by Ranjiths favorite Santhosh Narayanan were adequate as far as the narration is concerned,but couldn't make much impact except for the 'Nerrupu Da' bit that created a huge buzz before the release.There were good number of interesting slow motion sequences by G.Murali who did his job well the camera.Cuts by Praveen K.L could have been better.In all means,Kabali is an opportunity wasted by Pa.Ranjith who failed to utilize the charisma of the veteran actor to the fullest.Better less said about a thriller where the so called 'thrills' take a backseat.Give it a miss or watch it just for Superstar Rajnjikanth and his evergreen style of acting..
If yours idea about thlaivar movie is all about action,punch dialogue,silly humour,colourful songs and larger than life then u ll be disappointed,,but looking for a change in thalaivar then go for it....it's a complete Pa Ranjith film..because in two hour thirty minutes movie u only get see a maximum fifteen minutes of super star Rajanikanth.the rest is all about Kabali ....
When the movie "Kabali" was announced by the production house that it would be directed by Pa.Ranjith (Attakathi and Madras ) with "Superstar" Rajnikanth, all were much surprised on how the movie would come out and whether it would satisfy all classes of audiences and especially the Thalaivar's fans.
Next would be the characterization of the Main Villain ( Tony Lee) as to challenge a person like Kabali (Rajni) on screen one on one, you would want the baddie to be hard grit, menacing and gruesome ( at least to some level),but here the director seems to have missed on his character design due to which the Villain lacks the impact.One of the Main Strong Zones of Kabali is none other than Music Director Santhosh Narayanan who has done a excellent work in the songs and the background score department for the movie.
True to the the trailer, P.a Ranjith has beautifully showcased Rajni's style & fights melodiously throughout the movie.The film does get a bit slow in between by bringing out Kabali's emotions and sadness but seeing things on a larger front makes the whole experience a treat to watch.
Kabali is entirely misunderstood movie which is totally different from what it showed in teasers.Its an emotional gangster flick which can be watched once..
Kabali flies down from Malaysia to India but his path to find his wife is riddled with many problems.Plus Points: 1)Rajinikanth: Rajni is the major plus point for this movie.His style,his charisma,his looks everything is marvelous.No one can match his level.He gave brilliant performance as aged gangster.His laugh is enough for whistles allover the theater.2)Music: Santhosh Narayan gave some truly world class music.Song Neruppu daa is extraordinary and even his BGM is different and perfectly sets the mood of movie.3)Interval and Climax: Both the Interval and Climax are the only scenes in Kabali which really satisfies audience.Especially climax fight brings out the Rajini we are missing the whole time.Minus Points: 1)Screenplay: Kabali is surprisingly disappointing with boring narration and dragging screenplay.All the audience who expected Rajni mark mass movie will be surely disappointed with Kabali.This movie is more of a emotional gangster flick than mass one.2)Duration: Kabali has duration of 2hr 30 min which is makes audience bored for sure.3)Missing Rajni style: Except his looks ,Kabali has no punch dialogues,no mass scenes,no stylish scenes which are expected from Rajini.So,Kabali is entirely misunderstood movie which is totally different from what it showed in teasers.Its an emotional gangster flick which can be watched once.Kabali also ends on a shocking note which came as an entirely unexpected moment.My rating 5.5/10.
Not shocked to see this movie which has a mixed critic but all have to admit that this not a Mass Entertainer and a Rajinikanth CRUX.This movie had all in it to be rated as Good film and Screenplay Thanks to Director Pa Ranjith.As Superstar played lead old gangster role the followers expectations was sky high because of the fast paced made the film Teaser.Which is also a business tactics on the promotions, nothing to hide.Finally watching this film as mere audience without any expectations will give you most satisfaction than any other hypothesis.Go watch & Enjoy as always...
People are entitled to their opinions and you don't need to like them, but respect it and move on.Lets leave aside the fact that this movie doesn't have the typical Rajini mass elements, comedy, style, punch dialogues, action scenes, etc. |
tt0079156 | Il fiume del grande caimano | A teenage girl purchases a baby American alligator while on vacation with her family at a tourist trap in Florida. After the family returns home to Chicago, the alligator, named Ramón by the girl, is promptly flushed down the family's toilet by her surly, animal-phobic father and ends up in the city's sewers.
Twelve years later, the alligator survives by feeding on covertly discarded pet carcasses. These animals had been used as test subjects for an experimental growth formula intended to increase agricultural livestock meat production. However the project was abandoned due to the formula's side effect of massively increasing the animal's metabolism, which caused it to have an insatiable appetite. During the years, the baby alligator accumulated concentrated amounts of this formula from feeding on these carcasses, causing it to mutate, growing into a 36 foot (11 m) monster resembling a deinosuchus or purussaurus, as well as having an almost impenetrable hide.
The alligator begins ambushing and devouring sewer workers it encounters in the sewer, and the resulting flow of body parts draws in world-weary police officer David Madison (Robert Forster) who, after a horribly botched case in St. Louis, has gained a reputation for being lethally unlucky for his assigned partners. As David works on this new case, his boss Chief Clark (Michael Gazzo) brings him into contact with reptile expert Marisa Kendall (Robin Riker), the girl who bought the alligator years earlier. The two of them edge into a prickly romantic relationship, and during a visit to Marisa's house, David bonds with her motormouthed mother.
David's reputation as a partner-killer is confirmed when the gator snags a young cop, Kelly (Perry Lang), who accompanies David into the sewer searching for clues. No one believes David's story, due to a lack of a body, and partly because of Slade (Dean Jagger), the influential local tycoon who sponsored the illegal growth experiments and therefore doesn't want the truth to come out. This changes when obnoxious tabloid reporter Thomas Kemp (Bart Braverman) (ironically, one of the banes of David's existence) goes snooping in the sewers and supplies graphic and indisputable photographic evidence of the beast at the cost of his own life. The story quickly garners public attention, and a city-wide hunt for the monster is called for.
An attempt by the police to flush out the alligator comes up empty and David is put on suspension, after the alligator escapes from the sewers and comes to the surface, first killing a police officer and later a young boy who, during a party, is tossed into a swimming pool in which the alligator is residing.
The ensuing hunt continues, including the hiring of pompous big-game hunter Colonel Brock (Henry Silva) to track the animal. Once again, the effort fails: Brock is killed, the police trip over each other in confusion and the alligator goes on a rampage through a high-society wedding party hosted at Slade's mansion; among its victims are Slade himself and the mayor. The alligator also kills the groom (who happened to be the lab scientist performing the illegal experiments). Marisa and David finally lure the alligator into the sewers before setting off explosives on the alligator, killing it. As the film ends with David and Marisa walking away after the explosion, a drain in the sewer spits out another baby alligator, having a repeating cycle all over again. | violence, murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0131550 | The Final Sacrifice | In the first scene of the film, hooded men chase a lone man through a snowy forest. A shot rings out and the opening credits roll.
The protagonist, Troy McGreggor, finds a map belonging to his late father, who was shot seven years earlier, as the first scene depicts. Troy’s father, Thomas, was an archeologist who met his untimely death after becoming involved in a plot with a mysterious cult led by a strange man named Satoris (Shane Marceau). The orphaned Troy decides to follow the map to learn about the circumstances of his father's death. The cultists learn about Troy and his father's map and begin chasing him in a black Ford Torino, but Troy escapes by outrunning them on his 10-speed bicycle. The cultists refuse to give up, however, and in a final attempt to escape, Troy jumps into the back of a battered pickup truck heading into the Alberta countryside. The truck belongs to a drifter with the unusual name of Zap Rowsdower. At first Rowsdower considers turning Troy over to the police, but after Troy helps him to fix his broken-down truck, he decides to let Troy stay with him. At a campfire that night Troy asks Rowsdower lots of questions, which irritates the grumpy Rowsdower, who drinks lots of beer and rubs his tattooed left arm as if he's in pain.
The map leads Troy and Rowsdower all over Alberta, through some hidden caves, and finally to the unkempt house of a grizzled fugitive by the name of Mike Pipper (Ron Anderson). Pipper was a partner of Troy’s father and has been hiding in the woods from Satoris for seven years. Pipper reveals that the cultists are the last descendants of an ancient and advanced race called the Ziox, who had inhabited the area long before the Indians, and whose civilization was destroyed by their god in a month-long rainstorm after they turned to worshiping unholy idols. According to Pipper, the Ziox built a great city that was more advanced than "anything the ancient Egyptians or Romans ever knew." He believes that Satoris wants to raise the buried city in hopes that it will restore power to the Ziox and allow him to conquer/rule the entire world. Pipper also casually mentions that Rowsdower once belonged to the evil cult and may have killed Troy’s father. Rowsdower reveals he has the cult’s insignia branded on his arm, like the other cultists. Satoris seems to be able to torment Rowsdower through the mark, as we see Rowsdower writhing in agony while asleep, presumably having a Satoris-induced nightmare.
Eventually, Troy is captured by Satoris and his cult, who use the map to locate their ancient idol. Satoris means to make Troy the titular final sacrifice. It’s up to Rowsdower to save Troy and put an end to the cult’s activities. Pipper gives him his horse and an old rifle, and directs him to the ancient Ziox sacrifice site that he was able to decipher from Troy's map. Rowsdower stumbles upon the site of the idol and begins to duel with Satoris, who reveals that when the moment came, Rowsdower could not bring himself to kill Troy’s father and Satoris had to do it himself. Satoris is about to kill Rowsdower when Troy manages to intervene, shooting the cult leader in the back with Rowsdower’s rifle. Satoris’ death causes the destruction of the idol and the reemergence of the lost city of Ziox, indicating that Satoris was the true final sacrifice. Instead of bringing about evil, the risen city (as Pipper had foretold) is actually a force for good, and Satoris' cult breaks up as its members are freed from his evil influence. Troy and Rowsdower observe the rise of the lost city from the ground, then the two heroes drive off together. | cult | train | wikipedia | "Quest of the Lost City/The Final Sacrifice" (pick your poison) goes one better: the characters are too stupid to keep the plot moving, but it does anyway through sheer coincidence and dumb luck.So we've got this scrawny kid named Troy, who as our story begins is rummaging through some junk his late father left behind (Dad, we learned in the pre-credit sequence, got shot seven years ago by a group of thugs in ski masks).
Presumably this makes him scary; in truth it makes him look like Professor Snape's third cousin and sound like a bad Darth Vader impersonator.Troy elludes the thugs by hopping into the back of a rusty pickup truck, driven by the boozy and bitter Zap Rowsdower.
My guess is the writer was going for a cool, memorable name like "Indiana Jones" and failed miserably.) Rowsdower happens to know a lot about the thugs (a cult bent on world domination, we are informed), having been one of their number some years back.
Pipper also drops a warning in Troy's ear about Zap: "He was with Satoris the night your father was killed." Troy's so shocked he doesn't even bother to ask how Pipper knows this, since a) all the cultists wear ski masks and b) nobody else was around when it happened.So, somehow Satoris manages to kidnap Troy and take him to the location of the lost city--proving that he did not need the map at all, despite breaking in Troy's door earlier--where the idol waits, having eluded Pipper's searches.
He failed miserably, but at least he tried.The plot revolves around a pre-Internet nerd named Troy, who, apparently, spends his time digging stuff out of the attic that relates to his father's death somehow, stares at it for a while, and then gives up on figuring out what happened and just puts it all away again.
He lucks out when a ski-masked cult randomly decides to come looking for a map that leads to a lost city, even though they could have come any time in the seven years prior but for some reason decided to let him grow old enough to somehow thwart their entire incompetent organization with the help of a beer-guzzling, mullet-endowed drifter...but I get ahead of myself.So anyway, Troy is forced to go outside the house for the first time in a decade and somehow winds up in the truck bed of the aforementioned drifter, who manages to deliver his name, Zap Rowsdower, with a straight face.
Anyhow, some other stuff happens, involving a gray-bearded, oh-my-god-I-can't-believe-people-like-this-actually-exist-type character named Mike Pipper, who explains some less-than-interesting exposition explaining what they're up against and what's at stake--the world, of course!
After looking thoroughly unconcerned, our heroes, though they couldn't pool together enough mental resources to open a can of tuna (though Rowsdower has a lot of experience opening cans...of beer...), find a way to overthrow the muscleheaded cult, defeat the villainous Satoris (a man with a voice deeper than the lead singer of Type O Negative), knock over a pole, raise the lost cardboard miniature of Ziox, and save all of Canada, acting like it's some sort of major accomplishment all the while.
"Quest for the Lost City" (or "The Final Sacrifice" as it is more commonly known) features a paper thin plot apparently thought up by a third grader, stunningly icky and sometimes downright ugly characters, and not much else.This is the story of geeky little Troy, whose dad was an amateur archaeologist who disappeared a few years back whilst seeking The Lost City!
Mike is a strange combination of Yosemite Sam and Jethro Tull, and although I suspect he was supposed to be the wise man of the film, filling in plot holes and offering Yoda-like advice, I couldn't stop laughing at him long enough to take him or anything he said seriously.
Evil cult members in ski masks and tank tops come after Troy (the nerdy kid), because they want the map (which is to a supposedly lost city, but really a map to a great big pop-up book).
Troy runs from the cult members and gets into the back of a truck belonging to Zap Rowsdower the hero of the flick (the most original name I have ever seen in a movie).
And it smelled a lot like back bacon.Now I know that most everyone has seen this movie only because of the comedy genius of MST3K, or Mistie to the loyal masses.
If the movie was $50 million and it looked like it was directed by a three-year-old, THEN maybe there would be a reason to hate it.
Troy is this twiggy, pasty kid with bad teeth who is obsessed with solving the mystery of his dead father (instead of, like, girls or getting some fashion sense).
The Final Sacrifice, or Quest for the Lost City as my copy claims, it's a 1990 movie that is most known for being featured on MST3K, but this movie it's watchable even without the MST3K crew.The film its one of those "So-bad-it's-good" kind of films, its also quite inspiring in many aspects, it was made with very little money and resources (and it shows), but you can tell that people cared about this little cheesy movie.
The Final Sacrifice comes across as a different kind of beast though, a film made by people who just had to make a movie, people compelled by the muse and having some fun in the process.
Then a bunch of ski masked wrestlers attack his house, at which point he escapes and ends up tagging along the the gruff good doer Zap Rowsdower, from whom proceeds some explanation and the rest of the whole adventure.
The ensuing chase of a car NOT being able to catch up to a skinny guy on a bike is very heart pounding.As the movie progresses, the boy, named Troy, meets up with our hero.
After a lot of chasing, and a VERY scary grizzled mountain man who sounds like a mix of Yosemite Sam and Randy "Macho Man" Savage, the movie ends with Troy being selected as the final sacrifice, which will give the bad guy with big nostrils an invincible army of zombies, with which he can take over Canada, and then get demolished by every other country in the world.I won't spoil the ending, but suffice to say, you know it's coming.
Good times!This film features an alcoholic hick hero named "Zap Rowsdower"; an effeminate teenage boy named "Troy"; a black-clad, mullet-sporting group of Canadian wrestlers; a bad guy who talks like Darth Vader; and Canada's answer to Yosemite Sam!!Go see it!!.
This movie is all about the legendary adventures of Troy McGregor and Zap Rowsdower, two rugged Candian gents who wage a battle of will and raw determination, against the evil cult leader Satoris and his many hooded henchmen.
While they follow an old map that was made by Troy's long-deceased dad, the boys are running around the wilderness of South-Eastern Alberta Canada, in an effort to locate the long lost city of the Ziox civilization.
Let me offer up something of a cast run-down: We have a 90-pound weakling, a dumpy, middle-aged, bemulleted, drunkard and a old crusty hermit.The main thrust behind this profoundly amateurish Canadian-made film, appears in the form of numerous tepidly-staged action scenes, which without exception, feature lots of ski-mask n' tank-top clad Canadian cultist's, who are running around in woods in pursuit of Troy and Rowsdower.
Not surprisingly this film looks and sounds terribly cheap, from it's pitifully bad sets - to the model that's supposed to represent the Ziox city and of course all the old crappy cars and trucks, that the cultists are often seen driving - making tracks all over South-Eastern Alberta, in the vein quest for the map.
As the guy's from MST3K pointed out, the music featured in this movie sounds like video-poker music.....
whatever the music's inspiration is, it flat-out sounds laughably terrible and further increases this films boundlessly entertaining quality.When watching The Final Sacrifice a profound lack of talent and funding is constantly in evidence and that fact permeates every second of this terrible, yet remarkably endearing movie.
For me it's this films ridiculous casting that I love so much and when a films "heroes" are this pathetic you really shouldn't expect much from the rest of it's cast, such is the case here; because everything about this movie represents complete and utter mediocrity at it's finest - as you'll plainly see when you pop in The Final Sacrifice.
And even if it isn't the worst movie ever made - it's always right up there.I now must set aside some space especially for Zap Rowsdower (played by Bruce J.
Shot in rural Canada, this film tries to tell the story of a youthful hero who discovers a plot by an evil occult to take over the world.
The acting looks very similar to what I am used to as well, where the director hops on the phone to call up friends and relatives to fill a role.Ultimately, it is a bad film, but it does give me such nostalgia what I actually do watch it occasionally just for the fun of it.
The Final Sacrifice is not a good film by any means, and the version most of us saw by Mystery Science Theater 3000 is probably the only version we've seen, and that's a good thing too.
DO watch it as a comedy, not a good comedy like Blazing Saddles or any Montey Python movie, but a movie not trying to be a comedy, but sadly is, like the Evil Dead series or really any other "B" rated horror movie.So some scrawny thespian lost his dad to a bunch of Canadian high school football players wearing masks, oh so long ago, who can't even drive fast enough to knock this kid off a bike, nor have a good enough aim with a gun to shoot at a truck going...
This movie is lots of shots of dorkish hero (Troy) in dire need of major dental corrective treatment running away from balaclava-clad thugs who, despite most of them carrying rifles, never think of shooting him.
Ticked, cult members of this "lost" civilization put on their WWE gear and try to annoy Troy, but he escapes and winds up with our "hero" Zap "Bud Drinker" Rowsdower (perhaps the greatest name ever).
It's like he's channeling Yosemite Sam and Arthur Hunnicutt at the same time.I do have to give some credit to the casting of our "hero" Zap Rowsdower.
Not surprisingly for anyone watching his performance, this was Christian Malcolm's (Troy) only film credit.Also the city of the "lost" civilization is well made, even though it's obviously a small model....hey, nice model work, guys!
Every scene in this movie is done so horribly that I don't know how this movie actually made it to a theater) Christian Malcolm is such a great action hero like when he chases after his truck and has to jump in the back with the cult right on his heels.
Once again, even for a Canadian film, this is an embarrassment but I truly think they made this movie solely for the purpose of being on MST3K.
I can't imagine what watching "The Final Sacrifice" as an actual movie is like, but it is absolutely one of my favorite MST3K's of all time.
See this film, and judge for yourself, although I think you'll agree, that digitizing can't make a film that is already of this quality any better.Kudos to director Tjardus Greidanus, you couldn't have made a better film.The bottom line: This movie will make you laugh, it will make you cry, and the ending will keep you guessing.That was easily the finest stream of horse garbage I have ever typed..."This film is the ultimately worst film of all time.
Lets throw in the label Stupidity with the aforementioned banal bit.Anywho, Troy and Zap fight some dumpy hood-wearing canadians, meet an old prospector who has a wire brush in his throat, and save the legend of the Ziox society.The MST3K comments on the movie are a riot and this is a very good episode of MST3K that I recommend to anyone to watch.
As in an earlier comment, the Mystery Science Theater 3000 version, (known as "Final Sacrifice" is a hilarious spoof of this Canadian made movie!
It is best watched as an MST3K episode though, I mean what kind of movie invents a lost civilization and calls them the "Ziox" or names its hero "Zap Rowsdower?" Regardless, it is much better than Werewolf or The Incredibly Strange People .
Must have been something like, "Hey, let's make a fantasy adventure movie and set it in the absolute dreariest portion of Canada (i.e. southern Alberta) during the most utterly depressing time of the year (October or November, I'm guessing) and let's have for our heroes the two least cinematic dorks we can find (i.e. Troy McGregor, a complete puss with hideous teeth and the whimpiest, whiniest voice you have ever heard and Zap Rosdower, a cranky, pudgy drunk with the worst mullet imaginable and magically self-laundering acid-washed jeans) plus the most half-assed plot that we can come up with (that is, a 'quest' for a lost city that our 'heroes' basically stumble across in the woods because the drunk's truck conveniently breaks down in just the right spot) filled with more holes than you can drive an 18-wheeler through (for example, these cultists do nothing for seven years and then just happen to show up at this kid's house the very day after he finds this map that they want so badly, which just happens to be the same day that Rosdower is in town in his conveniently disabled vehicle which just happens to come back to life the very moment the puss needs an escape and so on), and let's not cast any females in the ENTIRE film with the exception of the wimpy kid's withered grandmother who appears in all of ONE scene, and in the first chase scene don't you think that it would be plausible if a guy driving a Gran Torino can't catch a skinny kid on a ten-speed...?" That must have been what they were thinking when they were planning this film.
Any movie which has a hero named Zap Rowsdower is not one I would highly recommend.
Okay...let me sum up this movie in a few words: this guy, a cult leader nonetheless, is bent a world domination...I know, I know...we've all heard it a million times...but here is where "Quest for the Lost City" is unique!
We've got guys in masks and tank tops running around looking for some skinny kid with a map to a lost city, a villian with a really bad voice and Zap Rowsdower!
"The Final Sacrifice") a kid conveniently stumbles upon a map of some sort that is a key to a "lost city." A cult of guys in ski masks, led by Satoris--decked in a trench coat, suit, and tie while riding around in rusty GMC trucks--want the map and run after the kid.
The background music sounded a little annoying at times, particularly the 1980s video game music during some driving scenes, but otherwise, a good film given its resources.Besides, it was nice to see a hero in Rowsdower who looked like one of us in the audience for a change..
This awful, awful movie, filmed in Maple-vision, follows the story of a kid who goes on a lame quest to find some lost city, and its also the powerful story of a man named Zap Rowsdower.
And while you're at it, destroy all copies of this movie too, please?While not the worst movie ever made, "Quest for the Lost City" boasts to be the worst Canadian export since...well, since the LAST Canadian-based movie I've seen (Lord, there's been so many...).Now, seems there's this hockey mask-wearing cult called Ziox that's led by a guy that looks and sounds like a well-dressed and -coiffed Darth Vader who want to get a map held by the geekiest kid ever (since me in ninth grade, anyway), who happens to escape their grasp and find protection under the eye and wing of the one and only Zap Rowsdower....Okay - Rowsdower I can buy.
As for Canada, it's made movies like "The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz" (about a working class Jewish boy trying to make it big in 1940s Montreal) and "Strange Brew" (depicting a pair of archetypal Canadians), so it's mostly doing well.In conclusion, Pearl is a horrible person for making Mike and the 'bots watch this..
Fleeing from the cult that murdered his father, a teen (Christian Malcolm) is aided in his quest to find the lost city of the fabled Ziox by a secretive drifter.Typically a film ends up on the Bottom 100 because people see a movie on "Mystery Science Theater 3000" and then instantly give it a 1 or 2.
At least with the boys of "Mystery Science Theater 3000" here to make fun of these kinds of films, then this movie is actually worth watching at least once!
It became so bad at one point that in some of the MST3K versions of my movies Mike/Joel and the bots were being replaced by first year film students discussing the dynamics of each scene....
The Lost City (The Final Sacrifice) is just such a movie.
I saw this one on MST3K, and it was one of the funniest episodes I've ever seen (lots of Canadian bashing, as well as making fun of the movie's characters)!
Yet I think that like many other films, "The Final Sacrifice" has been unnecessarily maligned through its connection with MST3K.
The most hysterical part of this movie (the MST3K version, of course) is when they come across Mike Pipper, a poofy-haired guy with a beard that talks like Red Green.
Again, don't watch this movie without the MST3K guys cause you'll just be wasting your time.. |
tt0049662 | Raw! Raw! Rooster! | The opening shows Foghorn Leghorn lounging in the barnyard, being fanned and serenaded by several hens, when a telegram arrives saying that his old college roommate, Rhode Island Red, will be paying him a visit. Red is voiced by Daws Butler, and is a takeoff on Jackie Gleason's "Loudmouth" character, Charlie Bratten ("Here's CHARLIE!!"). Foghorn decides that he had enough of "that loudmouth" Red in college, and puts up several signs and barbed wire outside the barnyard fence to discourage Red from visiting. Meanwhile, Foghorn does not realize that the delivery man that brought the telegram is actually Red in disguise, so Red sees everything that Foghorn is trying to do to prevent his visit. Foghorn sees Red, who extends his arm for a handshake. Foghorn shakes hands and receives an electrical shock from an unseen joke buzzer in Red's hand. Red then pulls another joke by squirting Foghorn with a fake carnation on his lapel. Red sees the hens and tries to impress them by singing and playing a rendition of Freddy the Freshman. Foghorn tries to get back at Red by rigging a camera with a boxing glove in it and asking the self-absorbed Red if he wants to have his picture taken. Red obliges, but Foghorn cannot get the glove to fire from the camera. Red then reverses positions with Foghorn and gets him to squeeze the shutter mechanism on the camera, which causes Foghorn to get punched by the glove. Foghorn then falls backwards into a hole that he dug and is hit on the head by a boulder, traps that were intended for Red. Foghorn breaks the fourth wall by looking at the viewer and saying: "I thought I had a sitting duck, turns out he had a pigeon." Red then asks if Foghorn is going to take his picture and this time Foghorn gets behind the camera and points a double-barreled shotgun at Red, who puts his fingers into each barrel, causing the shotgun to backfire on Foghorn.
Red is then seen walking with the hens outside of the barnyard and asks them if they want to see the "star halfback at Chicken Tech" in action. He asks Foghorn to replicate an old football play, the "23 Skidoo", which is a long pass. Unable to find a football, Red gets a casaba melon and hikes it to Foghorn, then goes out for a pass. While Red is waiting for the pass, Foghorn cuts an opening into the melon, lights a stick of dynamite, and stuffs it in the melon before throwing it to Red. In the distance Red is seen catching the melon but quickly yells "punt formation" and kicks it back to Foghorn, who catches the melon right before it explodes. Foghorn then tries to get back at Red by challenging him to a game of golf, and sneakily replaces the golf balls with fake ones that are supposed to explode on impact. Foghorn gives Red a ball then runs into the distance with a flag stick. Instead the ball exploding on impact, Red hits it right to Foghorn and the ball explodes when it lands. Feeling cheated that he has been victimized again, Foghorn runs back and takes one of the balls and tries to tee off. This time, the ball explodes on impact as it was supposed to before.
Foghorn then finally figures out how to get rid of Red. He disguises himself (using the same costume that Red used in the opening scene) and delivers a fake telegram to Red saying that he must leave immediately to claim a large inheritance. Red is anxious to leave but Foghorn stalls him, saying that Red can't leave without a gift. Foghorn then gives Red an "electric" bowling ball with a clock attached to it (to tell Red when its time to bowl). The ball is really a time bomb, but Red does not realize it because he is in such a hurry. Red leaves and Foghorn detonates the bomb, finally getting his revenge on Red, who returns and says to Foghorn, "With friends like you, I'll never need an enemy." | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | Foghorn Leghorn went to college?!.
Honestly, what college would have accepted a guy whose entire life is apparently based on practical jokes?
Maybe Foghorn Leghorn was a member of the Deltas in "Animal House"!
No matter, it should come as no surprise that Foggy's college buddy Rhode Island Red (sort of a New York version of Foggy) was also a trickster.
But what I really can't figure out is why the hens were so attracted to Red. True, they'd been with Foggy so long that his immature lifestyle was probably getting old, but this new guy wasn't much better.I should say that every time that FL set up a trap for RIR, it was pretty obvious what was going to happen.
Rooster!" is still worth seeing.
As it was, the end, I say the ending was a little different from most of FL's outings.
A surprise, that is..
For me, another one of Foghorn's best.
The Foghorn Leghorn cartoons always have given me much pleasure, they are routine but also very funny and witty with one of Looney Tunes' most distinctive characters.
is immensely enjoyable stuff in all areas.
The animation is crisp and filled with vibrant colour, and the music has much character and is sumptuously orchestrated.
The story is told efficiently and never feels bogged down in any way.
The beginning is very funny, and the ending is effective in how different it is compared to usual.
The writing is full of the sharp wit that we associate with Foghorn's cartoons, the similes and repetitions continue to be quite endearing, and while the gags don't present much of a surprise in terms of outcome they are still hilarious.
I was especially taken by Red's ukulele rendition of Freddie the Freshman, priceless is definitely the right way of summing it up.
Foghorn is charismatic and never annoying, and Red- part Jimmy Durante, part- Jackie Gleason- is one of his best foils(making you wish he was used again).
The vocals of Mel Blanc and Daws Butler are impeccable, their voices are ones you can recognise anywhere and you can never get enough of their energy.
Overall, enormously enjoyable, one of Foghorn's best and one of my favourites of his certainly.
9/10 Bethany Cox.
"Har-har-hardee-har-har!".
Foghorn Leghorn's old college chum Rhode Island Red drops in for a visit, much to Foghorn's dismay.
Poor Foggy, Red's as obnoxious as they come!
The animation is terrific and the colors are wonderful.
Such a great use of color in these old cartoons; it never ceases to amaze me.
This isn't even one of the best examples of it yet it's still so lovely to look at.
The reds and greens are sublime.
The voicework from legends Mel Blanc and Daws Butler is first-rate.
The characters and situations are relatable, despite this being about a couple of roosters.
I bet most of us have an old friend from high school or college we dread seeing that annoys us to no end.
It's a good Foghorn Leghorn cartoon with some funny gags and lines..
Finally a believable villain for Foggy.
Sometimes a new character arrives on Old Macdonald's Farm that takes up so much of Foghorn's time that he just plain forgets to kick the Barnyard Dog around.
Of course this is a good thing, as the unexplained hatred between rooster and dog was starting to get rather tiresome anyway.
And why should he bother with that dog in the first place when he has a whole harem of good looking chicks craving for his attention?
After receiving the news that his old college chum Road Island Red is coming to visit, Foghorn panics and takes some amusing measures to detour him.
The Jimmy Durante like Red turns out to be an even bigger practical joker than Foghorn and the Barnyard Dog combined.
What's more, he plays the ukulele, which the chicks really dig.
So for once Foggy has a legitimate enemy and turns into a Wile E.
Coyote clone trying to get rid of Red with the use of Acme products.The two fighting cocks try to out do each other while recounting their old football days and playing some golf.
Apart from the Acme products, there seems to be a useful crate of explosives behind every other tree on this farm.
Unfortunately you can see all the punchlines coming a mile off, resulting in every explosion being a letdown.
This leaves the end result rather a sloppy mess, as Red would say.5 out of 10.
When Adlai Stevenson dared the Looney Tuners to create a more deplorable character .
. than Foghorn Leghorn (who some see as a prophetic embodiment of billionaire U.S. Presidential Nominee H.
Ross Perot), Warner Bros.' wacky animation team rose to this challenge with their creation of Foghorn's nemesis, Rhode Island Red (who most view as the near-perfect template for billionaire U.S. Presidential Nominee Donald J.
Trump) in RAW!
ROOSTER.
ROOSTER.
Red, like the Trumpster, thinks that he's God's Gift to Womankind, and puts together an adoring harem rather than limiting himself to the Biblical One.
(Would-be joiners of the White House Fourth Wives Club should think twice before answering Trumplestiltskin's imminent casting call for FIRST LADY APPRENTICE, as our incipient Donald the Great is likely to replace the traditional White House Lawn Easter Egg Roll with a throwback Tudor-style Noggin Toboggan Ride, as Trumpenstein enjoys a flock of Unclocked hens running around bleeding from their Wherevers like so many beheaded chickens.) Though Foghorn Leghorn manages to blow up Rhode Island Red as RAW!
ROOSTER concludes, it's hard to decipher whose goose gets cooked in the end, according to the Looney Tune prognosticators..
Look out, Foggy!.
Directed by Robert McKimson, "Raw!
Rooster!" is a very good Foghorn Leghorn cartoon.
This time around, instead of allowing a child to make a big ass out of Foggy, Foggy lets his old college chum, the obnoxious Rhode Island Red, get the best of him.
It turns out to be an amusing escapade.Two scenes in this cartoon that I find hilarious.
First, in order to impress the "chicks", Red plays ukulele and dances and sings "Freddy the Freshman".
And second, after an exploding casaba melon blows off Foggy's beak, he exclaims, "I goofed!" Let's not overlook the vocal talent in "Raw!
Raw!
Raw!
Raw!
Raw!
Raw!
Raw!
Raw!
Raw!
Rooster!" Mel Blanc supplies the voice for Foggy, and Daws Butler does Red's voice.
You couldn't ask for anything better. |
tt1245666 | The Postcard | Near the end of the Second World War, Sadazo Morikawa (Naomasa Musaka) is one of a group of 100 overaged conscripts for the Japanese navy assigned to cleaning duty. Once the cleaning duty has finished, the members are chosen by lottery for various duties. Sadazo is assigned to serve in the Philippines. He thinks he will not survive, and asks a comrade, Matsuyama (Etsushi Toyokawa) to return a postcard to his wife, Tomoko (Shinobu Otake), and tell her that he received it before he died.
Earlier, Sadazo is conscripted, and he says goodbye to his parents Yukichi (Akira Emoto) and Chiyo (Mitsuko Baisho) and wife Tomoko. Later, a military official reports Sadazo's death. Sadazo's parents plead with Tomoko not to leave, and to marry their younger son Sanpei (Yasuhito Ochi). Tomoko agrees to marry Sanpei. Sanpei is conscripted. He considers running away but his parents tell him it is useless. Sanpei dies in the war. Later, during farm work, Yukichi dies from a heart condition. Chiyo gives Tomoko some money and then hangs herself.
The war ends and Matsuyama returns to Japan. His wife has run away after an affair with his father, and is now working as a bar hostess in Osaka. They meet and argue, and she tells him she wishes he had died in the war. Matsuyama makes his way to Tomoko's house to deliver the postcard. He talks about Sadazo and tells her he plans to go to Brazil. He has 200,000 yen from the sale of his fishing boat, and he tries to give her half. She refuses. He has a fight with Kichigoro (Ren Osugi), another suitor of Tomoko. After Tomoko and Matsuyama quarrel, they agree to go to Brazil together. They burn Sadazo and Sanpei's ashes. Tomoko gets drunk and sets fire to the house. Matsuyama pulls her out of the burning house. They decide to stay in Japan and grow barley on the site of the old house. The film ends with them in the field of barley. | romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0035605 | Above Suspicion | In the spring of 1939 in England, Oxford University Professor Richard Myles (Fred MacMurray) and his new bride Frances (Joan Crawford) decide to honeymoon on the continent. Because they are American tourists and therefore "above suspicion," they find themselves commissioned by the British secret service to find an apparently missing scientist who has developed a countermeasure against a new Nazi secret weapon, a magnetic sea mine. Without knowing his name, what he looks like, or where to find him, the couple look upon the search as adventurous and cross Europe seeking clues from clandestine contacts.
In Paris, Frances is given a hat decorated with a rose as a signal for their first contact, who silently instructs them to go to a café in Montmartre, where an unseen contact plants a tourist guidebook to southern Germany in Richard's coat. The couple notice a series of ink dots on a map in the book that linked together form a musical staff with the opening notes to the song "My Love Is Like a Red, Red Rose," which they deduce is their password. Three pinpricks in the same map direct them to the book's seller, A. Werner (Felix Bressart), in Salzburg. Werner informs them they must go to a certain museum where a man named Count Hassert Seidel (Conrad Veidt), calling himself a "guide," suggests that they check into a guest house run by Frau Kleist (Johanna Hofer). She provides them with a book on Franz Liszt with annotations that reveal their next stop should be the village of Pertisau in the Tyrol, where they should inquire about a doctor who collects chess pieces.
Some days later, the couple intends to go to a performance of Liszt but are advised against it by Thornley (Bruce Lester), a fellow houseguest and recent graduate of Oxford. They go anyway; and, during the same loud passage that Thornley had been practicing earlier in the night, a Nazi Colonel, the Commandant of Dachau concentration camp, is shot and killed. Officials insist on questioning the entire audience, but Richard and Frances are rescued by Gestapo Chief Count Sig von Aschenhausen (Basil Rathbone), a former Oxford schoolmate of Richard's. Thornley later admits to Richard that he killed the Nazi as revenge for torturing and killing his Austrian fiancée. He also warns Richard that Thornley and his fiancée had once also been "above suspicion."
Frances and Richard go to the home of the chess collector, Dr. Mespelbrunn (Reginald Owen); but, while he does not seem to be present, Count von Aschenhausen is. They notice sheet music for "My Love Is Like a Red, Red Rose" on his piano, but Sig does not respond to an identification signal that Richard gives him, and the couple becomes suspicious. They hear thumping noises upstairs and discover that Sig is holding Mespelbrunn prisoner. Mespelbrunn tells them to run and that the Gestapo is coming after them. The couple leaves the house just in time, and Hassert appears to help them free Mespelbrunn, who is the missing scientist "Dr. Smith". All four head for Innsbruck, and Mespelbrunn gives Richard the plans for the countermeasure.
The couple obtain counterfeit passports from an elderly couple named Schultz. Richard and Frances are to catch the train to Milan at separate stations; but, when the Schultzes are arrested by the Gestapo, the police are on the lookout for them in disguise. Frances is detained and questioned by the Gestapo; but Thornley, in Innsbruck as well to catch the same train, is able to find Richard. Richard, Thornley, and Hassert sneak in to where Frances is being held and kill all her captors, including Sig; but Thornley is also killed. After fooling the Nazi border guards, Hassert and the newlyweds finally find freedom in Italy. | revenge, murder | train | wikipedia | If you like the kind of spy-romance yarns spun out by Hollywood in the 1940s--the kind with tongue-in-cheek dialogue that lets you know you're not supposed to take any of it too seriously--you'll enjoy this amusing, yet suspenseful film in which Conrad Veidt plays a "nice guy" for a change.
Honeymooners Joan Crawford and Fred MacMurray are asked by British intelligence to do some spying while on their European jaunt.
Good entertainment with some amusing dialogue and light-hearted performances by Joan and Fred that indicate they should have been teamed more than once.
As it is, this is Joan Crawford's last film at Metro after seventeen years with the studio and comes just two years before "Mildred Pierce" at Warners.
The film's setting is in the days prior to the outbreak of the Second World War. Although it would have been highly unlikely that British Intelligence would have asked two non-Britishers and non-professionals to do a bit of spying for them which could turn very dangerous for them and give the whole thing away plus creating an international scandal (the World War had not yet started), yet it is always interesting to see how it would have developed.
Good slick direction by Mr. Thorpe, excellent acting by Mr. McMurray and specially by Miss Crawford, excellent set design which does not forget the overcoats needed on the Brenner Pass between Austria (in the Film the country is called Southern Germany) and Itally (which did not get into the War until 1940).
Above Suspicion (1943)An odd movie even for its time, being clearly anti-Nazi and a bit of an American adventure on behalf of the British, but set in the months before the war began, earlier 1939.
It must have seemed a bit lightweight at the time, and it certainly is a bit breezy now, too.Joan Crawford is at her best when life is going wrong, when the screws are applied or when she has to be a tough and independent women.
The only other actor of note is the Nazi figure, played by the guy who plays Sherlock in all those B-Movie Sherlock Holmes films, Basil Rathbone, and you can't quite make him out as the evil menace he needs to be.Of course, our leading odd couple has been chosen for this mission by some knowing British officials who see the American innocence as a perfect cover for what is actually pretty dangerous stuff.
Above Suspicion (1943) ** 1/2 (out of 4)By-the-numbers WWII drama from MGM has Joan Crawford and Fred MacMurray playing newlyweds who are asked by the government to do some spying as they make their way into Nazi controlled territory.
ABOVE SUSPICION was one of the hundreds of films turned out by Hollywood to motivate or at least pursued the country to support the war and to show how evil the Nazi party was.
Both Crawford and MacMurray are good in their roles, although I'm not so sure they play were together.
Conrad Veidt is good in his role as a good German and Basil Rathbone steals the film as the evil German.
Well, if Joan Crawford didn't know the end was near for her at MGM, she knew it when she was handed "Above Suspicion," based on the novel of the same name by Helen MacInnes.
Crawford plays a newlywed, and Fred MacMurray her American husband, who teaches at Oxford.
The couple are asked by the foreign office to track down someone while honeymooning in Germany, a man who can help the Allies regarding a German secret weapon.
At first, it's fun; then it becomes dangerous.This is an entertaining film in part thanks to a good cast of Crawford, MacMurray, Basil Rathbone, and Conrad Veidt.
There is also some real stuff of spy books and films - special hats, song codes, codes on maps and in books."Above Suspicion" doesn't seem very big budget and despite some Bavarian costumes and quaint German towns, it's all Hollywood set.
Given the huge films Crawford took part in at MGM, this black and white movie must have seemed like a come-down.
"Above Suspicion(1943)" was the last film Joan Crawford made under her Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer contract.
She left,because she was dissatisfied with the mundane scripts she was offered.Looking at this film,we can see her point.Here's an espionage thriller that has a great premise and a good cast,but falters midway through.The plot is basically about honeymooners(Crawford and Fred MacMurray)being ask to do spy work in Nazi Germany.
They must get information about a secret German mine.Along the way,they encounter colorful characters that lead them to clues.They even witness an assassination of a German leader in an opera house.The first 45 minutes is extremely suspenseful and Crawford and MacMurray have great chemistry together.However,the rest of the film is less than plausible and the ending leaves much to be desired.The problem,though,is with the director,Richard Thorpe.Not one of MGM's best directors,Thrope puts too many unnecessary scenes in the film,that distract from the plot.In addition,he wastes the talent of some great character actors,putting them in one-dimensional roles.Basil Rathbone was great at playing sinister roles.Here he plays a conniving Nazi,but has very little to do.The major miscasting was letting Conrad Veidt play a charming spy.Veidt was marvelous at playing an acid-tongued Nazi officer,most notably in the classic,"Casablanca(1943)." In other hands like Alfred Hitchcock or Fritz Lang,this film could have been first-rate.Crawford wouldn't have a hit movie until "Mildred Pierce(1945)",where she gave perhaps the best performance of her career as a self-sacrificing mother.
They ask newlyweds Richard and Frances Myles (Fred McMurray and Joan Crawford) to try to track down the "formula" for a new German secret weapon while on their honeymoon.
Basil Rathbone and Conrad Veidt plays significant roles in this drama that was called "tongue in cheek" by TCM.
Joan Crawford and Fred MacMurray made a great team.
It was great to see Crawford work with Conrad Veidt again.
spy thriller, he is a better man than I Gunga Din. It's amazing that Richard Myles (Fred MacMurray) can remember all the details.
Robinson and Barbara Stanwyck in the film noir classic "Double Indemnity." He certainly keeps up with Joan Crawford in "Above Suspicion," although the two simply don't jell as a team.
Barbara Stanwyck would have made a much better partner for MacMurray in this film.All that aside, this is still a topnotch suspense movie from World War II.
In the opposite direction viewers may also enjoy seeing Conrad Veidt playing a good guy who assists the newlyweds Frances and Richard Myles (Joan Crawford and Fred MacMurray)in their dangerous mission inside Nazi Germany.
By halfway through, I can imagine most of the audience in the theater half asleep.Being a fan of classic films, especially during the 1990s when I couldn't watch enough of these old movies, I was pumped up to see a film starring Joan Crawford, Fred MacMurray, Conrad Veidt, Basil Rathbone and Reginald Owen.
Do they honestly believe the British Foreign Office and newlywed and her husband - with no experience - to go inside Nazi Germany and be an effective spy?Well, maybe that's where the humor came in, but it's "Thin Man" quality and Crawford and MacMurray, although fine actors, are no Myrna Loy and William Powell in playing these kind of roles.
American honeymooners (Fred MacMurray, Joan Crawford) are recruited by British government to spy on the Nazis just before WW2 starts.
It was Joan Crawfords last contract film at MGM, and far from walking through the part I personally think she sails along quite breezily and relaxed, which is just right for the character she plays.
Basil Rathbone always makes a great, charming villain, and the much underrated Fred MacMurray comes across quite well as the hero.
For what she obviously knew what would be her last film with MGM, Joan Crawford saunters through the part of a newlywed bride who thinks a little espionage on her honeymoon with Fred MacMurray would be just the thing to give it some spice.Above Suspicion finds MacMurray and Crawford as a pair of newlyweds in 1939 Great Britain.
He's a visiting American professor at Oxford and right after their visit to the preacher MacMurray is asked by someone from British Intelligence to locate some of their missing agents in Nazi Germany.
Rathbone is no fool, he's a shrewd adversary and gives the best performance in the film.The part Joan does seems to have been written with Myrna Loy in mind, possibly something to do with Bill Powell, though at Powell's age it would have been a tough sell for him as honeymooner.
Even though I am a big fan of classic film and Joan Crawford, "Above Suspicion" left me very disappointed.
This Nazi era spy film has is complete with secret codes, disguises, evil-doers and international intrigue -- all normally very fascinating stuff, except that in this case it is presented in a simplistic, juvenile way that fails to impress...in fact fails to even keep you awake at times.It's impossible to believe that the British "Foreign Office" would select Joan's character (a perky soon-to-be housewife) and her husband (played by Fred MacMurray) to carry out an urgent, covert spy operation in Nazi Germany.
I, too, have seen better spy thrillers and anti-Nazi movies, however, this movie, was, nevertheless, a good movie!
Joan Crawford and Fred MacMurray were very good in the lead roles, although I thought the chemistry between them was not that good, whereas the chemistry between Barbara Stanwyck and Fred MacMurray in their movies together, especially "Double Indemnity", was fantastic!
Bruce Lester, Reginald Owen, Richard Ainley, and, especially, Basil Rathbone all contributed very good supporting performances!
Now we come to the actor for whom, like Mark.Waltz, this movie has a special place in my heart: Conrad Veidt!
Seeing Basil Rathbone and Conrad Veidt in anything is always a joy and both Joan Crawford and Fred MacMurray have given many great films.
Culminating in the film's biggest flaw (again personal opinion), which is the ending which doesn't ring true for a second and is something of a head scratcher.It is interesting seeing Crawford and MacMurray together and there is some wit and tension between them.
To me, the chemistry between the two characters didn't quite gel.Something that is a bit of a shame, because actually Crawford and MacMurray are both very good in the roles.
They are more than complemented by the supporting cast, with notable contributions from an against type Veidt, charmingly dynamic in his final film, and especially a marvellously sinister Rathbone (no stranger to playing villains and he sure knew how to play them well).
The story much of the time is involving with some nice suspense and thrills, which is why it is frustrating that it loses its way later.Concluding, quite good and enjoyable, wish it was better though.
This Type of Thing was Rarely Done with Complete Success, but it is Nevertheless a mildly Entertaining Filler that just couldn't mesh the Suspected Approach into a Coalescing Whole.Fred MacMurray and Joan Crawford are Newly Weds asked to become involved in the search for a German Secret Weapon in Hitler's Stomping Grounds.
But Serious Fans of War-Time Films, especially involving Nazi's are going to be Disappointed and Frustrated..
Honeymooners (Crawford and MacMurray) in pre-World War II Europe are asked to be British spies, and to track down a missing agent.
This was Crawford's final film for MGM after 18 years.
Professor Myles (Fred Macmurray), an American teaching at Oxford, is sent along with his new bride Frances (Joan Crawford) to find him, the British believing that as Americans they'll arouse less suspicion as they snoop around the Third Reich.
Joan Crawford's last film for MGM doesn't exactly showcase her talents, and she soon after moved to Warner Bros.
She was just a well-dressed clothes horse for Metro by the 40s.This particular piece of hokum though teams her with the tiresome Fred MacMurray, Basil Rathbone, and, in his last film, Conrad Veidt.
Helen McInnes novel is the basis of this 1943 MGM film that marked the last time Joan Crawford worked at the studio after a long career as one of its most famous stars in the studio.
While it is by no means a remarkable movie, it has good moments in the way the two stars, who were obviously in a light mood, make the best out of their characters.The story revolves Richard and Frances Myles, a newlywed couple, embarking on their honeymoon in the Continent.
Well, little prepares the Oxfor university professor and his bride for the adventure they will encounter."Above Suspicion" still is a lot of fun to watch, even if it's not a great spy movie.
The easy chemistry between Fred McMurray and Joan Crawford works out fine and it's surprisingly effective.
Ms. Crawford had a lighter role as Frances Myles; she shows good sense of timing for this type of genre.
In 1943 Joan Crawford was dismissed from MGM (or she walked away after buying her contract out, whichever version applies) and after several years of being offered lesser and lesser starring vehicles with the exception of THE WOMEN and the minor hit A WOMAN'S FACE, and after being on the box-office poison list (in which she was not alone but in good company) she was given this last movie.ABOVE SUSPICION is one of the handful of films that came out during World War II which served as a backdrop to denounce anything remotely Nazi.
This, of course, is really mindless fluff -- much like today's ridiculous blockbusters trying to capitalize on the crisis situation of the moment (be it war or terrorism) and of course, bringing into the mix some high-power action names and some flashy but silly storytelling -- and in no moment can anyone believe that Crawford and MacMurray are British spies working undercover, no more than anything which takes place here.
Fred MacMurray plays an Oxford professor(!) and marries Joan Crawford.
Then, on the way to their honeymoon, they are approached by the British Foreign Office and asked to do a bit of spying on their trip through southern Germany and Austria (this was set in early 1939--just before the war).However, despite the odd casting and basic premise, the film worked pretty well provided you didn't think through how easy it was for them to slip through the Gestapo's fingers on two occasions.
Well, the acting was very good and they were given excellent supporting players in the form of Conrad Veidt and Basil Rathbone.
It really did work--but for fans of classic Hollywood, this is a bit strange.In addition to the acting, the plot and action were very good and the film was given the full MGM treatment--excellent music, direction, sets, etc.
Light espionage WWII thriller and Conrad Veidt's last film.
Suspense, a little intrigue, adventure and espionage make for an enjoyable World War II movie.
At one point toward the end, Fred MacMurray's character, Richard Myles, says, "At least it's not a concentration camp," referring to the detention place where the Nazis have taken his wife.Joan Crawford plays Frances Myles, the new bride of Oxford professor Myles.
Conrad Veidt, Basil Rathbone, Reginald Owen and Bruce Lester round out the list of the major supporting cast.
He has words with Richard who then answers him with a closing term, "dope." The Gestapo officer turns to a woman in the shop and asks her in German what "dope" means.This was the last film that Conrad Veidt made.
In war films, he was most often cast as a German officer or Nazi chief.
Light-hearted anti-Nazi film with delightful casting of the usual suspect..
I'll always have a special place in my heart for this film because it casts the usual Nazi villain Conrad Veidt as the good guy for a change.
But here, sadly in his last film, he is cast against type, that face and voice still imperious, but with a much lighter heart, and on the side of an American couple (Fred MacMurray and Joan Crawford) who are on the European mainland on their honeymoon.
MacMurray is an Oxford professor who was asked on his way out of England to perform a service for the Allies and new wife Crawford is game for helping him.
While this was Crawford's last MGM film under her long contract and she had been considered box-office poison, it was a nice way to leave the studio she had considered home for 18 years.
We have this fun loving American couple Frances & Richard Myles, Joan Crawford & Fred MacMurray, traveling on vacation to Nazi Germany in order to obtain for Great Britian the secret blueprint for a magnetic mine that the Germans are working on.Despite the movies title-Beyond Suspicion-the two especially Richard Myles act so obnoxious and suspicious that it's a miracle that the Nazi's didn't suspect them of being spies as soon as they laid eyes on them.
This muddles things up so much in the film that by the time the Myles' finally get to meet Dr. Mespelbrunn who's being held hostage in his own house by the Gestapo you and possibly even they forgot what they were there for, the plans for the secret magnetic mine, in the first place!There's also a nice little side plot in the movie, to make things even more confusing, with British tourist Thornley, Bruce Lester, planning to gun down the Commadaunt Col.Gerold, Frank Reicher, of the Nazi concentration camp where his wife was interned and later murdered!
Thorney plans to pull this off in the middle of a standing room only Listz concert at the local opera house with hundreds of German soldiers and Gestapo agents in attendance!P.S The movie turned out to be both the last film that Joan Crawford made for the MGM studios and Conrad Veidt's, who played a good guy for once, last movie ever!
Crawford and MacMurray traipse through Nazi Germany with the casualness of mixed pairs on a tennis court. |
tt0055608 | Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea | The new, state of the art nuclear submarine Seaview is on diving trials in the Arctic Ocean. The Seaview is designed and built by scientist and engineering genius Admiral Harriman Nelson (USN-Ret) (Walter Pidgeon). Captain Lee Crane (Robert Sterling) is the Seaview's Commanding Officer. One of the on-board observers is Dr. Susan Hiller (Joan Fontaine), studying crew-related stress. The mission includes being out of radio contact for 96 hours while under the Arctic ice cap, but the ice begins to crack and melt, with boulder-size pieces crashing into the ocean around the submarine. Surfacing, they discover fire burning in the sky. After the rescue of scientist Miguel Alvarez (Michael Ansara) and his dog at Ice Floe Delta, the sub receives radio contact from Mission Director Inspector Bergan at the Bureau of Marine Exploration. He advises that a meteor shower pierced the Van Allen radiation belt causing it to catch fire, resulting in a world-threatening increase in heat all across the Earth. Nelson's on-board friend and scientist, retired Commodore Lucius Emery (Peter Lorre) concurs that it is possible. Bergan informs Nelson that the President wants him at a UN Emergency Scientific Meeting as soon as possible.
Nelson and Commodore Emery calculate a plan to end the catastrophe. The USOS Seaview arrives in New York Harbor in two days. At the meeting Nelson informs the UN that according to their calculations, if the heat increase is not stopped, it will become irreversible and Earth has "a life expectancy of about three weeks." The Admiral and the Commander have come up with a plan to extinguish the Skyfire. He proposes firing a nuclear missile at the burning belt from the best calculated location, the Marianas. Nelson posits that when fired at the right place and time, 1600 hours on August 29, the nuclear explosion should overwhelm and extinguish the flames, away into space, essentially "amputating" the belt from the Earth. The Seaview has the capability to fire the missile.
However, the Admiral's plan is rejected by the chief scientist and head delegate, Emilio Zucco (Henry Daniell) of Vienna. His reasons are that he knows the composition of gases in the belt and he believes the Skyfire will burn itself out at 173 degrees. Zucco's plan is to let the Skyfire do just that and he feels the Admiral's plan is too risky. Nelson claims that Zucco's burn-out point, however, is beyond that date and time if the current rise rate is maintained. But at Zucco's urging, Nelson and Emery are shouted down and the plan is rejected. Despite the rejection, the Admiral and the Commodore quickly leave the proceedings, advising that his only authorization will be from the President himself.
It is a race against the clock as the Seaview speeds to reach the proper firing position, above the trench in the Marianas in the Pacific. During this time Nelson and Crane agree on tapping the Rio-to-London telephone cable to try to eventually reach the President. However, an unsuccessful attempt on the Admiral's life makes it clear that there is a saboteur on board. But the confusion over who the saboteur might be revolves around rescued scientist Miguel Alvarez, who has become a religious zealot regarding the catastrophe, and Dr. Hiller, who secretly admires Dr Zucco's plan. Other obstacles present themselves: a minefield and a near-mutiny. And Crane himself begins to doubt the Admiral's tactics and reasoning. During the telephone cable attempt, Crane and Alvarez battle a giant squid. Although the London cable connection is made, Nelson is told there's been no contact with the States for 35 hours. Also, a hostile submarine follows the Seaview deep into the Mariana Trench, but implodes before it can destroy the Seaview.
Near the end of the film the saboteur is revealed to be Dr. Hiller. Captain Crane happens by as she exits the ship's "Off Limits" Nuclear Reactor core, looking rather ill. She has been exposed to a fatal dose of radiation: her detector badge is deep red. Walking over the submarine's shark tank, she falls in during a struggle with the Captain, and is killed by a shark. The Admiral learns that temperatures are rising faster than expected. He realizes that Zucco's belief that the Skyfire will burn itself out is in error.
At the end, Seaview reaches the Marianas. There, in spite of the threats and objections of Alvarez, Seaview launches a missile toward the belt and it explodes the burning flames outward, saving the world. | insanity, claustrophobic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0033044 | Shooting High | The Carsons and the Pritchards have been feuding in the town of Carson's Corners for generations. The budding romance between Will Carson (Gene Autry) and Marjorie Pritchard (Marjorie Weaver) is now being threatened by the long-standing feud. Margorie's father, Calvin Pritchard (Frank M. Thomas), is the bank president and mayor of Carson's Corners. Calvin pretends to support Will's courtship of his daughter because he needs to acquire a piece of Carson property for a proposed highway through the area. When Will learns of Calvin's true motives, he accuses Marjorie of scheming with her father to steal Carson land.
The long simmering feud between the Carsons and the Pritchards erupts over Will's accusation. Just as the families renew their bickering, Gabby Cross (Jack Carson), a publicity agent for Spectrum Pictures, arrives in town and offers the townspeople $20,000 to use Carson's Corners as a filming location for a movie he is making about Wild Bill Carson, Will's grandfather and the founder of Carson Corners. Still angered by Will's undermining his highway plan, Calvin refuses Gabby's offer. His youngest daughter, Jane (Jane Withers), suggests a compromise that would allow Spectrum Pictures to use the town as a filming location if the highway proposal were approved by the Carsons.
With all parties agreeing to the proposal, the movie company arrives in town and begins production. The star of the film, Bob Merritt (Robert Lowery), begins to court Marjorie. Wanting her sister to marry Will, Jane and the sheriff devise a plan to frighten Merritt out of town, telling him a lynch party is after him. After Merritt leaves town, the head of Spectrum Pictures threatens to sue Pritchard for the defection. Gabby suggests giving the part to Will, who agrees on the condition that Pritchard extend the Carson mortgages.
While the movie is being filmed, three gangsters arrive in town. During a bank hold-up scene, the three gangsters put on actors' costumes and steal the money from the bank. Learning of the theft, Will pursues the gangsters on horseback, catches them, and brings them back to Carson Corners with the money. Will's heroic actions wins the respect of the Pritchards, as well as Margorie's respect and hand in marriage. | flashback | train | wikipedia | Gene Meets 20th Century Fox. Calling this an Autry Western is a bit of a stretch.
Gene's in it, but his part is overshadowed by an over-emoting Jane Withers whose boisterous personality is, I think, a matter of taste.
Then too, you may need a score card to keep up with the meandering plot that mixes a family feud with a town's survival with a love triangle with a movie shoot, and finally with real bank robbers.
If this sounds complicated, it is, but despite the mix, the results are still pretty entertaining.
The opening Autry-Withers duet "Wanderers" is delightful.
Too bad we don't see more of Charles Middleton (Flash Gordon's Ming the Merciless) whose graveyard voice and Grim Reaper looks always made me cover my little-kid eyes back in matinée days.This was a big studio production, Twentieth-Century Fox, which probably accounts for the odd mix, especially a cast that includes familiar Western types like Tom London and Eddie Acuff, but also city dudes like Jack Carson and Robert Lowery.
For viewers interested in seeing how horse operas were filmed, this is an opportunity.
Carson plays a fast-talking movie producer come to town to shoot an oater based on the town's most famous cowboy citizen.
The behind-the-scenes look is fascinating and I'm sure the crew got a kick out of filming "a movie within a movie".
But there's not much hard riding or fast shooting, so for fans of more conventional B-Westerns, this one may be a "skip it"..
The great Carson/Pritchard feud.
I'm sure Herbert J.
Yates of Republic Pictures got a bundle for Gene Autry's services over at 20th Century Fox to co-star with Jane Withers in Shooting High.
How he felt about being billed second to Jane is another story, but after all 20th Century Fox was her home studio.Jane's the little sister of Marjorie Weaver who Gene is romancing.
But the problem is that Gene's a Carson and Weaver and Withers are Pritchards.
The Carsons and the Pritchards have been feuding for generations and that fact keeps the two lovers apart.Gene's grandfather was a fighting lawman of the old west and a film company comes to town wanting to film a story about Grandpa.
It will star Robert Lowery and Kay Aldridge and will bring a short wave of prosperity to the area.It won't do me any good to continue, but things do work for the young people in the end as they inevitably do.
Things do get a bit silly here.
Autry does well simply being Gene Autry at another studio.
Withers plays a Miss Fix-It in a way to rival Deanna Durbin without singing a note.
Jack Carson as the fast talking studio agent really stands out in the film.
Saying Carson is fast talking is almost a redundancy.A real bank robbery is worked into the plot giving Gene a chance to be a real hero.
Shooting High is an amusing film and no doubt did well in the red state market..
It's a real motion picture...in Carson Corners..
Feuding, singing, a bank robbery all while one of them there moving pictures is bein' made.
Gene Autry plays Will Carson in the middle of his family's generation-old feud with the Pritchard's.
A motion picture company comes to make a movie about Will's grandfather Wild Bill Carson.
When the real star of the movie(Robert Lowery)is scared out of town, Will takes the part of his beloved ancestor.
While the movie is being made a real group of crooks rob the bank and guess who's horse catches up with the get away car.Others in the cast: Jack Carson, Jane Withers, Marjorie Weaver, Kay Aldridge and Hobart Cavanaugh.
Gene gets to croon tunes like "Little Old Band of Gold" and "Only Love in a Lifetime"; plus he sings a couple of tunes with his 14 year old admirer Withers..
Little Miss Fix It cures romantic blues and movie star egos..
Old western legends come back to roost in the small town where they allegedly took place when a movie crew shows up to film what happened there decades before.
It's up to perky Jane Withers to fix all of the issues that arise from the presence of the movie crew, push singing Cowboy Gene Autry in the leading role (replacing the inappropriately cast Jack Carson) and aid him with lady friend Marjorie Weaver when things get out of control with the movie making.
Withers and Audrey get together to sing a couple of innocuous songs oh, and there's the appropriate amount of farce including a sudden burst of gunfire when real bullets for some reason replace the movie gun blanks.
As usual, Withers is a good sport in being consistently perky and aiding everybody she meets.
This is a standard early 1940s light comedy musical that isn't anything special but won't leave you feeling cheated out of entertainment either.
It doesn't matter that the storyline is weak and that the gags are as old as the hills, but sometimes a little bit of corn is perfect for what ails you..
"They ain't going squirrel hunting.
Get the boys!".
If you were attentive when the picture opened you would have noticed this was a Twentieth Century Fox film whereas Gene Autry was under contract to Republic Pictures.
Having been loaned out to Fox goes a long way to explain how Jane Withers got top billing here even though most viewers would probably consider it an Autry flick.
However when you get right down to it, Withers got most of the screen time and her high energy performance as young Jane Pritchard overshadowed just about everyone else in the cast, including Gene.There's another thing about Withers' character, she was probably the most level headed person in Carson Corners, always trying to find a way to patch things up between the Pritchard's and the Carson's, a long running feud that began in the days of Will Carson's (Autry) granddad, Wild Bill Carson.
When Signet Pictures arrives in town looking to produce a film about the town's namesake, Jane finds herself an intermediary to a whole host of competing forces, with her main goal of getting sister Margy (Marjorie Weaver) finally married to Will Carson.Since this wasn't a Republic film Gene doesn't have any of his usual sidekicks around for comedy relief like Smiley Burnette, or other regulars like Gail Davis or Mary Lee. But the folks at Fox Studios allowed for a fair number of tunes like 'Wanderers of the Wasteland', 'Little Shanty of Dreams', 'Only One Love in a Lifetime' and 'This Little Old Band of Gold'.
The romance angle between Margy and Will plays out successfully following a real bank holdup that replaces the movie script, and young Jane couldn't be happier.Republic must have liked the idea of involving Gene in a film utilizing a movie studio angle because they came up with a couple themselves.
There was 1941's "Down Mexico Way" and "Sioux City Sue" in 1946.
Probably the biggest surprise for me coming out of the picture was when I looked up Jane Withers' other credits.
I knew she looked somewhat familiar but you could have knocked me over with a feather with this one - if you were around in the mid-Sixties and watching nightly TV, you probably saw her just about every night pitching Comet Cleanser as Josephine the Plumber!
As I write this she's still alive and will be ninety years old in a couple of weeks - God bless her. |
tt0447710 | Torched | While heading out to work, university hospital nurse Deanna is tased and raped in her apartment elevator by a hooded man wearing a surgical mask and medical gloves. The next day, the traumatized Deanna subdues a burglar who breaks into her apartment using the rapist's abandoned stun gun. Deanna, convinced the intruder is the same man who raped her, ties the burglar up, strips him down to nothing but his underwear and balaclava, and takes some of his blood. At work, Deanna steals urine samples, makes plans to go out with a friend and co-worker named Leanna on Thursday, and asks her boss, Doctor Tyson, to compare the burglar's blood to a swab of semen she had collected after being raped. Deanna tells Doctor Tyson that a friend was raped, and that the blood belongs to her ex-boyfriend, who she suspects was her assailant. Back at home, Deanna tortures the burglar by covering him in the urine samples, burning him with a blow torch, and jabbing him with syringes.
When Thursday arrives, Deanna goes out to a nightclub with Leanne, and hours later returns to her building severely intoxicated. While stumbling up to her apartment, Deanna bumps into a neighbor and acquaintance named Trevor, who she seduces and has sex with. A relationship develops between the two, as Deanna becomes further unhinged, and begins suffering from nightmares. She also continues to torture the burglar, dressing in fetish-wear attire for the occasions, and attaining an almost sexual gratification from the man's suffering. One day, Deanna gives the burglar a handjob, and afterward destroys his genitals with needles and the blow torch.
A week after castrating the burglar, Deanna hires a gigolo drug addict to sodomize him. While the addict has his way with the burglar, Deanna leaves and goes to Trevor's apartment. There, Deanna discovers circumstancial evidence indicating Trevor was her rapist, walks in on Trevor and Leanne having sex, and attacks them with a circular saw that was among Trevor's carpentry tools. Deanna beheads Leanne with the saw, and bashes Trevor's face in with it. Returning to her apartment, Deanna murders the gigolo by stabbing him in the neck with a knife after he reveals the burglar had died at some point during the rape. Deanna then goes to the hospital in search of Doctor Tyson, spotting him seated in his parked car, dressed like her rapist and surrounded by sadistic pornography and stun guns identical to the one she was attacked with. When Doctor Tyson tries to pull her into the car, Deanna jams a cigarette lighter into one of his eyes, and knocks him out with one of the stun guns. Having finally found her rapist, Deanna abducts Doctor Tyson, and the film ends as she prepares to torture him. | dark, cruelty, murder, violence, insanity, revenge, sadist | train | wikipedia | Short and sweet tale of rape and revenge.
Torched doesn't reach feature length at only 44 minutes, but it's 44 minutes well spent if you like this kind of thing as director Ryan Nicholson starts the film off nasty, and manages to carry this on throughout.
Right at the start, we witness a nurse being raped and from there she decides it's time for revenge, as someone else tries to attack her, but she manages to get the better of him with a stun gun - and then the fun starts!
The film takes obvious influence from the classic seventies crop of 'rape and revenge' films, such as I Spit on Your Grave.
The film also takes influence from this new wave of modern day Video Nasties, which includes films such as Murder-Set-Pieces and August Underground.
Nicholson gives the film a hard rock score, which works rather well when it's put against a backdrop of grisly and vile torture.
There isn't very much of this film, and what there is of it is unlikely to make anyone want to stand up and applaud; but Torched is a more than decent way to spend three quarters of an hour for fans of sick and twisted horror movies..
What happens here after a girl gets raped in an elevator (actually not very extreme) is gonna be pretty gruesome for some.
The movie also contains the best fake penis I've ever seen on screen (not that I spend my time looking for fake penises of course), and said penis is wholeheartedly attacked with syringes and a blow torch.
Hmm...nice (ouch!).There's no doubt that rape is a horrible thing for any woman (or man - there's a bit of that in here too) to endure, but its obviously just been set up here so the makers could have an excuse to offer what comes after.
Yep, its a pretty nasty affair, but as with most of these kind of movies I spent the time laughing out loud at its madness.The acting by the girl who plays the main character is actually not bad for a flick like this.
Usually the acting is terrible in these kind of films.
I do enjoy a good gory horror show as Hollywood just cant make anything worth a shock at all any more so you really gotta go to the independent scene to find real "horror".The film is quite short at around 45 minutes and its probably enough, even gore gets boring after some time.
This 44 minute film is quite the nasty piece of filth.It starts with a woman getting raped and then soon after someone breaks into her home and attempts to rape her again.She awakens and manages to stop the attack before it begins and,believing her masked assailant to be her rapist from 5 minutes earlier in the film,she knocks him out with a stun-gun and sets about keeping him as her torture slave for the rest of the 30 minute running time,burning his bare testicles with a blow torch,sticking syringes in his penis and other horrid punishment!"Torched" was actually made by Ryan Nicholson,one of the FX guys on the grim "August Underground" series.The film is obviously inspired by "I Spit on Your Grave" and Abel Ferrara's wonderful "Ms.45".It's competently acted and the violence is extremely disturbing.The score by Necrophagia,Macabre and Necro is awesome and perfectly captures the nihilistic feeling of the film."Torched" is even better than "August Underground's Mordum",but you'll need an iron stomach to watch it.8 out of 10..
Very Decent Low-Budget Rape/Revenge Offering.
All I had heard about this film was that director Ryan Nicholson was involved with AUGUST UNDERGROUND'S MORDUM, and about the infamous "nut toasting" scene.
I have to admit, I was pleasantly surprised by the execution (no pun...) of this film.TORCHED is about a woman who is raped leaving her apartment building.
She restrains him and spends a week torturing him in some pretty brutal fashions (including some of the aforementioned blow-torch fun, and some pretty twisted penile-needle torture...).TORCHED is actually a pretty strong film in all respects.
The acting is above par for a film in this budget range, the story is decent and has a couple of twists, and the gore FX are pretty top-notch.
I personally dig the rape/revenge genre as a whole, and TORCHED is another good entry.
Torched, a 45 minute shocker from indie director Ryan Nicholson, is a brutal rape revenge tale that goes straight for the jugular, assaulting the senses with a non-stop barrage of horrific imagery which is definitely not for those of a nervous disposition.
From the opening savage sexual assault to the movie's blood-drenched climax, Torched will sear itself into your memory.Far from being the poorly acted and amateurish production I was expecting, this confidently directed and well acted piece of extreme movie-making was a pleasant surprise (well, maybe not pleasant, but it was far better than I thought it would be!).
The cast are great and the whole production is well put together, with a cool metal soundtrack and some pretty impressive (and nauseating) special effects.Michelle Boback plays Deanna, a pretty nurse who is raped by a masked attacker outside her home.
Believing the man she now has tied up in her flat to be her rapist, she begins to torture him in a manner of particularly nasty ways.This film certainly knows how to pack a punch, with graphic scenes of mutilation and a particularly mean-spirited moment where Deanna employs a junkie to help her with her revenge!
After a lot more violence (including a juicy power-saw beheading), the film ends well, with a pretty good twist.Torched sets out to shock, and shock it does.
After a woman gets raped she seeks for revenge against her rapist.
When a guy breaks into her apartment thinking he is the same who rape her she imprisons him and this is where the party begins..
Someway in her path of revenge her mind gets totally twisted and things start to get really nasty.
This film disposes some great deal of gore scenes.
The soundtrack is total representative of the scenes the film provides.
Despite its small length 44 minutes it has everything someone would expect to see from this kind of film, even more...!
Heading into Ryan Nicholson's Torched, I was aware that it was a short flick, some of my horror pals enjoyed it, and that there's some cool torture scenes.
It was short, there were some cool torture scenes, but I wouldn't say I enjoyed it as much as the other reviewers on here.Story is about a chick that gets raped.
What follows is a slightly above average revenge tale with some pretty awesome make-up and blood fx.I understand how people are saying for this type of movie (low-budget indy horror) the acting was much better than average.
Her co-worker chick was pathetically average, the apartment dude and the doctor were probably the best actors in this movie.
It was nothing incredibly shocking, but I guess it was kind of unique.Even though I've dissed this movie some, Torched is definitely a flick any self-respecting hardcore horror fan should check out.
I'm not saying I'll be recommending it, unless someone asks me for an extreme movie with a short running time.
But it's an extreme, gritty, low-budget independent horror flick that will appeal to a lot of horror fans.
The movie suffered some torture.
It was one of the first sleazefests of Ryan and his Plotdigger theme but somehow things went terrible wrong.
It was never edited and some workprint or a finale copy was released without the clearance of Ryan himself.
Ryan did his best to withdraw the release but failed.
Ryan was fed up and stated to re-release HHNF as it should have been, he re-edited the flick and put a new score on it.
Still you can see that it is a low budget flick.
Just like Run Bitch Run one of the better rape/revenge ones this year..
Torched is a interesting little short film that is so brutal that will probably make you hide your family jewels deep somewhere and well
can we talk about the plot holes?
Maybe not,Deanna a nurse who works at night you read what I just typed,who works at night as a nurse who walks out of her apartment in the day,yes she picked the wrong day to go out,when she approaches outside a masked man throws her back in and proceeds to rape her,traumatized and shaken after,she runs back to her apartment and goes to sleep.
The next night Masked man walks in and tries to rape her but (oh yes!)Deanna has a taser and takes him down This film was directed by Ryan Nicholson who worked in the August Underground sequel,this film isn't the least misogynistic as the awful I Spit On Your Grave but she does take the law or blowtorch for that matter,in her hands but she does do the brutal revenge very violently,Deanna a nice pretty woman who could've had been doing well in her life loses her mind and by a nice thoughtful twist but all is finally explained in an appropriately a lot of series of climaxes, which left me thinking how 1.Does anyone else besides her and Trevor live in the apartment building,since the captor screams loud enough that could've made a neighbor complain about it or 2.
if she captured the assailant how did she managed to get a taser since she stayed in her apartment even the day before she was raped (3.)Why leave the door open or leave criminating evidence around (4.) have sex with the woman's friend since you already had sex with her.
But anyways I kinda have more questions but besides that we can still see Deanna descend into madness and maim,toast nuts(pun totally intended) and decapitate because we got to know her at inopportune time,poor girl she needs someone to love..
Unlike the kind person who posted before me, I found this to be an most interesting short.Forget how bad you think the acting is, the script and/or the plot.
A young nurse is brutally raped and she gets revenge but at a huge cost.
OK, I never captured a rapist and tortured him to death but that doesn't mean I didn't want to.
Torched starts one evening as a young woman named Deanna (Michelle Boback) leaves her city apartment to go to work, before Deanna is able to leave the elevator though a masked man overpowers Deanna & brutally rapes her.
Deanna is devastated but doesn't phone the police & goes to work as normal, the next evening Deanna wakes up in her apartment to find a masked intruder on top of her raping her.
Deanna manages to overpower him & takes great delight in torturing him over the next few days, however it seems that the first & second rapist are not the same people & in a quest revenge Deanna sets out to find the identity of the first attacker using a DNA swab & is shocked to learn who it is...This Canadian production was directed by Ryan Nicholson & is a fairly sleazy yet straight forward tale of rape & revenge in the style of MS.
45 (1981) as the main lead is raped twice, once outside & once in her apartment & I Spit on Your Grave (1978) with the general theme of a woman gaining strength from adversity & setting out to wreck bloody revenge on those who raped her.
Obviously nowhere near as good as those two classic rape revenge flicks Torched offers up a few painful looking but brief torture scenes, some crude gore effects & a plot where all the men are cheating rapist scumbags & the women are evil two-timers which is simply not the case in reality & it's a really depressing view of society actually that makes it very hard to like Torched.
There's obviously no feel good factor here but there's no message or personal journey for any of the character's either, this is really just 40 odd minutes of rape, sex & torture which may in itself be a recommendation for some but I was pretty bored watching it & the double twist ending is very predictable, I don't want to boast but I actually figured it out within fifteen minutes.Apparently filmed in 2004 it was edited into the anthology horror film Hell Hath No Fury (2006) before it was edited into a single short & released in 2010.
Besides not being a particularly strong entry in the rape revenge sub-genre Torched is horrible to watch from a technical point of view, the makes go for that twitching camera look where the damned thing never stops jerking around for no good reason & the soundtrack of hip-hop & rock is awful, I actually turned the volume down & muted it on a few occasions just because the music was so bad & annoying.
There's a some gore here, a woman has her head cut off with a saw, a guy's head is bashed in, a rapist has hypodermic syringes stuck into his penis & body & has the skin on his leg, penis & balls burnt with a blow torch.
The rape scenes are fairly tame actually, they certainly aren't as full blown or as long as those seen in I Spit on Your Grave for instance.Going direct to video Torched was shot in Vancouver in Canada, the whole thing looks as cheap & rough as any film you are likely to see with none existent production values although some of the special effects are decent enough for a low budget indie film such as this.
The acting is dire, the pathetic screams from people as they are supposedly in great pain are embarrassing (why didn't Deanna's neighbours call the police when they heard all the screams coming from her apartment?), no-one seems to resist any attack or behave in a way that i found believable.Torched is a soulless & pretty meaningless showcase for some crude gore effects & torture scenes, at just over 40 minutes at least it's short but there's nothing here of any substance or depth & save for those torture scenes you won't remember a thing about it once it's finished..
The revenge classic 'Ms.45' meets The Video Nasty Slasher 'Don't Go in the House'.
A revenge horror exploitation film from 2004 from Ryan Nicholson the mad man behind 'Hanger' which wasn't that good and 'Gutterballs' which is awesome and tonight's movie is 'Torched'Deanna, a young, pretty and upwardly mobile nurse is about to face the most difficult challenge of her life...Deciding whether five men should live or die.
In a moment which would change her life forever, Deanna is brutally raped, but the pain she suffered is nothing compared to that which her five suspects are about to endure.
One by one, Deanna avenges her rape.
It's a revenge film like in 'Ms.45' where our heroine doesn't care if the guy did it or not she wants him to pay.
And Its a Ryan Nicholson film, his films are always memorable.
also I heard that there is a scene that involves a blow torch and a guys testicles.Torched is definitely better than Hanger, But not Gutterballs honestly I don't think any film from Ryan Nicholson could beat 'Gutterballs'.
But this one does a good job with the revenge part because in 'Gutterballs' you don't realize that it is a revenge film till the end this one is revenge and torture from the first ten minutes till the end real torture talking about human dartboard, melting skin off with a blow torch, etc it really comes together nicely as a revenge film package.
The music is pretty good along with the effects much like any film from Nicholson.On the gore meter from one to ten One being something like 'The Corpse Grinders' and Ten being something like 'Braindead'.
'Torched' is a 5.5 pretty gory especially in the last half and in the final scene.
Really good revenge slasher worth a watch if you're interested 4/5.
Shocking rape revenge movie.
Torched is 45 minutes of pure exploitation, skocking stuff, gore and revenge.
A woman who works in a hospital is raped at the beginning of the movie, and off course, she gets traumatized.
So she started to torture him, day by day, increasing the brutality of the tortures(includes some penis torture that its hard to stand for a man) Then the violence and revenge rampage continues...the chick is out of control and she is now a torture machine!
A very cool movie for fans of exploitation and gore.
I usually consider myself a hardened horror movie veteran.
Nothing in horror movies ever seems to both me.
I've seen all the "extreme" horror movies i.e; A Serbian Film,Re-gorgitated Sacrifice but torched is the only one that really bothered me.
My main problem with the film is the dialogue and the acting.
All and all its not terrible if your a fan of extreme horror movies or just a fan of Ryan Nicholson's movies then you should like it.
Michelle Boback's performance in Torched was by all means a visual account of what many women wish they could do their rapists and abusers.
I could totally related to her character - doing the unthinkable to a rapist and abuser is much less a pipe dream to many women who have lived through such circumstances I am sure.Michelle Boback is convincing a the role of Nurse/Victim and Villain and the effects were all together not that bad considering this is a film that was obviously made on a smaller budget.
Michelle Boback is a talent that I would love to see in horror, gore, suspense or whatever.
Another Film that may compare to Torched is a film I recently watched called MAY - I am not sure who is in it but it is suspenseful and leaves you with the same creepy, disturbed feeling. |
tt0088771 | Barbarian Queen | A peaceful barbarian village prepares to celebrate the wedding of Queen Amethea (Lana Clarkson) to Prince Argan (Frank Zagarino). During preparations for the wedding ceremony, the forces of Lord Arrakur (Arman Chapman) attack the village, taking Argan and Amethea's younger sister Taramis (Dawn Dunlap) along with several others prisoner and slaughtering the remaining villagers. Amethea, her handmaiden Estrild (Katt Shea) and the female warrior Tiniara (Susana Traverso) survive the attack and set out for Arrakur's city to rescue the others and seek revenge for the destruction of their village.
Along the way the three women come across a small encampment of Arrakur's forces. Amethea and Tiniara ambush and kill the men, discovering Taramis captive inside the camp, who has seemingly been traumatized by her experience and acts withdrawn.
On the outskirts of Arrakur's realm the women meet members of an underground resistance force who agree to help smuggle Amethea's party into the city, but refuse to take up arms with them against the tyrannical Arrakur. Inside the city gates, Amethea discovers Argan and the other men taken from her village are being forced to fight as gladiators in the arena at the center of town. Meanwhile, Taramis notices Arrakur leading a procession of troops into his palace and approaches him. Arrakur recognizes Taramis from the camp and allows her to accompany him inside, while in another part of town Estrild is attacked and raped by two of Arrakur's guards. Amethea and Tiniara come to her defense, but the women are overpowered and taken prisoner.
Estrild is made into one of the harem girls who serve the desires of the gladiators, where she is reunited with Argan, telling him of their failed rescue attempt. Amethea and Tiniara are interrogated separately; Tiniara dies in an escape attempt, while Amethea is sent to the dungeon to be tortured. Arrakur and his new concubine Taramis visit Amethea in the dungeon, where she has been stripped naked save for a leather collar and thong, to find her being stretched on the rack by the chief torturer (Tony Middleton). Taramis pretends to not know Amethea, while Arrakur demands information about the rebels who helped Amethea into the city. Amethea refuses to speak, and Arrakur demands answers by the morning, taking his leave. Meanwhile, Argan, the other gladiators, and Estrild plot an uprising against Arrakur.
The torturer later rapes Amethea, but she uses her feminine strength to squeeze his manhood painfully during the assault, forcing him to release her from the rack, whereupon Amethea hurls him into a pool of acid and escapes the dungeon. Finding Estrild, the two women flee the castle and regroup with the rebels, who agree to help in the planned overthrow of Arrakur's forces led by Argan during the gladatorial games. Amethea and the rebels join with the gladiators in the attack. Amethea fights Arrakur in one-on-one combat during the melee, but is defeated and disarmed by him. Before Arrakur can deliver the killing blow, however, Taramis stabs him in the back, killing him. Amethea and Argan are reunited and celebrate the liberation of the city from Arrakur's tyranny. | violence, pornographic, cult, murder, sadist | train | wikipedia | The Barbarian Queen is Queen Amethea (Lana Clarkson), whose village is burned by evil warriors on the day of her prospective wedding, after which most of the people are killed or enslaved.
Nudity and bondage and fondling yes, but I have to say the most memorable scene occurs when Queen Amethea uses a unique method of escape after she has been captured and tied up in the warrior camp and is being fondled by one of her captors.
If you quite like the idea of half-naked barbarian warrior girls then this might be the film for you.
Barbarian Queen is one of the cycle of sword and sandal flicks that were popular in the mid 80's.
In fact I guess if you were inclined towards political correctness you could label Barbarian Queen as a film that is a little bit sexist.
The story really isn't too important but suffice to say it features a group of Amazonian type women on a quest to get vengeance on a tribe of incredibly misogynistic men who opened up the movie by raping and murdering their people.There's lots of sex and violence in this one.
You have to give a film marks for originality for the likes of this, that's for sure.Barbarian Queen has a story and action that is by-the-numbers really but it gains points for gratuitous excess.
Best reason to see this movie: Lana Clarkson on the rack.
The impression it made on me was one of Lana Clarkson, who plays the lead role, topless and tied to an upright rack while she's tortured with a needle by a smallish man with large glasses.Now the reason she's there: Amathea (Lana Clarkson) was about to be married to the prince of her village when soldiers charge in and slaughter just about everyone.
Along the way they manage to kill a few straggling soldiers, rescue a woman tied to fence who's topless and has been whipped, and make friends with rebels seeking to overthrow the local ruler.
After the 5 minute torture scene, Amathea throws the torturer into a vat of acid and escapes, freeing the gladiators and the prince and creating a mediocre fight scene wherein the ruler is overthrown and the people are free.Don't see this movie for the plot.
You'll want to see it because the 4 main actresses in the film eventually have nude scenes in this order: rape, nipple play, wrestling, woman on the fence topless, rape, stripped topless, Lana's torture scene.
I'm convinced that the only reason they made a sequel was to show Lana Clarkson on a rack again (see "Barbarian Queen II").
Unless you're into bad barbarian sword-and-sandle movies, mild rape, Lana Clarkson, and/or bondage, you can skip this movie.
Lana Clarkson bares it all in this silly female 'Barbarian' romp that's trashy and entertaining at the same time..
After surviving a brutal attack on her village on the day of her wedding to a tribal prince (Frank Zagarino), a tough female warrior (the late Lana Clarkson) seeks revenge.
Silly, poorly acted (and poorly dubbed) romp is loaded with action and gratuitous nudity (just about every female bares it all, including Clarkson).
Another awful, but hilarious contribution to the Sword & Sorcery genre starring the late Lana Clarkson, Héctor Oliviera's "Barbarian Queen" of 1985, is a film that is absolutely ridiculous in almost any aspect, but that shouldn't be missed by any fan of movies of the "so bad it's good" kind.
Most of these cheaply produced and trashy Sword & Sorcery (or should I say Boobs & Sorcery) flicks are awful as hell, but they're hilarious unintentional comedies, and "Barbarian Queen" is the epitome of such a hilarious (semi?) unintentional comedy.
I personally can't help it - I love films of that kind, awful as they may be, and I personally always laugh my ass of and have the time of my life watching them.This little film's thin plot in particular tells the story of 'barbarian queen' Amethea (Lana Clarkson) who, together with a few other busty female warriors, decides to free her tribe from slavery and tyranny after their village has been razed to the ground by a ruthless tyrant.
It's often stated that this is set in the times of the Roman empire, but the villains really have nothing Roman about them, I'd say the movie is set in a typical, undefinable Sword'n'Sorcery fantasy time, some of the folks look like medieval knights, others like Barbarians from more ancient times...The whole movie is quite similar to an earlier Lana Clarkson movie, "Deathstalker" of 1983, In which she played a role that was almost the same as in this one.
I personally enjoyed Deathstaker more, since it was gorier and the unintentional comedy factor was at times even higher, but "Barbarian Queen" is definitely also recommended if you're looking for a good laugh.
Apart from its value as an unintentional comedy, "Barbarian Queen" delivers a good amount of sleaze, and a busty female cast that gets topless every five minutes."Barbarian Queen" may be a god-awful film, but people with a sense of humor should have a good time watching it and laughing their asses off..
And for that I would actually recommend it for anyone who wants to see a lot of breasts in a low budget Connan rip off.For those who are feeling daring I offer the barbarian Queen Drinking game.
My only reason for watching this film was for the scantily dressed women warriors that were in it, having sex nearly every other scene.
The torture chamber was my favorite scene, and the best line in the movie was when the torturer had Lana Clarkson on the rack, and after a brief torture, he decides to "bone" her.
A decent pace, mildly amusing violence, entertaining if not accomplished acting, a rousing score (credited to James Horner and Christopher Young), and abundant female nudity mix in this fantasy action flick.
It's really no more than average for the genre, but it does deliver the goods for undemanding fans of sword and sandal schlock.Set during the days of the Roman Empire, it stars the buxom Lana Clarkson as Amethea, one of just a few survivors when her peaceful village is attacked.
Amethea teams up with her friend Estrild (played by future director Katt Shea) and the innocent Taramis (Dawn Dunlap) to take on the depraved bad guys, assisted by an underground rebel movement.One has to give these filmmakers credit, as they know exactly what kind of movie they're making.
Although there's not a great deal of actual story here, "Barbarian Queen" moves along fairly well and clocks in at an acceptable 72 minute run time.
The aforementioned score is pleasing, even if the compositions from Horner are lifted - in typical Roger Corman fashion - from the earlier "Battle Beyond the Stars".Clarkson is an appealing heroine, and Shea does well as her equally strong friend.
Tony Middleton is fun to watch as the torturer Zohar, in a sequence that's sure to delight viewers.Filmed on location in Argentina, this can boast some respectable production value.Six out of 10..
The twist with this one is with Lana Clarkson, the D-cup destroyer from Deathstalker, and she is a kind of pre-Xena fighting wiz.
While not as terrible as some in this genre (ie: Red Sonja, Warrior Queen), Barbarian Queen is still indifferently acted, poorly produced, and ill-cowceived.
Almost typical female barbarian action with lots of swordplay and lousy plot.
Allmost typical because the Mighty Female Barbarians are looking like big eyed, blond haired Hollywood bimbos.
The only reason I can recommend this movie is if you want to see women showing off their tits.
Sloppy editing, bad acting (Lana Clarkson and Katt Shea shows their acting talents (both of them) and crap music.
The story is promising enough (as a revenge flick), but the warrior women only manage to get captured every few minutes so that they can be tortured (topless, of course).
Terrible, terrible, terrible movie, that came out during the outburst of Conan clones of the early to mid Eighties, based on a no-plot or always the same plot situation and plethora of good looking women, possibly naked and often raped, that eventually get their revenge and won the day.
This one shows the beauty that was the late Lana Clarkson, already cast in several other movies of that kind, as a very unfortunate bride to be that saw her village devastated the day of her marriage and her sister and spouse ransomed by savages.
When all of a sudden Roman soldiers attack the peaceful village, kill the man and rape the woman and sell them as slaves.
the bottom of the sword & sorcery barrel, fling this one in the dung heap along with it's sequel.My Grade: F Eye Candy: Lana Clarkson, Dawn Dunlap, Katt Shea, and Susana Traverso get topless.
An unenterprising addition to the (rightly) maligned '80s genre of the sword-and-sorcery movie (you'd be well advised to check out the likes of DEATHSTALKER and THE SWORD AND THE SORCERER instead of this uninspiring dreck) whose sole purpose seems to be to show as many naked women throughout the film as possible.
But this isn't soft-core porn by any means; instead it's a low budget action epic, shot on the cheap in Argentina by a talentless bunch of guys who don't know two things about fight choreography (case in point: compare this film with a similar Shaw Brothers sword-fighting epic – no contest).The film deserves note – and perhaps credit – for portraying some feisty and powerful female warriors who easily overthrow their male oppressors, but then proceed to turn this idea on its head by insisting that all of the female performers be naked or raped at one time or another.
Although female torture, rape and molestation may sound unpleasant, rest assured that this film portrays the scenes as weakly and routinely as it can, without power.Lana Clarkson ("I'll be no man's slave and no man's whore!
The middle section of the film consists of torture and contains an amusing scene of a guy being thrown into an acid bath, but that's about it.Despite the inclusion of some muscular men in a gladiator battle, the excitement level is null.
Expect to see a level of film-making so cheap, unimaginative and unskilled that you can barely bother to watch the movie at all.
The flagrant sexist behaviour left so little to desire about this film, I got sick of seeing womens breasts and them getting raped I had to turn it off!
I wouldn't recommend this to any one female unless you think womens bits are of any interest to you.
As a fan of these types of movies (the "sword and sandal" genre), I have seen quite a few.
Even in the most cheaply produced ones, I can point to at least something I liked in the movie.However, with "Barbarian Queen", there is not a single good scene or even one bit of dialogue that distinguishes the film.
An hour into the film, it still has not advanced beyond the "warrior women being pursued by lusty men--interspaced with swordfight scenes".One of the most annoying things in the movie is the unconvincing nature of the lead actresses.
They can hardly lift a sword, and deliver unconvincing and wobbly strokes against men who are twice their size.The music contains excerpts from other Corman films, like "Battle Beyond the Stars" and "Deathstalker".
The costumes of the evil guards and soldiers (such as the headware) are lifted also from the latter film.Of course, with a Corman-produced film you aren't expecting Ingmar Bergman-like quality.
My discovery of B movie Barbarian Queen has to do with it is part of a four film collection of Roger Corman produced 80's sword and sorcery films.
Former Playboy model Lana Clarkson does look good here and so does the rest of the female cast.
Our story is set in Roman times, but the film does little to make it period correct or Roman.
Lana Clarkson and friends unite to fight the evil empire, but mostly must avoid rape(and attempted rape) by fighting real stupid and horny men.
Do not get me wrong, the Deathstalker films are totally ridiculous as well, but they pull off being entertaining where Barbarian Queen fails miserably at.
Lana Clarkson appears in the first Deathstalker film to boot and has less screen time, but is much more memorable than she is here.
I have no problem with women kicking ass, but this film is poor and I would have found my time better spent rewatching Red Sonja or episodes of Xena Warrior Princess..
Feisty warrior Queen Amethea (winningly essayed with delightful go-for-it spunky relish by the gorgeously voluptuous Lana Clarkson; Kaira in "Deathstalker") and several luscious female companions (who include future director Katt Shea Ruben of "Stripped to Kill" and "Dance of the Damned" fame) go to Arrakur's kingdom to free their people.
Directed with suitably lowbrow flair by Hector Olivera, this gleefully trashy low-budget sword and sorcery fantasy action exploitation romp certainly delivers the expected sleazy goods with a pleasing blend of energy and abundance: we're got plenty of priceless dopey dialogue (all-time favorite line: "You're much too beautiful a girl to let yourself be broken into food for the royal dogs"), a constant speedy pace, lots of gratuitously bared distaff skin on frequent display (cute'n'cuddly brunette hottie supreme Dawn Dunlap in particular looks absolutely yummy as Amethea's sweet innocent younger sister Taramis), several exciting gory sword fights, a rousing score by James Horner and Chris Young, and a memorably disgusting bespectacled nerd torturer who uses a metal claw to paw one of Amethea's breasts.
I watched Barbarian Queen after seeing several movies made by Argentina filmmakers at the United States Film Festival (a.k.a Sundance) back in the 80s.
One of the films , "Night of the Pencils," was made by the very same director, Hector Olivera, of "Barbarian Queen." Pencils is a serious film that examines the brutalization of several young folk during the Junta years.
When I came across Barbarian Queen, I was some what surprised that this obvious exploitation sword and sorcery was made by the same guy.
Barbarian Queen is about a group of villagers taken captive by an evil regime.
And while the film does wallow in the same rape fantasy that populated a big chunk of these sword & sorcery b-movies, there is one sequence I think that more honestly displays Olivera's view.
It is very satisfying when he gets his at the business end of Clarkson's sword.
It certainly makes Barbarian Queen more interesting for me than it probably deserves..
After co-starring in the first Deathstalker film, Lana Clarkson would return to star in this Roger Corman produced schlockfest.
Sadly, despite comedic turns in films like Fast Times at Ridgemont High (she's Vincent Schiavelli's wife in a quick scene) and Amazon Women on the Moon (I really need to get to that movie soon), as well as other action films Vice Girls, her career stalled by the early 2000's.
Let's celebrate her starring role in a movie that somehow is at once a feminist adventure epic and a misogynistic wallow in the muck.A peaceful barbarian village - is there any other kind - is all in a tizzy about the wedding of Queen Amethea (Clarkson) to Prince Argan (Frank Zagarino, Tan Zan: The Ultimate Mission).
Lord Aarkur and his men attack, taking Argan and Taramis (Dawn Dunlap, Forbidden World) captive.You may be thinking - oh cool, this movie is woke and the man is the captive in peril, not the woman, who is the hero - but this is a Roger Corman sword and sorcery movie.
So even through Amethea, Estrild (Katt Shea, who went on to direct Stripped to Kill, Poison Ivy and The Rage: Carrie 2) and Tiniara are going to fight and kill lots of evil creatures and baddies, they're also going to get naked, tortured and me too'd for pretty much the entire film.I was going to write, "I don't know the audience for a movie that wants to see barbarian women get raped," but I totally know the audience.Let's try and get past it.
But maybe you can get revenge.By the end of the movie, Estrild is a harem girl, Tiniara has been killed, Taramis becomes Arrakur's concubine and our main heroine, Amethea, has been tortured repeatedly but comes out on top, tossing the interrogator into a pit of acid after using "her feminine strength to squeeze his manhood painfully" as per Wikipedia.
So even in her moment of triumph, a Corman film reveals that women need treachery to win, not outright skill.The first film from Corman's Concorde company, Barbarian Queen was directed by Héctor Olivera as part of a nine-picture deal.
Corman wanted low-budget sword-and-sorcery films.
This union led to this film, as well as Cocaine Wars, Wizards of the Lost Kingdom, Two to Tango and Play Murder for Me. I think Corman's vision won out, sadly.There's an in-name-only sequel and Clarkson played a character called Amethea in Wizards of the Lost Kingdom II who has nothing to do with this character.
There was also a third film planned.In later years, Corman has claimed that this movie inspired Xena: Warrior Princess.
Again you must check out the poster for this film, so so very sexy and awesome yet as usual nothing like the actual movie, such a shame.Set in the Roman era apparently, never noticed myself, the plot revolves around a small band of female warriors and their Queen trying to save the Queens sister from nasty Romans.
All the sword fighting is pretty hokey looking but its fun to watch all the extras pretend to be proper swordsmen/women.End of the day I watched this because of the cool film title.
Its Corman and its all about big breasted blonde women in skimpy outfits with swords killing men, expect nothing less.2/10 |
tt1560970 | Neds | Neds is a dark coming-of-age film that follows the story of John McGill, a young boy growing up in 1970s Glasgow. While a brilliant student who excels in his studies at school, his studious nature causes conflicts with his working-class family and the wider, gang-riddled neighbourhood.
John's immediate family consists of his mother, a part-time hospital worker; his father, an abusive, alcoholic, tool-maker; and his older brother, Benny, leader of a neighbourhood gang called the Young Car-D. On a visit from New York, his Auntie Beth encourages John to leave Scotland when he is older to pursue opportunities there.
The film opens with a leaving ceremony marking John's transition from primary to secondary school. On his final day, John is accosted by Canta, a local bully and member of the Hardridge Paka Gang, who intimidates him, threatening to beat him up when he moves to secondary school. John relays the details of the encounter to his brother who enlists the help of his fellow gang members to track down and assault Canta as punishment.
Once John begins secondary school, apart from not being in the top class, everything goes well. Informed by the headmaster that he will be moved up to the appropriate level by Christmas time by proving he is different to his brother, who assaulted two teachers and was expelled, he successfully progresses. However, he finds himself socially isolated and his teacher advises him to attend a summer camp for children with disabilities. There, he becomes friendly with a middle class boy called Julian. One day he accidentally breaks one of Julian's father's LP records and is forbidden from seeing Julian again.
While walking home, a group of Young Car-D gang members threaten to mug him until they realize whose brother he is. They stop harassing him, ask him to join them and offer John vodka and cigarettes which he accepts, marking the start of his downward spiral.
When the school year recommences, John has changed his ways for the worse: drawing graffiti on desks, being impolite to teachers and smoking cigarettes in the toilets at break time. At one point he is caught up in a fight between two gangs and obtains a knife which has been kicked under the door of the toilet cubicle in which he is hiding.
In revenge for the rejection by Julian's family, John throws a pair of football boots full of fireworks through the dining room window while they are eating. He then visits a social club, where members of the Car-D gang eject two members of rival gang The Krew. Returning, they hurl a bicycle through the function room window, urging the Car-D to give chase up to the edge of their territory where they escape via a walkway. John gives chase, running into an ambush and is in turn chased by The Krew and pursued by their leader. Escaping by pushing his way into an Irish woman's home, John evades the rival gang. It emerges later that she is the mother of the boy who hurled the bicycle.
John becomes more deeply involved in gang feuds taking place between 1972 and 1974. He slits a boy's throat in a gang fight and hides the blade. Returning home he finds that the police are there and hides from them. Upon their departure, John learns that his brother has been arrested as a suspect in the stabbing. The next day he finds that his brother's bail has been set at £15 by the Sheriff court. He robs a bus driver at knife point to raise the money, but fails to pay the sum in time.
On a walk with Claire, one of the girls from the gang, John spots his one-time tormentor Canta, now an isolated and slightly pathetic character. John confronts him about the bullying incident years earlier, and agrees to move past it, but Canta makes a snide remark as he turns away. Enraged, John first knocks him to the floor, then drops a stone slab on his head, causing permanent brain damage.
John becomes increasingly confrontational, throwing a glass bottle at a passing police officer, as he hangs out with the Young Car-D in a park, which results in them ostracizing him for attracting police attention.
His father is drunkenly abusive to his mother so John later beats him about the head with a frying pan. His mother orders John out of the house and he is forced to take refuge in the machine room in a block of high rise flats, living on deliveries of bread and milk stolen from tenants. Returning to his refuge he finds the room locked and, after sniffing glue, wanders the streets, stripped to the waist. Seeing a statue of Jesus, who John jokingly urges to come down, he has a glue-fuelled vision that Christ accepts the offer but then challenges him on his poor life choices.
The next morning, his sober dad finds John and tells him to come home. His father asks him to put him out of his misery and end his life. John goes to his room, taking two knives which he tightly straps to both hands. He goes downstairs and finds his father urinating in a bottle. He asks John to wait until he is asleep, so John wanders the streets. When he encounters members of the rival gang, he attacks one, leaving him grievously injured. Pursued by the other gang members, John is himself badly beaten. Members of Young Car-D then spot John and fight off his attackers, only to have the enraged John turn on them. Injured, he returns home to the room where his father is asleep but is unable to go through with killing him. Falling asleep, he collapses on top of him.
He chooses to change his ways and returns to school, attending a remedial class, wanting no further involvement with the gang. The class goes on a field trip to a safari park and their minibus breaks down. Thinking the teachers have abandoned him with the brain-damaged Canta, John decides to leave the van. The film closes with John and Canta walking hand-in-hand into the distance through a pride of lions, who ignore them. | violence | train | wikipedia | A good film that gives a very accurate portrayal of what life can be like for a young kid growing up in Glasgow.
The film is set in the 70's but the main themes are just as applicable for youngsters in 2011 (trying to fit in, feeling like part of a group/gang).The highlight of the film is the performance of Conor McCarron as a bright student who makes the wrong choices and finds himself part of a young gang.
And school is not where you learn, it is where you survive.Like Lynne Ramsey's Ratcatcher, Neds resonates with Glaswegians born in the Sixties who grew up in this mayhem, and now look at it with the benefit of age and distance and wonder how we ever took it for normality.John is the academically gifted younger brother of a locally respected/ feared ned.
I haven't really watched many (any?) Scottish films but I am familiar with Peter Mullan, having seen his completely depressing TYRANNOSAUR previously.
It's a film with a nostalgic '70s ambiance and an autobiographical feel, featuring the misadventures of a shy, chubby schoolboy who ends up becoming a fearsome teenage gang member.NEDS is a lengthy, slow-paced and frequently hard-hitting movie that tackles some uncomfortable home truths.
The pace is perfect, Peter Mullan does an excellent job in showing the downfall of the characters and asking questions of society and how tough life can be for a young kid in what is a violent city.
First off, let me point out a few things, to people who obviously didn't get this.People who complained about the silly music, you really couldn't see that the director was trying to show how ridiculous the violence was?People who didn't get the Jesus thing, well, you've obviously never come from a dark enough culture, where solvent abuse is rife, and people have extremely vivid hallucinations.I was raised in the area the movie is set, and the time it was set, and i can tell you, its very accurate.
The production values of the movie are good, and its certainly way better than average and keeps you entertained, i watched this as a piece of "World Cinema", even though i come from the area, and had no trouble at all with the dialogue, but then again, thats me, i can see who others would find it difficult, then again, i would moan about this spoiling the movie, when in Rome ...
"You are a swat Mister Mcgill"Peter Mullan's Neds has become one of the small number of electrical Scottish films that have been made within the last 20 years.
As it goes Peter Mullan has always been interested in directing and from my point of view has a Ken Loach appeal about it when it comes to writing and producing scripts.NEDS a film which portrays a young mans will to succeed in any circumstance and every hurdle which is played by society must be dealt with-in an appropriate 70s fashion.
The film is set in Glasgow in the early 70's and it deals with the struggles of youth growing up at a time when knife culture was rife and the threat of violence lingers in the air..We follow young teenager John McGill and his low-life friends in and around Glasgow, as we follow his time at school where at the start he is a model student, however his notorious brother who is a member of a gang and who is well known amongst the other NEDS, casts a shadow over Conors life as he is soon sucked into the gang life himself, now this may seem like a cliché but trust me there are a few good surprises that rises this film above all the other British films made over the past 10 years...Now this is the real kicker, i live in Paisley that is right next door to Glasgow and the heavy Scottish accent (Glaswegian) that is used throughout the film is a real joy to listen to, there was so many times i was laughing my ass off at how funny this film can be, but there are some harrowing moments as well, i have no idea how this film will translate over seas??
This is a great movie that will touch your heart for anyone that has been raised in tough neighbourhoods around the world..Great performances from the entire cast, solid direction from Peter Mullan, and a good story that needed to be told especially in Scotland, if you get the chance check it out, you'll be glad you did....
First I have to admit that one reason that made this film more appealing for me was that at the moment I live in Glasgow, right in the area, where the film was filmed and here the "neds" are a part of daily life, only in different uniforms that in 70's.
Though it might have been good to show little bit more the gruesome results of stabbings as it feels here, and in that movie too that sadly many of these young "neds" do not even realise the fact that knife can kill and is not a toy.
Watch out in the future for Conor McCarron who plays young John McGill, the bright schoolboy who has so much hope ahead of him as he leaves primary school.
Top marks to Director Peter Mullan and all who took part in this wonderful "real" & "no holding back" film of a time in Glasgow's history which is not known about by many outside of the area..
I have been waiting ages to see this Peter Mullan film, and was not disappointed when i eventually went to the screening last week with 3 generations of my family...
All this gives the impression that McGill's life is a Shakespearian tragedy From a technical point of view there's absolutely nothing wrong with Mullen's film and shows what can be achieved with a small budget .
STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday Morning John (Connor McCarron) excels as a child in his studies, but the rough, hard environment around him soon has an effect on his personal character and, as he grows up in 1970s Glasgow, he moulds into one of the pack, as problems at home and school breed the violent character within him, going up against the hard drinking, knife wielding thugs that are the sworn enemies of the hard drinking, knife wielding thugs he's in with.Glasgow still holds the notorious accolade of being 'the knife crime capital of Great Britain', so this could have been just as hard hitting and unflinching as it was setting out to be being a modern day drama.
Still, this feels like quite an undisciplined effort from Mullan, which veers into outlandish, arty moments (such as the lead character duking it out with the Lord Jesus Christ) that only serve to make it an even more alienating experience than it already is.
After spending much of the 1990's making a name for himself as an intense character actor in the likes of Trainspotting and My Name Is Joe, Peter Mullan announced himself as a director to watch with 1998's Cousins.
His tough upbringing in a rough area of Glasgow meant that his talents in front of the camera would normally be employed in tough, intimidating roles, and Mullan drew upon his experiences as a young man for Neds, a social realist drama depicting an academically promising young boy's descent into gang culture and into the footsteps of his notorious older brother.'Neds' stands for Non-Educated Delinquents, a term I heard often during my time living in Edinburgh, and one applied to the sort of tracksuit-wearing hooligans also labelled as 'scallies' or 'chavs', depending on which area of the UK you're from.
The 'ned' here is John McGill, played by Greg Forrest as a youngster growing up in 70's Glasgow who hopes to use his intelligence to make something of himself, but finds himself pulled onto the streets due to a number of factors: from his disinterested, cane-happy teachers to the pressure of living up to his brother's reputation.
Mr. McGill isn't much to look at, but he has a presence terrifying enough to silence a room when he enters, and a tendency to come home drunk and bawl abuse at his long-suffering wife.Mullan has a real talent for staging tense situations, with some of the events played out in Neds no doubt taken directly from real experiences.
Still, this is raw, unflinching film-making from a director clearly hoping to draw attention to the plight of youngsters growing up in such grim working-class surroundings, where respect is earned through brutality and allegiances are decided by which side of the bridge you live on..
Then the movie jumps in years to a teenage John McGill and he's a completely different character.
Peter Mullan's film about Glasgow's Non-Educated Delinquents is not quite as straightforward as it may at first seem: there are some fairly common elements (the bright kid trying to learn his way out of poverty, the drunken father, the violent street gangs) but also some odd, surreal imaginative scenes, and an overall narrative that grows more opaque the longer the film lasts.
Peter Mullan's Neds is set in the early seventies in Glasgow which is excellently recreated, Connor McCarron plays John a promising student who is is led astray with a bad crowd, it doesn't take long for John to follow in the same footsteps of his older brother who revels in the same gangland shenanigans.
Upon hearing of Peter Mullan's forthcoming project i waited in anticipation for this release but i was disappointed with the end result it certainly was on paper a great idea, He has hit the nail on the wood with the atmosphere and drama but Neds is a film with a promising start but it then takes a dark detour towards the end i was sorely disappointed with this effort it is nowhere as grand as classic fare that deal with teen drama such as Coppola's The Outsiders Rebel Without A Cause,As much as i respect and admire him as a filmmaker/Actor i was disappointed with the overall product..
(I know the two often go hand in hand) I just didn't feel like the character development justified the direction that the plot went in.So plot was so-so, performance wise it was pretty solid, particularly for young, amateur, Scottish kids.
Ultimately I found myself wanting to enjoy the film more than I actually did.Sidenote: I grew up in Scotland, not too far from Glasgow and for a long time 'Neds' didn't necessarily know they were 'Neds'.
I was interested to see the character in this refer to himself as a Ned. I know that the word itself goes way back and I am sure it is accurate in the film makers experience, but interesting how that differs from people who live just a few miles away (admittedly that was 80s/90s/early 2000s) I also appreciate that Glasgow gang culture has a long and complex history where as I lived in a more rural area where groups were mainly interchangeable (apart from the great Neds Vs Goths War of '97!).
Although the first hour is controlled and captivating, the second hour becomes script-messy, loses intensity and is too long: the movie should have been 15-20min shorter.As for John's character, though there was material, he lacks depth, his psychology and increase in power are not enough controlled, and I failed to feel strong emotions towards him.Neds can be compared to This Is England, and though the latter was a little different, I preferred it because everything was better described: script, character, psychology, message.
Clichés of shell-suits, drink bottles, smoking and loitering in parks and you get the idea of what a "ned" is meant to be.Peter Mullan makes this partially biographical film about the slide of a precocious teenage boy from star pupil to the dregs (in the 70s).
He is unique in Peter Mullan's depiction of 1970's Glasgow, where the only real aspiration for him is to not become a NED – a non-educated delinquent.
Every time I predicted something the story surprised me, though it loses its way a bit as McGill is drawn deeper into delinquency.Mullan is honest in interviews about his inspiration for the film's content.
i was looking forward to watching this film as the age group of the main characters where about the same age as myself(age 12 in 1974).i am also from glasgow.
i am a big fan of mullan but there was no character in the film you could care for,from the start i was trying to work out what relation the girl who went to America?
Peter Mullan has captured the essence of Glasgow gang culture impeccably while challenging oft-heard current notions of "it wasn't like that when I was a boy".The film is brutal, touching and, thanks to an excellent script which oozes with the tension and volatility of the darker side of Glasgow's character, it carries an ever-increasing level of tension which culminates in an explosion of violence and emotional turmoil that is heart-breaking as much as it is disturbing.The dialect is definitely a potential stumbling-block to the film's chances of appealing to a world-wide audience, despite it's themes of tribal-like warfare on the streets ringing true in all corners of the world.
He is left (almost literally) thrown to the lions, unsure about where he will go and what he will do, dragging the ball and chain of his previous atrocities behind him with no-one left to turn to, no-one to back him up, everyone has given up on him and left him behind.Peter Mullan has delivered yet another fine film with N.E.D.S and one that will no doubt bring mixed reaction through both it's realistic and uncomfortable portrayal of Glasgow youth and its unwillingness to adopt a sweet and audience-satisfying end which gives a conclusive answer to all that has gone before.
Having met Peter Mullan while I was at university, I know that he is not one for happy endings or giving the audience what they want.
Mullan has provided us with 2 excellent films in Orphans and the Magdalene Sisters but NEDS is disappointing in the extreme.
The feel of the 1970s didn't come across and at one point the main character 'John' calls himself a 'ned' - not a term used by ordinary people at that time.
Another powerful drama after The Magdalene Sisters from Peter Mullan, set amidst the adolescent gang culture of 70s Glasgow, and loosely based on personal experience.
John McGill, played with both menacing brawn and sensitive intelligence by McCarron, turns his back on his academic successes in favour of his older brothers gang lifestyle after experiencing prejudices within society and hypocritical, violent authority figures.The film doesn't hold back on the violence that gang mentality stirs up, often contrasting the boys as softly spoken individuals from decent homes against their violent gang behaviour.
Neds falls into the broad category of "coming of age" movies that automatically have words like "gritty," "uncompromising," "brutal" and "realistic" pinned on to them far before we're given the opportunity to make up our own mind about them.
Set in Glasgow in the 1970's, it tells the story of John McGill, a promising student who falls in with gangs and goes off the rails.
Whilst by and large the events that take place in Neds are similar to those of other youth dramas (abuse, violence, searching for belonging etc) and are in part delivered very well compared to its peers, it's difficult to sing its praises purely because of the major flaw that runs throughout the film; the strength of its lead character.
This isn't a major sleight against newcomer Conor McCarron as much as it is a comment on the development of John McGill as the crux of the narrative (saying that though I couldn't quite tell if McCarron was meant to look like he was on the verge of bursting out laughing at any given moment or whether this was just a poor job on his part).
Despite almost losing it completely towards the end, there does seem to be a last final chance for some redemption for young John McGill...The final scene at Blair Drummond safari park reminded me of Peter Sellers walking on water in his last movie - Being There!
Neds tells the story of John, a Catholic teenager growing up in 1970s Glasgow.
The movie won Best Film at the San Sebastian Film Festival in January 2011.Good points: The characters were well portrayed and gave a good performance, making it realistic and a good representation of how life would have been like as a young Scottish boy.
Tormented by school bullies and his drunkard father; growing up, Joe (Conor McCarron), decides it is easier to follow in his brother's footsteps and become a NED (non-educated delinquent), because it is easier to survive the times and neighborhood being a ruthless hoodlum.
Basically, set in 1970's Glasgow, Neds (Non-Educated Delinquents) are roaming the streets, and school boy, ten year old John McGill (Greg Forrest) has been surrounded by it for some time, but ignores it to do well in his studies.
After a very good academic career, fourteen year old John McGill (Conor McCarron) is ready to start secondary school, but with a dysfunctional family consisting of a drunken and violent father (Peter Mullan), troubled mother Theresa (Louise Goodall) and brother Benny (Joe Szula) constantly getting into trouble with the police, dark clouds appear in his personality.
I agree with the critics that it loses some grip towards the end, but all the actors, most of which are newcomers, especially McCarron and his younger self Forrest are fantastic, the realism in parts with the violence and school punishment makes for good viewing, an interesting coming-of-age drama. |
tt0050814 | The Pajama Game | Act I
A strike is imminent at the Sleep-Tite Pajama Factory, where the workers churn out pajamas at a backbreaking pace ("Racing with the Clock"). In the middle of this, a new superintendent, Sid Sorokin, has come from out of town to work in the factory ("A New Town Is a Blue Town"). The union, led by Prez, is seeking a wage raise of seven-and-a-half cents an hour. Sid and Babe are in opposite camps, yet romantic interest is sparked at their first encounter. Despite cajoling from her fellow garment workers, Babe appears to reject Sid ("I'm Not At All in Love"). Meanwhile, Hines, the popular efficiency expert, is in love with Gladys, the company president's secretary, but is pushing her away with his jealous behavior. After witnessing a fight between the couple, Sid's secretary, Mabel, tries to help Hines break from his jealous ways ("I'll Never Be Jealous Again"). Meanwhile, Sid, rejected again by Babe, is forced to confide his feelings to a dictaphone ("Hey There").
During the annual company picnic, kicked off with the official Sleep-Tite Company Anthem, Prez chases after Gladys, who rejects his advances ("Her Is"), a drunken Hines demonstrates his knife throwing act (these knives are thrown at Babe), and Babe warms up to Sid ("Once a Year Day"). As the picnic-goers head home, Prez turns his attentions to Mae, who responds in the positive far more quickly and aggressively than he'd expected ("Her Is (Reprise)"). At Babe's home, Sid's romantic overtures are deflected by Babe, who makes casual conversation on tangential subjects ("Small Talk"). Eventually the walls come down between the two, who admit their love for one another ("There Once Was a Man"), but their estrangement is reinforced when they return to the factory. A slow-down is staged by the union, strongly supported by Babe ("Racing with the Clock (Reprise)"). Sid, as factory superintendent, demands an "honest day's work" and threatens to fire slackers. Babe, however, is still determined to fight for their cause, and kicks her foot into the machinery, causes a general breakdown and Sid reluctantly fires her. As she leaves, he begins to wonder again whether a romance with her is a mistake ("Hey There (Reprise)").
Act II
At the Union meeting, Gladys (Mae in the 2006 revival) performs for the rest of the union, with "the boys from the cutting room floor" ("Steam Heat"). After the main meeting, the Grievance Committee meets at Babe's house, to discuss further tactics, such as mismatching sizes of pajamas and sewing the fly-buttons onto the bottoms such that they are likely to come off and leave their wearer pants-less. At the meeting, as Prez and Mae's relationship is waning, Sid arrives and tries to smooth things over with Babe. Despite her feelings for Sid, she pushes him away ("Hey There (Reprise)").
Back at the factory, the girls reassure Hines, who is personally offended by the slow down ("Think of the Time I Save"). Sid, now convinced that Babe's championship of the union is justified, takes Gladys out for the evening to a night club, "Hernando's Hideaway" (Hernando's Hideaway), where he wheedles the key to the company's books from her. Hines and Babe each discover the pair and assume they are becoming romantically involved. Babe storms out, and Hines believes his jealous imaginings have come true ("I'll Never Be Jealous Again Ballet").
Using Gladys' key, Sid accesses the firm's books and discovers that the boss, Hasler, has already tacked on the extra seven and one-half cents to the production cost, but has kept all the extra profits for himself.
In Gladys' office, Hines, still jealous out of his mind, flings knives past Sid and Gladys (deliberately missing, he claims), narrowly missing an increasingly paranoid Mr. Hasler. After detaining Hines, Sid then brings about Hasler's consent to a pay raise and rushes to bring the news to the Union Rally, already in progress ("7½ Cents"). This news brings peace to the factory and to his love life, allowing him to reconnect with Babe ("There Once Was a Man (Reprise)"). Everyone goes out to celebrate—at Hernando's Hideaway ("Pajama Game"). | romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0037795 | The House on 92nd Street | In 1939, American standout university student Bill Dietrich (William Eythe) is approached by Nazi recruiters due to his German heritage. He feigns interest, then notifies the FBI. FBI agent George Briggs (Lloyd Nolan) tells him to play along.
Dietrich travels to Hamburg, Germany, where he undergoes six months of intensive training in espionage. He is then sent back to the United States to set up a radio station and to act as paymaster to the spies already there. He is told that only a "Mr. Christopher" has the authority to change his assignment.
Dietrich manages to pass along his microfilmed credentials to the FBI; they are altered so that instead of being forbidden to contact most of the agents, he is authorized to meet them all. In New York, his contact, dress designer Elsa Gebhardt (Signe Hasso), is suspicious of the modification and requests confirmation from Germany, but communication is slow. In the meantime, she has no choice but to give Dietrich full access to her spy ring. When questioned, Dietrich's other legitimate contact, veteran espionage agent Colonel Hammersohn (Leo G. Carroll), denies knowing Mr. Christopher's identity.
In a separate development, a German spy is killed in a traffic accident; the FBI finds a secret message among his possessions stating that Mr. Christopher will concentrate on Process 97. Briggs is alarmed because he is aware that Process 97 is America's most closely guarded secret.
When the Japanese attack Pearl Harbor in December 1941, the United States enters the war. Most of the spies Dietrich has identified are immediately picked up, but Gebhardt's ring is left alone, in the hope of flushing out Mr. Christopher.
Gebhardt gives Dietrich papers to transmit immediately to Germany; they contain part of Process 97, a key part of the atomic bomb project. Dietrich steals a cigarette butt he notices in non-smoker Gebhardt's otherwise empty ashtray. The FBI traces this tiny clue to Luise Vadja, and from her to her supposed boyfriend, Charles Ogden Roper (Gene Lockhart), a scientist working on the atomic bomb. Roper breaks when he is picked up and shown a message from Germany ordering his liquidation after he has completed his mission. Roper confesses to have hidden the last part of Process 97 in a book at a bookstore from which a man believed to be Mr. Christopher was just filmed leaving. That is enough for Briggs, who then orders the arrest of Gebhardt's ring.
It is just in time for Dietrich. Gebhardt finally receives a reply from Germany, confirming her worst fears. She injects Dietrich with scopolamine in an attempt to obtain information, but her building is surrounded by government agents. Gebhardt orders her underlings to hold them off while disguising as a man and tries to sneak out with the vital papers. Unable to get away, she returns, only to be shot by mistake by one of her own men. The rest are captured, and Dietrich rescued. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0253514 | Purana Mandir | The film opens with a scene taking place some 200 years ago, with the royal procession of Raja Harimansingh of the sultanate of Bijapur, stranded near the Kali Pahari (literally, black mountain). The Raja is concerned because his daughter Princess Rupali has disappeared near the lair of the devil-worshipper Samri (Anirudh Agarwal). The princess wanders into the ruins of an old fortress and is promptly captured and tortured by the villainous Samri. His trademark attack is mesmerizing the hapless victim apparently sucking out their life force through the eyes, causing their natural eyes to be replaced with demonic white shades. During this process, Samri's eyes gleam blood red. Raja Harimansingh catches Samri in this terrible act and orders the soldiers to capture him.
Samri is put on trial, where his terrible litany of crimes is read. He has performed various heinous acts to please his demonic spirit masters and enhance his own evil powers. He has raped and disembowelled newly-wed brides; he has mutilated and cannibalized young children; he has — it shocks the crier as he reads out this charge — exhumed corpses for sacrifice and eating; and he has terrorized the hamlets surrounding Bijapur with his reign of evil. While the rajpurohit (royal priest) suggests Samri be subjected to pure Agni i.e. to be cremated, the Raja proposes another sentence—Samri is to be decapitated, with the headless body to be buried behind the old temple at Kalighat and the head secured in a strong-box to be kept at the Raja's haveli (mansion). The strongbox is chained with a trishul as advised by the rajpurohit (trident, the weapon of the Hindu God Shiva) to hold the evil in thrall. Samri pronounces his curse upon the Raja: "So long as my head is away from my body, every woman in your line shall die at childbirth; and when my head is rejoined to my body, I will arise and wipe out every living person in your dynasty."
As the years pass, the princely states merge into the Indian republic, and the great-great-grandson of Raja Harimansingh, Thakur Ranvir Singh (veteran actor Pradeep Kumar, known for his royal roles), now resides in the city. Samri is long gone, but not forgotten. His evil legend is passed from father to son in the Harimansingh clan, and his sinister curse occurs with each generation. Ranvir Singh's wife died at the birth of his daughter Suman (Aarti Gupta). Suman, now a college student, has a boyfriend Sanjay (Mohnish Behl) and they spend most of their young love frolicking in pools, the beach and nightclubs. One the Thakur learns about their relations, he severely disapproves of their relationship ostensibly because Sanjay is not of royal birth. (The real reason is that any man who marries Suman must endure her inevitable death when their child arrives.)
Suman is unaware of the ancient curse and resolute in her love, and Sanjay is steadfast in standing by her. They try to confront the intractable Thakur and the latter succumbs and reveals the curse which has been terrorizing their families for 200 years. Sanjay finally understands the father and walks out on Suman. However Suman leaves her home in the middle of the night and convinces Sanjay to accompany her to Bijapur where they can track and, if possible, to investigate the sordid tale put an end to the demonic barrier to their love. They head down to Bijapur accompanied by Sanjay's bosom buddy Anand (Puneet Issar) with his wife Sapna.
They undertake a frightening journey to Bijapur. After their car blows a flat, they are met by an old toothless hag Mangli and her mysterious son Durjan (Sadashiv Amrapurkar) who is the cook and chowkidar (caretaker) of the Harimansingh haveli. There is also a deformed woodcutter Sanga (Satish Shah) who makes fast friends with Durjan but secretly believes there is a treasure buried somewhere in the haveli.
The haveli has a painting of Raja Harimansingh; this painting shifts its gaze when Suman looks at it; and the eerie likeness of Samri appears through it. Various other sinister events (creaking beds, flaming torch lamps and random winds) somehow lead Anand and Sanjay to smash the wall behind the painting and uncover the strong box that holds Samri's head. Misinterpreting the head to be potentially that of a brave soldier who incurred the king's displeasure, they head back with the intention of sealing the wall the next day. Unfortunately Sanga and Durjan notice the whole incident. Sanga, already biased with self-created visions of treasure, yields to his temptations (believing the treasure is within the box) and detaches the trishul.
Samri's undead head mesmerizes him putting him into a trance. Sanga brings the head to the body behind the old temple and rejoins it in a gruesome ritual by piercing his hand with a dagger and the blood falls on Samri's neck, making Samri whole. With the hatred of 200 years under him, Samri begins his murderous rampage to eliminate the descendants of Raja Harimansingh and once again wreaks evil all over the surrounding hamlets.
The townsfolk are unprepared to deal with evil of such magnitude. Misunderstandings and tensions claim the lives of many townspeople and Anand meets a horrific death at the hands of Samri. The remainder barely withstand the onslaught when Thakur Ranvir Singh arrives. He relates the legend but he, too, does not know the means to defeat the bloodthirsty Samri.
Despondent, the townsfolk seek refuge at the temple as Samri cannot enter that holy ground. They perform aarti (lamp adornment) to Lord Shiva. Divine guidance comes before Sanjay; the trishul holds the key to check the monster. Sanjay and Suman return to the haveli to seek the trishul and offer a battle to Samri. Unbeknown to them, Durjan had moved the trishul to a different location within the haveli itself. Sanjay and Suman find themselves trapped in the haveli while being hunted by the bloodthirsty Samri.
After a series of tumultuous events, Sanjay manages to trap Samri in a coffin and, with the trishul in hand to check the monster, drag him out to the village square (next to the old temple). There, they construct a hasty pyre and burn Samri alive once and for all.
Few days after, Sanjay and Suman were married and lives with Suman's parents happily. | revenge, romantic | train | wikipedia | Before there was Raaz, there was Purana Mandir....
Purana Mandir is without any doubt one of the greatest, if not the greatest, Bollywood horror movie ever made.
Directed by the famous Ramsay Brothers, it has a powerful story that grips your attention right from the start, and never let's go.The story concerns a demonic curse bestowed on a royal family, which forbids its daughter (Aarti Gupta) from marrying.
However, she falls for Monish Behl.
Before they can marry, they visit, with two friends, the old palace and the nearby temple where, hundred of years ago, an extremely macabre event had taken place...
Much of the credit for the huge success of this masterpiece has to go to the perfect musical score provided by relatively unknown music director Ajit Singh.
The music is essential in making this movie genuinely frightening at times.
Monish Behl and Aarti Gupta both give very sincere performances, Ajay Agarwal has a very strong screen presence as Samri, and it is a pleasure to also see veteran actor Pradeep Kumar.The DVD recently released by Mondo Macabro (part of a 2-disc release including also Badh Darwaza) is the best this movie has looked for years.
Unfortunately, it is presented in 4:3 aspect ratio, but this is how the movie was originally made.I would rate this movie right up there with Raaz as the best Bollywood has given its audience in terms of horror.And, oh, did I forget to say that Purana Mandir also has the most beautiful and haunting love song ever to grace the Indian silver screen, sung by no other than...Ajit Singh himself..
Knock-Out Bollywood Horror!!
EVIL DEAD meets SOUND OF MUSIC?.
If you want one Bollywood shocker, PURANA MANDIR is good place to start.
Over two hours of over-the-top gory action with wild camera angles, stunning action scenes, creepy shocks and, eh, all the cheerful singing and dancing!ONE THE BEST MOVIES I HAVE EVER SEEN!Argento-fans who're tired of Euro/US horrorflicks, should try this tasty hindi dish - you'll be coming back for more!!!.
One of the Best Films to come out of India.
I remember my parents renting this from our local Hindi video library in the 1980s.
I remember seeing the poster in the shop window and Saamri's grotesque face staring lustfully at Arti Gupta's body.
We used to love this movie when we were kids because it was really scary.
I hear it was a tremendous hit and people in Bombay were crazy for it.
The Ramsay Bros.
are fantastic filmmakers and know exactly which buttons to push in order to get the right response from the audience.
More than this, they had really fantastic stories that were based on old Indian myths and superstitions and delivered them with plenty of style and energy.
Much like the Hammer Horror films of Britain, the Ramsay Bros.
had a visual aesthetic that was uniquely their own and has never been replicated.
It's a shame that they no longer make movies and have chosen instead to concentrate on India's burgeoning television market.
At a time when I really couldn't hack watching glossy Bollywood musicals or listening to soppy Hindi love songs, the Ramsay Bros.
movies were about the only thing we could watch collectively and really enjoy.
'Purana Mandir' is a perfect example of good Hindi commercial movie-making and deserves to be hailed as a Horror classic..
The best Indian horror film.
Yeah..
as a horror movie buff...
seeing both Hollywood and Bollywood horror flicks, I would say that PURANA MANDIR is the best Indian horror film ever made, or at least, I have seen.
The theme is great, the props, though cheesy, are creepy enough, the demon is really scary, the songs are good and the plot is plausible (for a change).
The movie moves at a fast pace and there is never a moment of boredom, excepting some comic interludes.
Ajit Singh, a nightclub singer, a talented music director (of very few films) and a true-blue Indian prince, manages to come with really hummable songs, including the signature song, WOH BEETEY DIN YAAD HAI, especially the version which Ajit Singh sings himself.
A touch of eroticism in the movie is enough to titillate the audience.
A watchable horror movie, by any standards.
At least there is no vampire or werewolf theme, which Hollywood seems to specialize in ..
Even though more than 20 years have passed since the movie was released, it has not dated..
there is nothing to date in the movie, excepting, perhaps the clothes that the lead pair wore and the car they drove.
The movie has some really scary moments..
and I would really recommend it to all horror movie fans..
Just Brilliant.
This movie is just Brilliant, it has got everything from Horror to comedy to some soft sex scenes.
Purana Mandir must be the most scary movie made in India ever.
The actors has done some really good acting, and especially the Saamri guy has done it again.
He is sure a good actor, and makes every little child and even grown up sleepless at nights, crying for their mothers to save them.
The comedy part is Brilliant, Jagdeep is the Godfather in comedy.
The actress is sure sexy, and she loves to show her body, even though its not even nice to look at...heheThe Ramsay's has done a excellent camera work with some excellent story writing...to all you movie lovers, Purana Mandir is a must see, and don't watch it alone..
India's Best Horror Film till date.
This is the best horror film made in India with "Saamri" as India's answer to its western counterparts Freedy Kruger,Jason.It is time for the next generation of Ramsay clan to make films with fresh story ideas catering to the present generation.There has been never been such a favorable time to make horror films in India.Ramsay's have been the creator of this genre in India and what is needed is a fresh start with a gripping story, better special effects and great production values to match the international standards.If they were successful in times when the funds were limited and a limited market they can be successful now with the markets opening up and corporates backing fresh ideas.Calling RAMSAY'S WE WANT YOU BACK!!!..
Fantastic....Freddy, jason, Leatherface and Saamri.
Purana Mandir is example of great Indian cinema and at the same time low budget.
Its low budget in terms of casting but the props and make up on the monster is still pretty good for the early 80s.
Not good, but for its time its amazing and scary.
Saamri is a terrifying monster who went on to do more films which include Bandh Darwaza and Saamri 3d.
The guy that plays Saamri suited the role and did a good job.
Monish Behl i believe makes his debut and does a decent job.
Puneet Issar is average, Jagdeep is OK for some people, but i found him annoying.
The girls are unknown and looks like will remain that way, but one of them did some mild nudity which was rare at the time.
They are quite good looking, but compared to this generations of actresses then no chance.
Ramsay family are magnificent film makers who have given one of the best horror movies in India.
Purana Mandir and Veerana are great movies..
Classics although not classy.
I had the misfortune to watch this film as a kid but saw it again only last year and it still scared the hell out of me.
The whole atmosphere of the film is creepy - the gate to the house, the eyes in the paintings, the staff at the house, the windy weather.
Also the little shocks that come up unexpectedly throughout the film!
The blood shower, the possession of the caretaker, the child-birth possession at the beginning of the film!
This film gave me sleepless nights for a few weeks and its absolutely great to watch if you're visiting your farmhouse or are going to a remote country trip where everything squeaks, and where there is limited electricity..
Thakur, Haveli, and Saamri.
As far as the history of Indian cinema is concerned, there has been very little place for horror till date.
Even today, the romantic and action films are sure to do more business than their horror counterparts.
Its other story that Indian directors are not very professional with horror and their kind of story is closer to any of the push-cart kiddo comic than to a decent horror story.
Seriously, I am now left with nothing in hand but a couple of Ramsay movies, that shine even today in the Bollywood sky of horror.
Purana Mandir was one such attempt by the Ramsays that stands out even today when its compared to Bhatt's absurd ghost tales.
Though Purana Mandir wastes a hell lot of time on pointless and mindless comedy sequences where the power of Puneet Issar seems dwarfing down under the magnitude of super suckers Jagdeep and Rajindernath to insulting levels, but at the same time it honestly keeps pace with the plot and uses similar elements of fear that the viewers would later see in Ramsays other hits like Veerana and Bandh Darwaza.
The plot follows a similar Thakur-Haveli plot, but in a different fashion this time.Years ago, a tantric named Saamri (Aniruddha Agarwal) roamed about the sultanate of Bijapur, terrorizing and killing the townsfolk.
Finally he was arrested by King Hariman Singh's soldiers and sentenced to death for his inhuman and unholy offenses.
Saamri is a vampire who killed several women and children and drank their blood to please his demon god.
When Saamri is about to be beheaded, he puts a curse on the King's family.
According to his curse, every women of the King's family shall die during childbirth.
Saamri is beheaded with his head and torso buried at different places.
It is believed that who so will put the head and torso together, shall give Saamri a chance to resurrect, whereby the resurrected Saamri will devastate everything that comes his way.The film cuts to present times, where we see Suman (Aarti Gupta) and Sanjay (Mohnish Bahal) as love birds.
Suman wants to marry Sanjay, but her father Thakur Ranvir Singh (Pradeep Kumar) is hellbent on separating the duo.
Suman finally comes to know that she is the descendant of King Hariman Singh and being a girl she would face Saamri's curse and die at the childbirth.
The evil image of Saamri appears and disappears before Thakur Ranvir Singh every now and then and torments him.
Sanjay and Suman want to put an end to this curse and decide to pay a visit to Suman's ancestral palace.
They also take Anand (Puneet Issar) and his wife with them.
The palace is a hellish place and remains vacant even today.
It is looked after by the caretaker Durjan (Sadashiv Amrapurkar) and a local woodcutter Sanga (Satish Shah).
The two believe that a large sum of valuables is stashed somewhere in the palace and keep looking for it.
They somehow find a box and believing it to be their booty-box, open it by mistake.
Their mistake forms the crux of the story.
Obviously the monster has to be resurrected else who would spend money watching the b-graders?Aniruddha Agarwal as Saamri is the core attraction of Purana Mandir, and he solely overshadows others.
He is so effective as Saamri, that the viewers feel mesmerized and forget about the protagonists.
Jagdeep and Rajindernath with their sore performances have only extended the movie duration by an hour or so and could have been avoided by the directors.
The lead pair is okay but Puneet Issar has given a great performance and his death really troubles the viewers.
The background score is one of the most haunting scores and was repeatedly used in many other Ramsay projects including their famous Zee Horror Show.
This soundtrack is still considered 'jinxed' by many.
This is a fairly enjoyable film (overlooking the comedy) that can be relished on a dizzy Saturday night..
Great location film.
when i saw this movie first time i was Really happy that this Indian film maker is very good, because when in India people love to watch romantic movie then this guy dare to makes horror movie, i really salute RAMSAY FAMILY,not because they dare to makes horror movie but made great horror movie of India ever with some great location from Murud's nawab palace, i personally saw that palace, believe me it's looks really horror and heritage,The story of movie is similar to other Ramsay movie like Thakur and haweli plot, but in this movie we automatically fall in love with them,The performances are good from Mohnish Behel,Aarti Gupta and Puneet Issar, but the credit goes to AJAY AGARWAL and his MAKE-UP MAN,he was brilliant with his face expression,After watching this movie i really becomes number one fan of RAMSAY BRO.
I REQUEST RAMSAY BROS.
THAT PLEASE MAKE THIS KIND OF MOVIE AGAIN AND AGAIN BECAUSE WE NEED YOU DEAR,AND THANKS FOR GREAT ENTERTAINMENT. |
tt0347369 | Jiminy Glick in Lalawood | Jiminy Glick in LaLaWood starts off as an Entertainment Tonight or Access Hollywood spoof, but develops into a murder mystery, with David Lynch played by Martin Short as a makeshift Hercule Poirot.
Jiminy Glick (also played by Short) checks into a spooky hotel where Lynch is at the bar, spouting random scenes for his new movie. Glick hits the spotlight when he gets to interview Ben Di Carlo (Corey Pearson), who is starring in an indie flick called Growing Up Gandhi. This movie is a tale of Gandhi's rise as a prize fighter in the boxing rings of India. The film and its star are not well received, except for Glick who enjoyed it. Unfortunately, he fell asleep before the film ended.
After this scoop, Glick gets another prize interview with Miranda Coolidge (Elizabeth Perkins), who becomes the key figure in the murder mystery. Coolidge is starring in a lesbian sexploitation movie called African Queens (a takeoff of The African Queen), but is soon involved in the aforementioned murder.
Glick conducts interviews with real stars like Steve Martin, Kurt Russell, and red carpet interviews with Kiefer Sutherland, Whoopi Goldberg, Sharon Stone, and Jake Gyllenhaal. Jiminy gets kidnapped by Randall Bookerton, a local hip hop recording artist, who wants his animated film, The Littlest Roach, to win Best Picture. Jiminy also becomes a suspect in Miranda Coolidge's "murder". He and Dixie (Jan Hooks) retrieve his cell phone, which mysteriously appears in Miranda's room.
Jiminy thinks that Andre is covering up her murder. David Lynch appears and tells the Glicks what happened. It is revealed that Natalie, Miranda's daughter, killed her girlfriend Dee Dee who was having an affair with Andre, her mother's agent. Dee Dee disguises herself as Miranda in case she got drunk and upset. Glick mistakes her for the real Miranda and passes out in her bedroom. Andre calls some "former business associates" to dispose of Dee Dee's body. Natalie stabs Andre in anger and disgust for how he treats Miranda and other actresses he has worked with.
Natalie goes to jail for 20 years. The future of the film festival is uncertain, and Miranda is considering retirement. Randall Bookerton and his posse are happy to receive an award for their film. Glick, meanwhile, realizes that celebrities can be dull, after interviewing actor Rob Lowe, ending the film. During the credits, bloopers and outtakes are seen with Jiminy interviewing Kurt Russell and Steve Martin. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0076257 | The Kentucky Fried Movie | The Kentucky Fried Movie contains largely unconnected sketches that parody various film genres, including exploitation films. The film's longest segment spoofs early kung-fu films, specifically Enter the Dragon; its title, A Fistful of Yen, refers to A Fistful of Dollars. Parodies of disaster films (That's Armageddon), blaxploitation films (Cleopatra Schwartz) and softcore porn/women-in-prison films (Catholic High School Girls in Trouble) are presented as "Coming Attraction" trailers. The fictional films are said to have been produced by "Samuel L. Bronkowitz" (a conflation of Samuel Bronston and Joseph L. Mankiewicz, but also a spoof of B-movie producer and American International Pictures co-founder Samuel Z. Arkoff). The sketch See You Next Wednesday mocks theater-based gimmicks like Sensurround by depicting a dramatic film presented in "Feel-a-Round", which involves an usher physically accosting a theater patron. Other sketches spoof TV commercials and programs, news broadcasts, and classroom educational films. The city of Detroit and its high crime rate are a running gag portraying the city as Hell on Earth; in "A Fistful of Yen", the evil drug lord orders a captured CIA agent to be sent to Detroit, and the agent screams and begs to be killed instead.
The film is number 87 on Bravo's "100 Funniest Movies," and is considered, along with The Groove Tube, to be one of the groundbreaking films of the entire spoof and mockumentary genres of film making.
=== Sketch selection ===
The film's credits listed the sketches incorrectly, as the writers changed the show order after the credits had been written. On second cut, they corrected this error. The following list is in the running order used in the film: | comedy, murder, cult, flashback, absurd, humor, satire | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0182015 | A Cosmic Christmas | Three aliens from an unknown planet, who bear a strong resemblance to the Biblical Magi, visit earth to know the true meaning of Christmas. Peter, a young boy, and Lucy, his goose, are the first to encounter them. Unable to find the true meaning of Christmas in town, Peter takes them to his family's house in the woods. While Peter's grandmother tells the aliens about her memories of Christmas, Marvin, one of the town's bullies, steals Lucy. In the chase to rescue Lucy, Marvin falls through the ice in a lake. Peter attempts to rescue him but falls into the lake as well. The townsfolk, who were out searching for the aliens, attempt to save the boys but their human chain isn't long enough to reach them. The three aliens, who had sworn not to interfere with events on earth, decide to help in order to learn the meaning of Christmas. The rescue effort is successful. The townsfolk are quick to condemn Marvin for stealing Lucy, but have a change of heart when they realize that Marvin stole Lucy because he had nothing to eat. Peter offers Marvin and his friends the chance to join them for Christmas dinner and the aliens realize that family and the spirit of forgiveness are the true meaning of Christmas. | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0125439 | Notting Hill | William "Will" Thacker owns an independent book store, The Travel Book Co. in Notting Hill. He is divorced and shares his house with an eccentric, care-free Welshman named Spike and has a small, tight knit group of friends that includes his sister, Honey.
Will encounters Hollywood superstar Anna Scott when she enters his shop. Minutes later, they collide in the street and his drink spills on her clothes. Will offers his house nearby for Anna to change. Before leaving, she impulsively kisses him and then asks him not to mention what just occurred.
Days later, Spike belatedly relays a message from Anna. Will calls and she invites him to visit her at the Ritz Hotel. On arrival, Will is mistaken for a journalist—in a panic he claims he works for Horse & Hound— and is made to interview not only Anna, but the entire cast of her of new sci-fi film, which he knows nothing about. Anna calls him back in and says she has cleared her evening. Will is exhilarated, before remembering that he is expected at his sister Honey's birthday party; Anna surprises him by offering to be his date.
At the house of Will's friends Max and Bella, Anna fits in perfectly as they all share stories. Honey immediately recognizes Anna and declares them best friends instantly. She and Will share a private moment in a garden square as they walk back from the birthday party. The following evening they go to a restaurant, where Will overhears a group of patrons making crude remarks about Anna and attempts to defend her, before Anna steps in herself and humiliates them. As they walk back to her hotel, she invites Will up to her room. But when he arrives, she tells him he must leave immediately. Her American movie star boyfriend (who was never mentioned until now) appears and starts to bark orders at him, as well as make unflattering comments about Anna's weight. Anna is apologetic and embarrassed, while a stunned Will leaves. Over the next six months, Max and Bella set Will up on a series of blind dates, trying to help him move on; however Will, still hung up on Anna, does not connect with any of them.
One day, a distraught Anna appears at Will's doorstep; some pre-stardom nude photos have been published in the tabloids (along with reports of a video filmed without her permission), and she needs a place to hide from the fallout. Once she calms down, they spend some time on the rooftop patio rehearsing lines from Anna's next film. She also apologizes for the previous incident, telling Will her boyfriend simply showed up out of the blue and the relationship had broken down long before then. When she sees a poster of the Marc Chagall painting La Mariée on his kitchen wall, Anna tells Will that "it feels like how love should be". That night, Anna goes to him and they have sex. The next morning, the press (inadvertently tipped off by Spike) besiege Will's house and get pictures of both him and Anna half-dressed. While packing to leave, a furious Anna accuses Will of exploiting the situation for his own benefit and declares that she regrets their time together, because the press will make sure it never goes away.
Seasons pass and Will, though determined to forget Anna, remains miserable. Spike and Honey find the numbers to Anna's New York and London agents, encouraging him to reach out, but Will decides to throw them away. At a dinner with his friends, Will discovers that Anna is now an Oscar winner and back in town making a period film. He visits her location shoot, where Anna sees him and invites him past security. Although things are not going well on set, she asks him to stay because there are "things to say". He is surprised to find that it is a Henry James film, something he had previously suggested would be a good role for Anna. Given headphones to listen to the actors over their microphones, Will overhears Anna bantering with her rude co-star, until the co-star mentions seeing Will and Anna refers to him dismissively. Saddened, Will leaves the set.
The next day, Anna comes to the bookshop with a present. Visibly nervous, She apologizes for her previous behavior and expresses a desire to rekindle their relationship. When Will points out her comments the previous day, she explains that she would never discuss her private life with "the most indiscreet man in England." Believing it inevitable that they would break up, Will turns her down, as her superstar status would mean he could never really escape the pain of losing her, and having it happen a third time would crush him. Although saddened, Anna accepts his decision, but reminds him that underneath all the fame—which is really just nonsense— she is "also just a girl, standing in front of a boy, asking him to love her."
Will meets his friends in a restaurant with the opened gift—the original La Mariée. They take turns supporting his decision to end the relationship by (halfheartedly) pointing out Anna's flaws. When Spike enters and is told what happened, he promptly calls Will a "daft prick". Will reiterates Anna's last comment and realizes his mistake. They pile into Max's car and race across London to Anna's hotel, where they find that she has checked out and is holding a press conference at the Savoy Hotel. When Will arrives, Anna's publicist is telling the crowd that Anna will be taking time off from making films and leaving the UK that night. Will, pretending to be a reporter again, admits he made the wrong decision and begs Anna to reconsider. After admitting she would, Anna announces that she will be staying in Britain "indefinitely." Anna and Will smile at one another from across the room as the press goes into a frenzy. A montage shows their wedding and arrival at one of Anna's movie premieres, before ending with them on a bench in the private garden, Will reading to a visibly pregnant Anna. | dramatic, romantic, comedy, psychedelic, entertaining | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0026663 | Mad Love | Tordesillas, 1554. Seventy four years old, Queen Joanna of Castile, called Juana La Loca (Joanna the Madwoman), is still mourning the loss of her husband who died a half century before. Joanna remembers with emotion the man she loved passionately, but who brought her ruin. She does not fear death, she says, because death would allow her to be reunited with her husband. Their story goes back almost 60 years.
In 1496, Joanna, the third child of the Catholic Monarchs Ferdinand II of Aragon and Isabella I of Castile, is leaving Spain through the port of Laredo. She is headed to Flanders to marry the Archduke of Austria, Philip, nicknamed the Handsome, a man she has never laid eyes on. The marriage has been arranged for political purposes. Joanna's siblings and her mother, Queen Isabella, bid her farewell.
Once in Flanders, Joanna, young and inexperienced, is immediately smitten by her handsome fiancé. He is equally pleased with his beautiful bride and orders the marriage to take place at that very moment so they can consummate their marriage without any delay. Their union is initially a great success. The political alliance between their two countries has been consolidated and Joanna and Philip are very attracted to each other. With his good looks and bed manners, Philip completely captivates his wife. Their passionate love making soon produces results. Joanna has a daughter, followed shortly after by a son. She gives birth to her son in an emergency bathroom delivery without any assistance, cutting the umbilical cord afterwards with her teeth.
A combination of love, lust and emotional dependency make the passionate Joanna deeply attached to her husband. Her love becomes consuming, but the intensity of her passion turns Philip away. He is a restless man who finds entertainment in going hunting and in the arms of other women. The deaths of Joanna's brother, the stillbirth of her brother's daughter, her older sister's death and her sister's son's death unexpectedly make her heir of the Castilian and Aragones crowns. However, she is not interested in government. Obsessed with her husband, Joanna surprises him in bed with a lover, who Joanna later successfully identifies as Ines de Brabante, one of the court ladies. In a fit of jealousy, Joanna cuts the long red hair of her rival. While Joanna despairs at her husband’s unfaithfulness, she receives further bad news. Her mother has died. Joanna thus becomes Queen of Castile and has to return to her kingdom. Her tantrums over her husband’s infidelities have made her start to become known as Joanna the Mad.
At the Castilian court in Burgos, the Queen is happily greeted by her subjects, but her marital life is still in turmoil. Philip is soon bewitched by the charms and spells of Aixa, a Moorish prostitute who uses her sexual attraction and black magic to secure Philip's favor. With this new lover, the King becomes noticeably indifferent toward his wife, which adds to her increasingly insane jealousy.
Against the background of this troubled marriage, there are two opposed political parties at court, one Flemish, the other Castilian. The conspiring Flemish usurpers are headed by Señor de Veyre, Philip's right-hand man. Their objective is to have Joanna declared insane and for Philip to take power away from her. Joanna has her own set of supporters, the loyal Castilian royalists, headed by the Admiral of Castile. The Admiral and the Queen's friend and confidant, Elvira, try unsuccessfully to rescue Juana from her marital obsessions.
However, it is not the government that is on the Queen's mind; she is fixated on retaining her husband’s love. To avoid any temptations at court, she hires only ugly-looking maids of honor to serve her, but in fact Aixa has been brought to court by Philip, passing as one of the court ladies under the name of Beatriz de Bobadilla. Unaware of this, the Queen relies on Beatriz to find a spell to help her retain her husband's love. Joanna is equally misguided in her attempt to regain Philip's attention by simulating a love affair with Captain Álvaro de Estúñiga, a close friend from her childhood. The Queen’s lack of control permits the manipulation of her enemies to have her declared incompetent to rule. The King, encouraged by Señor de Veyre, resolves to take the rule of the kingdom for himself and shove Joanna out of the way. He finds an unlikely ally in Joanna's own father, king Fernando, who has remarried and has no further interest in either the fate of his daughter or in the kingdom of Castile.
While her fate is decided at a court assembly, Joanna is able to successfully make her case, counting on the unquestionable support of her subjects. However, her powerful speech coincides with Philip falling gravely ill. Although she devotedly takes care of her husband, the doctors are unable to do anything for him. On his death bed, Philip apologizes to his wife for his past excesses. After the death of her husband Joanna, heavily pregnant, takes on a long journey to the south of the country to bury her husband. She does not go far. Forced to stop to give birth to a daughter, Joanna never reaches her destination. Although she retains her title as queen, at the age of 28 she is locked as a madwoman in the castle of Tordesillas for the rest of her long life.
Philip's body was laid to rest in a nearby monastery, which Joanna was allowed to visit from time to time. | insanity, romantic, murder, sadist | train | wikipedia | The first one of the two (incidentally, his first work as a director in America), 1932's "The Mummy" is really the most popular, given that it is also one of the best performances by horror icon Boris Karloff; however, it is in the second one where Freund's talents really shine, making this last movie as a director his final masterpiece.Loosely based on Maurice Renard's novel, "Les Mains d'Orlac" (literally, "The Hands of Orlac"), "Mad Love" is the story of Dr. Gogol (Peter Lorre), a brilliant surgeon deeply in love with a beautiful theater actress named Yvonne Orlac (Frances Drake).
Renard is often credited as being the "inventor" of the Mad Scientist archetype, and truly gives a great use to it in his novel; appropriately, "Mad Love" keeps this psychological drama between characters and brings it to life, spending considerable time detailing the characters and their relationships, building up the necessary tension for the grandiose finale.After directing several melodramas and comedies in a row, "Mad Love" allowed Freund to once again return to his expressionist roots and create a haunting tale of horror and madness in almost the same vein as his earlier classic, "The Mummy".
The story itself focuses a lot in psychological themes, ranging from neurosis and hysteria, to compulsive obsession and dangerous psychosis; Freund makes great use of this themes across the movie, although it is obvious that he prefers the character of Dr. Gogol to the other protagonists of the film.
Like Im-Ho-Tep the mummy, Dr. Gogol is driven by the mad love he feels for a woman, but unlike with the mummy, Freund makes sure to never fully transform Gogol into a monster, making him very human and frighteningly realist.Peter Lorre's acting is essential for this last element in Gogol's persona, and he delivers one of this most amazing performances in his career.
Colin Clive, who would become famous as Dr. Victor Frankenstein in James Whale's films, delivers a truly effective performance as Orlac, but I found that Freund seems definitely much more interested in Dr. Gogol and his antics than in the pianist's neurosis, leaving few space to Orlac's growing insanity.
Still, Clive does a very good performance despite the limited screen time his character receives when compared to Gogol.It is probably this last point what truly stops this movie from being a classic of horror, as with a runtime of barely 68 minutes, it feels too short and gives the feeling that something was missing (perhaps a few more scenes with Colin Clive) in this psychological thriller.
This beautiful black-and-white film by MGM rivals the classic monsters of Universal, and placed Peter Lorre alongside such horror movie icons as Bela Lugosi, Boris Karloff and Vincent Price.
Dr. Gogol (Peter Lorre) is a brilliant surgeon who is obsessed with actress Yvonne Orlac (Francis Drake).
German actor Peter Lorre made his American film debut in "Mad Love," which I believe was an MGM release and proved to be competition for some of the popular Universal Horror films of the time.
When Stephen is involved in an horrific train crash and has both his hands crushed beyond healing, Yvonne pleads with Gogol to help save his well being, he does, by amputating the crushed hands and grafting on the hands of a recently executed murderer, a murderer who's speciality was knives!Mad Love is one of those amazingly old classics that is a hybrid of genre staples, at times it's surrealist and at others its enjoying its Grand Guginol pulse, whilst knowingly it's lacing its story with an uneasy comedic beat.
Colin Clive as Stephen Orlac also puts in a performance of note, all twitchy nervousness and believable emotional torment, whilst Frances Drake more than adequately brings vulnerability to the centrifugal importance of Yvonne's emotional turmoil.Weird and gorgeous, and incredibly well written, Mad Love holds up incredibly well today as a horror/romance film of vast influential worth, see it in the dark and marvel at its various moments of excellence.
Ted Healy as an American newspaperman, Sara Haden as Yvonne's maid & May Beatty as Gogol's housekeeper, all offer much-needed comic relief.Film mavens should spot uncredited performances by Ian Wolfe as Orlac's stepfather; Clarence Wilson as a moneylender; and especially bubbly Billy Gilbert as the man on the train with the dog..
Brilliant surgeon Dr. Gogol (Peter Lorre) is in love with actress Yvonne Orlac (Frances Drake).
Here he returns to the genre with another actor legend of his time (Peter Lorre) and his near-iconic horror persona (Dr. Gogol).The concept of the love-struck mad doctor is not a novelty but it is through Peter Lorre's unique physical presence that it's tranformed into a horror villain worthy of a spot in the all-time villain pantheon - when he poses as Rollo the murderer with his fake steel hands, fedora hat, black goggles and that weird neck contraption he's worthy of the iconic looks of even The Invisible Man himself.Ironically the parts I enjoyed most are the comedic bits, mostly coming from the old maid and the interactions of various people with the wax model of Yvonne Orlac, Dr. Gogol's object of desire.
The horror part of Mad Love is somewhat weak however, be it Stephen Orlac's unwilling urge to kill (which to return to the Universal comparison reminded me of Talbot's plight in The Wolf Man) that is delivered with Colin Clive's characteristic brand of hammy acting and Peter Lorre's mad doctor.
However Peter Lorre, although menacing in some scenes, has something pathetic and pittiful about him I don't really like.All in all Mad Love is a 30's horror movie that will appeal to fans of Universal's monster gallery but is not quite as good or classic..
But Gogol's plans for Yvonne backfire when Stephen's new hands prove to have a mind of their own.Overlooked for far too long (probably because it wasn't part of the Universal packages that so many television stations bought and aired), it's good to finally see Mad Love getting so much richly deserved praise.
However, Gogol being the great surgeon he is, finds a way to help the situation by replacing the pianist's with those of a dead knife thrower...Peter Lorre has a number of truly great performances to his name; and his role here is undoubtedly one of the best!
He did a magnificent job with The Mummy, where his lugubrious sensibility was perfectly suited to the material, which concerned the living dead, but here is is dealing with people who are very much alive, and sparks are definitely indicated, and yet never present.On the other hand, Peter Lorre is brilliant as the mad and wonderfully named Dr. Gogol, and he dominates the film with his usual schizophrenic authority, as he seems to hear voices and see images in the darnedest places.
From the year 1935 comes Mad Love, a first-rate horror film that's based upon the frequently adapted novel "The Hands of Orlac" and some 80 years later still stands as a brilliant adaption.Oddly, if you look at it a certain way, this film could qualify as a romantic comedy of sorts.....
The key plot elements of this delightfully devious and under-rated classic involve, obsession, deception, decapitation, hand transplants, wax statues, knife-throwing, murder and a nosy, fast-talking reporter from New York.Mad Love is set in 1930's Paris and because it's such a short film (too short), the number of settings is kept to a mere handful, the most important setting is the private medical clinic/residence of Dr. Gogol (brilliantly performed by Peter Lorre) where the meatiest parts of the movie occur.
Mad Love is a fun and mostly fast-paced film, that has a very off-beat sense of humor, a first rate-script of highly literate quality and a small, but stellar cast, that's comprised of a evenly balanced mix of American and European talent.Peter Lorre offers the best performance, as the demented and deceitful Dr. Gogol (surely one of his most colorful performances), also Colin Clive (one of his last film roles) of Frankenstein fame delivers with a characteristically moody and nervously, over-wrought performance.
Also there's Ted Healy as the slick-talking' reporter, whose nosiness eventually cracks the case wide open, and not to forget the movies gorgeous heroine, Frances Drake, whose simply terrific in her role as the stage actress Yvonne Orlac - Doctor Gogol had good taste.The film is replete with lots of great visuals and stylistic touches, such as fish-eye lenses, mirror tricks, tilted camera shots, etc.
The movies most exciting and deviously entertaining moments all have one thing in common, they all feature Dr. Gogol (Peter Lorre) in the role of a deceitful and delusional, hopeless romantic; who has only two things on his mind - getting rid of Mrs. Orlac's hubby and then taking her for himself.My favorite visual in the film is the interesting interplay between, Gogol and a wax statue (that's in the likeness of Mrs. Orlac) which plays prominently into the fabric of the story.
Mad Love is an absolute superb horror film from 1935 starring Peter Lorre as Dr Gogol.
The Costumes, Sets, and Cinematography are Amazing and set the Tone for the rest of this Horror Movie that stills lies on the Fringe, Overshadowed by other Movies from Another Studio (Universal) and Sequeled Monsters.This one is just as good as Any due to a Combination of Story (The Hands of Orlac), Director (Karl Freund), and Star (Peter Lorre) that all Deliver one of the most Offbeat, Stylish Thrillers of the Decade.
In Paris, creepy bald-headed Peter Lorre (as Doctor Gogol) visits the incredibly realistic wax museum figure of beautiful scream queen Frances Drake (as Yvonne).
Poor Clive loses his piano-playing ability, but gains other talents
The whole "hand transplant" machinations never grabbed me or aided in my suspension of disbelief; but "Mad Love" is stylish, has Karl Freund directing, and Lorre is an amazing sight for sore eyes.
Also watch for the Yvonne's maid Sara Haden (as Marie), who can really hold her own.******* Mad Love (7/12/35) Karl Freund ~ Peter Lorre, Frances Drake, Colin Clive, Ted Healy.
(The real actress at the G-G was called "the most assassinated woman in the world" and was killed over 10,000 times in 60+ ways.) Gogol's obsession leads him to get involved in her private life, when her pianist husband loses his hands in a railway accident.Lorre is magnificent in this role.
When her husband can't play the piano but throws knives with deadly accuracy, she doesn't exactly come rushing into Gogols arms......The praise: It's stylish,macabre and chilling , Peter Lorre giving off a really good performance as the obsessed Dr. Gogol , fascinated by the sadism and perversion of the horror theater .
A mad scientist named Dr Gogol is obsessively infatuated with the lead actress of a local grotesque play in Paris.Though she is madly in love with a popular pianist, who sends her messages via code, when he knows his performances are being broadcast live on the radio.They plan to move to England together; though, not if Gogol has any say in the matter...Not only does he publicly molest her; he buys the wax statue made in her image; and formulates a sinister plot to ensure the object of his affection will never leave his sight.Meanwhile, police are moving local thug and killer, Rollo- whose proficiencies involve knife throwing- to the place where he is to be executed.Unfortunately, the train that both he, and the pianist, are in crashes...leaving the pianist with such severe injuries to his hands, that it will require their amputation.Rollo is executed (after mentioning the "longest dam ever built in the world").While the young actress is left so desperate, after the accident- that she turns to Gogol, hoping he can use his surgery skills to help her beloved.But he plans to use this oppourtunity to his advantage.He asks for the dead body of Rollo; from which he will harvest the hands; and transplant them onto the pianist.After numerous forms of therapy, the operation finally takes...though, things aren't exactly the same......he can no longer play the piano, no matter how hard he practices.He can, however, throw a knife with mean accuracy all of a sudden...which leads to the untimely death of his father.Turns out that Gogol had also replaced Rollo's head using the same procedure...and he's still alive...just with fancy new metallic hands.So, either his transplant hands are starting to take over his mind; or Rollo is somehow able to control his actions through his hands.At least, that is what they are leading him to believe...though, things might not be exactly like they seem...While not as good as Eyes Without A Face or House Of Wax...it's still a classic.Even if the story is a bit implausible in retrospect.Lorre's portrayal of Gogol is genuinely creepy.6 out of 10..
"Mad Love" was the film that launched Peter Lorre on his Hollywood career and he is wonderfully over-the-top as indeed is the whole film, just one of a number of versions of that grand guignol classic "The Hands of Orlac".
Having earlier acquired the services of Universal's top horror stars as Boris Karloff for THE MASK OF FU- MANCHU (1932) and Bela Lugosi in MARK OF THE VAMPIRE (1935), MGM has outdone itself using Colin Clive, best known for his title character in both FRANKENSTEIN (1931) and BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN (1935), and the European actor, Peter Lorre, in one of his first Hollywood movie roles.
Taken from the novel "The Hands of Orlac" by Maurice Resaba, that was earlier filmed in as a silent film (1927) starring Conrad Veidt, and remade years later with Mel Ferrar in 1960, many regard this version the best, especially when having Peter Lorre being the unbalanced doctor who performs miracles on disabled patients but is unable to conquer his mad love.The plot revolves around Yvonne (Frances Drake), an actress starring in a frightful play, "Torturee" for The Theater of Horrors.
****SPOILERS**** Peter Lorre as the brilliant but love-sick Dr.Gogol who goes mad, madly in love, with the object of his obsession the beautiful actress Yvonne, Frances Drake, that in the end lead to his death and the destruction of his life work as a world famous surgeon.Blinded by his love for Yvonne Dr. Gogol attended all her performances at the Theater of Horrors.
It's the kind of role that turned Lorre into the screen's foremost anti-hero of suspenseful horror classics.He's Dr. Gogol, a mad doctor so in love with an actress (FRANCES DRAKE) that when her musician husband (COLIN CLIVE) loses his hands in a train wreck, the doctor arranges to have the hands of an executed murderer attached to the pianist.
Interesting old horror movie starring Peter Lorre as a wacky doctor who, desperate to help the woman he loves, grafts the hands of a killer onto her pianist husband's mangled hands.
Mad Love was Peter Lorre's first American horror movie and also one of his best.Dr Gogol falls deeply in love with actress Yvonne Orlac and when her pianist husband looses his hands in a train crash, he puts him on a new pair.
The only annoying thing was the housekeeper's cockatiel flying around towards the end which was a little distracting from the main story.Joining Lorre in the cast are Francis Drake as Yvonne Orlac, Colin Clive (Frankenstein, Bride Of Frankenstein)as her husband and a good performance from May Beatty as the drunken housekeeper.I rather enjoyed watching Mad Love, despite it being a little weird at times.Rating: 3 stars out of 5..
Peter Lorre gives a stellar performance as the bizarre, bug-eyed Dr. Gogol, whose obsessive lust for the lovely Yvonne Orlac propels the movie.
Clive reprised his role as Stephen Orlac in 'Mad Love', in which the Werner Kraus role was taken over by Peter Lorre in his U.S. film debut.
Karl Freund directed this stylish and creepy film starring Peter Lorre(memorable in a star-making performance) as Doctor Gogol, a lonely surgeon madly in love with stage actress Yvonne Orlac, though his affection is sadly spurned because she is already married to a successful pianist(played by Colin Clive).
This one stars a baby faced/bald headed Peter Lorre, the quintessential creepy little mad man/killer, in the lead role.Dr. Gogol (Lorre) a famous and brilliant surgeon is enamored of Yvonne (Frances Drake) a performer in a show in the House of Horrors.
In his first American film, Peter Lorre plays Dr. Orlac, famous orthopedist who's madly in love with married stage actress, Yvonne, played by Frances Drake.
Peter Lorre is Dr. Gogol, a brilliant surgeon who has fallen in love with a concert singer Yvonne (Frances Drake).
"Mad Love" is a fascinating, breathtaking and incredibly creepy film that once again proves the brilliance of Karl Freund as a director, and even more so the brilliance of Peter Lorre as an actor.
While there are no fantastic monsters present (as in Universal's work of the time), there are certainly chills to mark this firmly in horror territory.The story strays from the plot of the earlier HANDS OF ORLAC by placing much more emphasis on the new character of Dr. Gogol, played by Lorre.
He directed Boris Karloff in 'The Mummy (1932)' and performed some uncredited work with Tod Browning for 'Dracula (1931).' 'Mad Love' combines Freund's sensibilities as a visual artist with strong acting and succinct storytelling, to produce what is certainly one of the finer horror films of the 1930s.Doctor Gogol (Lorre), a respected if unconventional surgeon working in Paris, visits nightly shows featuring his favourite actress, Yvonne Orlac (Frances Drake).
After all, you have Peter Lorre, severed hands, Colin Clive, Karl Freund...what's not to love, right?
Peter Lorre plays Dr. Gogol, a brilliant surgeon with an obsession with an actress, married to a pianist(played by Frankenstein's Colin Clive).
In this reasonably good 1935 film, Peter Lorre is Dr. Gogol, a genius at surgery who is driven irretrievably mad by his love for Frances Drake. |
tt0278343 | Beauty and the Beast | A widower merchant lives in a mansion with his six children, three sons and three daughters. All his daughters are very beautiful, but the youngest, Beauty, is the most lovely, as well as kind, well-read, and pure of heart; while the two elder sisters, in contrast, are wicked, selfish, vain, and spoiled. They secretly taunt Beauty and treat her more like a servant than a sister. The merchant eventually loses all of his wealth in a tempest at sea which sinks most of his merchant fleet. He and his children are consequently forced to live in a small farmhouse and work for their living.
Some years later, the merchant hears that one of the trade ships he had sent off has arrived back in port, having escaped the destruction of its compatriots. Before leaving, he asks his children if they wish for him to bring any gifts back for them. The sons ask for weaponry and horses to hunt with, whereas his oldest daughters ask for clothing, jewels, and the finest dresses possible as they think his wealth has returned. Beauty is satisfied with the promise of a rose as none grow in their part of the country. The merchant, to his dismay, finds that his ship's cargo has been seized to pay his debts, leaving him penniless and unable to buy his children's presents.
During his return, the merchant becomes lost during a storm. Seeking shelter, he enters a dazzling palace. A hidden figure opens the giant doors and silently invites him in. The merchant finds tables inside laden with food and drink, which seem to have been left for him by the palace's invisible owner. The merchant accepts this gift and spends the night there. The next morning, as the merchant is about to leave, he sees a rose garden and recalls that Beauty had desired a rose. Upon picking the loveliest rose he can find, the merchant is confronted by a hideous "Beast" which tells him that for taking his most precious possession after accepting his hospitality, the merchant must die. The merchant begs to be set free, arguing that he had only picked the rose as a gift for his youngest daughter. The Beast agrees to let him give the rose to Beauty, but only if the merchant or one of his daughters will return.
The merchant is upset but accepts this condition. The Beast sends him on his way, with wealth, jewels and fine clothes for his sons and daughters, and stresses that Beauty must never know about his deal. The merchant, upon arriving home, tries to hide the secret from Beauty, but she pries it from him. Her brothers say they will go to the castle and fight the Beast, but the merchant dissuades them, saying they will stand no chance against the monster. Beauty then agrees to go to the Beast's castle. The Beast receives her graciously and informs her that she is now mistress of the castle, and he is her servant. He gives her lavish clothing and food and carries on lengthy conversations with her. Every night, the Beast asks Beauty to marry him, only to be refused each time. After each refusal, Beauty dreams of a handsome prince who pleads with her to answer why she keeps refusing him, to which she replies that she cannot marry the Beast because she loves him only as a friend. Beauty does not make the connection between the handsome prince and the Beast and becomes convinced that the Beast is holding the prince captive somewhere in the castle. She searches and discovers multiple enchanted rooms, but never the prince from her dreams.
For several months, Beauty lives a life of luxury at the Beast's palace, having every whim catered to by invisible servants, with no end of riches to amuse her and an endless supply of exquisite finery to wear. Eventually, she becomes homesick and begs the Beast to allow her to go see her family. He allows it on the condition that she returns exactly a week later. Beauty agrees to this and sets off for home with an enchanted mirror and ring. The mirror allows her to see what is going on back at the Beast's castle, and the ring allows her to return to the castle in an instant when turned three times around her finger. Her older sisters are surprised to find her well fed and dressed in finery. Beauty tries to share the magnificent gowns and jewels the Beast gave her with her sisters, but they turn into rags at her sisters' touch, and are restored to their splendour when returned to Beauty, as the Beast meant them only for her. Her sisters are envious when they hear of her happy life at the castle, and, hearing that she must return to the Beast on a certain day, beg her to stay another day, even putting onion in their eyes to make it appear as though they are weeping. They hope that the Beast will be angry with Beauty for breaking her promise and eat her alive. Beauty's heart is moved by her sisters' false show of love, and she agrees to stay.
Beauty begins to feel guilty about breaking her promise to the Beast and uses the mirror to see him back at the castle. She is horrified to discover that the Beast is lying half-dead from heartbreak near the rose bushes from which her father plucked the rose, and she immediately uses the ring to return to the Beast.
Beauty weeps over the Beast, saying that she loves him. When her tears strike him, the Beast is transformed into the handsome prince from Beauty's dreams. The Prince informs her that long ago a fairy turned him into a hideous beast after he refused to let her in from the rain and that only by finding true love, despite his ugliness, could the curse be broken. He and Beauty are married and they live happily ever after together. | fantasy | train | wikipedia | A fine offering for young folks. A three-part special release for children, produced by H.C. Mathews. This will be, if it is rightly exhibited, a fine offering for young folks and will interest their elders, too. For a fairy story it has an ideal setting in the scenes of California, which add greatly to its value, and they are beautifully photographed. The story is told at length, and the sole, criticism we can make is that some of it will be over the heads of all but exceptionally bright children. If the exhibitor has someone, to tell the story as the picture is unrolled it will be perfect. - The Moving Picture World, May 3, 1913 |
tt0126850 | Cyberstalker | Aiden Ashley's family life was torn apart thirteen years earlier when her online stalker tracked her down to her home and in an avalanche of terror, murdered both her parents. Her stalker fled the crime scene without ever revealing his face to Aiden.
As a precaution, Aiden shuns the Internet for the next thirteen years, opting to stay off-line, attending therapy sessions and living in seclusion. She breaks this seclusion after her friend and art dealer, Winton Cornelis, convinces her to hold a public art gala showcasing her work. The gala marks a turn in her personal life, after she becomes romantically involved with a guest, Paul Rogers.
Meanwhile, Detective James Page continues to work on the unsolved case of Aiden's parents' murder. Page hires Jack Dayton, a cyber-security whiz, to research Aiden’s life. Dayton makes the shocking discovery that Aiden’s stalker continues to lurk. Aiden's stalker follows her undetected and installs secret cameras in her home.
Suspicion turns to Aiden's art dealer, with the discovery of suspicious financial transactions between his and Aiden's bank accounts. Things do not also appear as they seem as Aiden's love interest Paul's violent past is revealed. Furthermore, Detective Page's involvement is curious; he is the only one meticulously following a cold case after thirteen years. Gradually Aiden's stalker becomes ever more desperate to be a part of her life. But Aiden is determined not to let this man blow her life apart once more. Jack Dayton is the killer and is shot by Detective Page. | cult, sci-fi | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0124937 | Clutch Cargo | The stories centered on Clutch Cargo (voiced by radio actor Richard Cotting), described as "a writer and pilot with a muscular build, a white flat-top hair cut and rugged good looks". As was typical of adventure serials, Clutch Cargo was sent around the world on dangerous assignments. Accompanying him on the assignments were his young ward Spinner and his pet dachshund Paddlefoot. Actress Margaret Kerry, who provided the look, style, and movement of Tinker Bell in the 1953 Walt Disney Studios production of Peter Pan, provided both the voices and lips of Spinner and Paddlefoot. Live-action footage of an airplane was used as well, specifically that of a rare 1929 Bellanca C-27 Airbus. The attention to detail shown to the aircraft in the series is no doubt due to the fact that creator of the series, Clark Haas, was a pioneer jet pilot.
Hal Smith was the voice of Clutch's grizzled, pith-helmeted friend Swampy, as well as numerous other characters. He also voiced Owl in Disney's Winnie the Pooh series and played Otis Campbell on The Andy Griffith Show.
In all, 52 Clutch Cargo adventures were produced and then serialized in five five-minute chapters each. The first four chapters naturally ended in cliffhangers, with the fifth chapter concluding the adventure. Has explained the format of the show: "Each story is done in five five-minute segments so the stations can run one a day on weekdays, then recap the whole for a half-hour Saturday show. It's flexible and works very well." | mystery | train | wikipedia | Strange early TV cartoon..
About forty years ago when I was a child in a Los Angeles suburb I recall seeing this odd cartoon, so different from the others where things moved.
The creators seem to have had this process where they could put images of actors lips moving in the faces of the characters.
Kinda' neat and kinda' not.
After being exposed to the work of Disney, Lantz and others, this dialogue heavy, action off-stage with sound effects cartoon didn't seem so hot.
Novel, though.
Compare to others of the period.
Almost anything on the idiot box could hold the attention of a little child.
Some that came later were worse.
Margaret Kerry was the voice of Paddlefoot?
Well, whattaya know!.
Funky lips.
I remember watching Clutch Cargo every morning before school.
It seemed very strange, but for some reason I couldn't stop watching those real human lips.
It was on one of the cartoon channels recently, and my son thought it was the lamest thing he's ever seen and feels sympathy for how I grew up.
I recently heard an explanation for the odd animation, other than it was low budget.
The creator's child was deaf and could not understand regular cartoons, since she could not lip read the mouth movements of animated characters.
So he came up with the idea of using real mouths so deaf children could enjoy cartoons.
The story has a ring of truth to it, but it could very well be apocryphal.
If anyone can verify this, it would go a long way to explaining such an odd idea for kids' entertainment..
Cogntive dissonance.
An animation of still pictures, with human lips" --not really, it's actually cognitive dissonance: two conflicting cognitive inputs can't be resolved...like Clutch Cargo's lips.
Conan O'Brien must have been haunted by these images from his childhood.
It would explain a lot about his sense of humor.
It's amazing the stuff that was foisted on Baby Boomers like Clutch Cargo, Gumby and Davey and Goliath.
It makes you wonder if the KGB hadn't infiltrated TV and come up with a way to warp our young minds.
People think that video games and CG cartoons are bad today just imagine how these low-tech attempts at entertainment warped us...did I mention the Thunderbirds are GO!.
An oxymoron.
An oxymoron.
An animation of still pictures, with human lips..
A very strange cartoon.
It was an action cartoon with still pictures.
Moving human lips were superimposed on the still pictures for the dialogue.
It was rather creepy, but we all tried to copy the way Clutch talked..
Okay now, everybody!
"Duh Duh Duh Duh Duh Duh Duh Duh Duh Duh Duh!" And hey, it's "Old Swampy!".
The cross-pollination of the cartoony animated world with the live action film has very old roots in the film world.
Long before the advent of WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT (Amblin Entertainment/Disney/Buena Vista,1988) and SPACE JAM (Warner Brothers, 1996) we had good examples of this technological and format crossover.First off we saw Max & Dave Fleischer's OUT OF THE INKWELL Series began in 1918.
In its usual 1 Reeler length, these cartoons featured the adventures or rather misadventures of one Coco the Clown.
After his escaping "out of the Inkwell" the animated Coco would interact with the live action people in the real World.
In a typical story, the little clown (being only inches tall as compared to the normal sized humans) would find himself in a bad situation with the bad guys closing in; when he'd rush back to dive into the safe sanctuary of the bottle of India Ink. Coco's Ink Well antics continued right up through the Silent Era to the Talkies; where he was featured a as supporting 'player' in the Betty Boop Series.Fledging Animators Walt Disney & partner, Ub Iwerks took the same mixed animation-live action concept and stood it on its ear.
Rather than the diminutive Coco venturing into the Real World, Disney and Iwerks had the real girl, Alice, entering into the land if the animated.
In it she usually helped the "Toons" with a specific problem or set of problems.
She would normally be the biggest one in any scene.
The series ran for about 52 installments, from 1924-1927, and to the time right up to of the emergence of Mickey & his Pals!* From there, we jump ahead to the late 1950's, syndicated Television and the most bizarre mixture of all that gave us "CLUTCH CARGO", with his pals, Spinner & Paddlefoot!
It was certainly a 'frugal' method of rendering the cartoon story; and indeed a new high (or is it a "low"?) in limited animation.
The producer, Cambria Productions, was the same Studio that gave us "SPACE ANGEL" (1962), "THE NEW 3 STOOGES (1965) and "CAPTAIN FATHOM" (also 1965).
They apparently had a brief "Golden Age" in the Syndication Business, then went away or were absorbed by some other company.** As "CLUTCH CARGO", we remember watching it with some curiosity when it was first introduced by Mr. Frazier Thomas on the "GARFIELD GOOSE & FRIENDS" show on our local WGN TV Channel 9, here in Chicago.
Even as kids, we were sort of fascinated with their photographed moving-mouth gimmick; fascinated, but never fooled.
It was just that obvious.The rest of the animated movement consisted of an occasional rapid change of "SURPRISE", Paddlefoot's ears rapidly rising in the opening intros and Clutch and a group "moving along a road, with their legs 'cleverly' concealed by a low growing thicket of shrubbery.
(In reality, the multi-character drawing was being hand moved along, simulating the group's walking; albeit in a highly close-quartered drill team style, in appearance, anyhow!) Call it a fond recollection, nostalgia, or maybe even 'Camp', but in retrospect, "CLUTCH CARGO", Spinner, Paddlefoot and even 'old Swampy have managed to assume a position at the very pinnacle of our nostalgic yearnings for the cartoon favourites of vanished childhood.Well, until we meet again; "THAT'S All FOLKS!" NOTE: * We've seen some of these early Disney cartoons, not on DVD, nor on VHS, nor on Beta; but rather on Super 8!
(Remember Projectors?) The first one, ALICE'S EGG PLANT (1925) concerns her operating a chicken farm, and not that dark, purple Mediterranean veggie.They face opposition from a Communist agitator, a Rhode Island Red!!
ALICE'S ORPHAN (1926) features efforts by her and her cat in raising a foundling kitten.
This one we have in Super 8, Magnetic Sound, featuring obviously post synchronized music and sound effects.
We bought it from old Niles Films, South Bend Indiana,ca.
1978.NOTE: ** The way things go in both the Banking World and the Animation Industry, mergers and take-overs are the norm; rather than being the exception..
Different yes, bad not really.
I remember watching this show as a kid on WGN's Garfield Goose and Friends with Frazier Thomas.
It was very different from anything else that was done at the time.
I know compared with the animation of today it seems cheap and tawdry but now I watch these shows with the same fondness of watching old Andy Griffith Show reruns.
The live action lips set against animated cells and other ways they had of reducing the need of actual animation were sometimes fascinating in their simplicity.
If you saw these as a kid you will like them now.
If not they may not be right for you.
I totally enjoy watching these shows now as much as I did then..
Now for something really different!.
Time heals wounds.
Maybe that is why I gave this cartoon such a high rating.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Clutch Cargo look like Leslie Nielson, Officer Dribble of NAKED GUN?
CLUTCH CARGO aired early in the morning in Buffalo, NY on WGR (channel 2) back in the early 1960s.
Being less than 5-minutes, an episode could fit almost anywhere there was a moment of dead air, not that it was that much of an improvement.
But seriously now, these episodes were fun to watch.
Each episode was very short and the animators were very clever in masking the lack of animation by using bushes or any other obstacle to hide the lack of movement in their legs as they walked.
It was a unique blend of incredibly good artwork combined with incredibly bad animation.
What really set this cartoon apart from the rest was the real live acting moving lips which were super-imposed on the cartoon characters' faces.
This was a really neat novelty at the time..
Good Fun!.
If you enjoy classic TV and films, like I do, you should check this out.
Famed for its "Synchro-vox", the actors were recorded while doing the voice work, then their mouths were superimposed over the still pictures.Though it may seem awful, it's actually quite fun.
Unlike many shows of today, which are done with computers, every frame of Clutch Cargo was hand drawn and hand coloured.
There's no bad language or violence really, and it'd be safe to show this to pretty much all of the family.
If you've got kids, you should definitely show them this, they'll love it..
This is an early cartoon with little use of technology.
I'm not crazy!
As a kid growing up near Detroit, Michigan I remember seeing this cartoon.
True, it wasn't quality entertainment but in the days of maybe one black and white T.V. it's what we had at that time.
I believe Clutch flew an airplane..
Creepy,boring and offensive all at the same time..
This show is so disturbing that you might not even realize how stupid it is.A great adventurer has a little boy that lives with him and the boys name is Spinner.Read into that what you want.To me, Spinner sounds like a gay term like bear or twink but whatever.Clutch isn't the first grown man in the 50's to enjoy the company of a parent-less boy.It's a common theme in the movies I have been watching.Most people are creeped out by the fact that only the characters lips move but that's something I barely even noticed.The voices and acting are insanely ridiculous.It's really hard to believe that people can act that poorly.I'm seriously starting to believe that there was something severely wrong with people in the 50s.They also give the characters silly names that would probably be considered highly offensive today.But those are the good things about this show.Every story is boring and stupid.It always starts with Clutch trying to relax and write in his log book when he gets a phone call or telegram or visit from a friend informing him that a friend is missing.I can not believe any person ever watched this and enjoyed it.Avoid this like the plague..
Inspiration for Conan's Bill Clinton "Live Satellite" Sketch??.
Clutch Cargo and his pals Spinner and Paddlefoot, seen on WDTV - there's a stream of two seasons of this cartoon, where it instantly reminded me of the "guests" that Conan O'Brien would have by dropping a monitor down to show them live via satellite!
Oh my gosh, if you have a moment to watch these episodes, it is truly creepy.
Interesting concept that people chose, choosing to use "Synchro-Vox" a "revolutionary miracle technique" claiming to capture speech as it appears rather than conventional animated lip sync.
I'm sure glad they didn't use this for Tom and Jerry and Bugs Bunny!
The lips look fruit-juicy red and it really doesn't look that good in today's world.
Better for use on late night TV of course, and Conan O'Brien does it well!This process uses much less animation process which ultimately saved tons of money.
And I do like the voices used.
Save for the lip sync of Spinner, who has the voice of a woman.
Something about a young boy with a woman's lips is truly weird!.
Your Best Friend, Clutch Cargo.
Aristotle argued that good and bad art can be objectively distinguished.
But there's an alternative saying that beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.
In the end, your love for something or someone overrides their objective qualities.Thus my feelings about the Clutch Cargo series are not swayed by criticisms that the artwork or animation is simplistic or strange.
As I first watched Clutch in my childhood days, perhaps my mind was imprinted with an indelibly favorable impression.Clutch is a powerful hero, yet down to earth.
A tremendously nice guy, he'd risk his life to save a stranger.
He attracts the ladies, but if anything is going on, he's totally discrete - never any boasting or flaunting on his part.
Clutch deeply cares for his ward Spinner, who doesn't need to attend formal school as his guardian is an excellent instructor.There is some similarity to Batman and Robin, except those two faced great emotional upheavals sometimes in conflict with each other.
This torment is absent from Clutch and family.Adventure awaits at every juncture, villains are defeated, good people prevail.
Each episode contains five chapters, the first four cliffhangers, the finale upbeat.
A total of 52 episodes are exactly enough to last a year without repetition.
The bongo beat of the musical theme is hypnotic.
Paddlefoot, coincidentally for me a dachshund, is reminiscent of my beloved childhood pooch.I'm haunted by the expression you can't go home again.
But Clutch takes you very close.
When you're overwhelmed by the world's madness and by your personal travails including invincible aging, you can seek timeless escape and solace by turning to Clutch Cargo, your best friend. |
tt0104454 | Howards End | In Edwardian England Helen Schlegel (Helena Bonham Carter) becomes engaged to Paul Wilcox during a moment of passion, while she is staying at the country home of the Wilcox family, Howards End. The Schlegels are an intellectual family of Anglo-German bourgeoisie, while the Wilcox's are conservative and wealthy, headed by hard-headed businessman Henry (Anthony Hopkins). Helen and Paul quickly decide against the engagement, but Helen has already sent a telegram informing her sister Margaret (Emma Thompson), which causes an uproar when the sisters' Aunt Juley (Prunella Scales) arrives and causes a scene. Months later, when the Wilcox family takes a flat across the street from the Schlegels in London, Margaret resumes her acquaintance with Mrs. Wilcox (Vanessa Redgrave), whom she had briefly met before. Ruth is descended from English yeoman stock and it is through her family that the Wilcoxes have come to own Howards End, a house she loves dearly.
Over the course of the next few months, the two women become very good friends, even as Mrs. Wilcox's health declines. Hearing that the lease on the Schlegels' house is due to expire, Ruth bequeaths Howards End to Margaret on her death bed. This causes great consternation to the Wilcoxes, who refuse to believe that Ruth was in her "right mind" or could possibly have intended her home to go to a relative stranger. The Wilcoxes burn the piece of paper on which Ruth's bequest is written, deciding to ignore it completely. Henry begins to develop an attraction to Margaret, offering to assist her in finding a new home. Eventually he proposes marriage, which Margaret accepts.
Some time before this the Schlegels had befriended a young clerk, Leonard Bast (Samuel West), who lives with a woman of dubious origins named Jackie (Nicola Duffett). Both sisters find Leonard remarkable, appreciating his intellectual curiosity and desire to improve his lot in life. The sisters pass along advice from Henry to the effect that Leonard must leave his post, because the insurance company he works for is supposedly heading for bankruptcy. Leonard takes the advice and quits, but has to settle for a job paying much less, which he eventually loses altogether. Helen is later enraged to learn that Henry's advice was wrong and the company was perfectly sound.
Months later, Henry and Margaret host the wedding of his daughter Evie (Jemma Redgrave) at his Shropshire estate. Margaret is shocked when Helen arrives with the Basts, who she has found living in deep poverty. Considering that Henry is responsible for their plight, she demands he help them. However Jackie becomes drunk at the reception, and when she sees Henry she recognizes and exposes him as a former lover from years ago. Henry is embarrassed and ashamed to have been revealed as an adulterer in front of Margaret, but she forgives him and agrees to send the Basts away. After the wedding, Helen, upset with Margaret's decision to marry a man she loathes, leaves for Germany, but not before making love to Leonard.
Margaret and Henry marry, with the pair arranging to use Howards End as storage for Margaret's belongings. After months of only hearing from Helen through the odd postcard, Margaret grows concerned. When Aunt Juley falls ill, Helen returns to England to care for her but avoids seeing Margaret. Thinking that Helen is mentally unstable, Margaret lures her to Howards End to collect her belongings, only to confront her with a doctor. However on first glance she realizes that Helen is heavily pregnant, with Leonard Bast's child. Helen insists on returning to Germany to raise her baby alone, but asks that she be allowed to stay the night at Howards End before she leaves. When Margaret requests this from Henry, he stubbornly refuses and the two bicker.
The next day, Leonard, still living unhappily in poverty with Jackie, leaves London and travels to Howards End to see the Schlegels. When he arrives he finds the pair, as well as Henry's brutish eldest son Charles (James Wilby). Charles quickly realizes that Leonard is the baby's father, and begins assaulting him for dishonoring Helen. In his rage he beats him with the flat of a sword, which causes Leonard to have a heart attack and die. The police charge Charles with manslaughter and Henry breaks down when Margaret tells him that she is leaving him to help raise Helen's baby.
A year later Paul, Evie and Charles's wife Dolly gather at Howards End. Henry and Margaret are still together, and living with Helen and her young son. Henry tells the others that upon his death, Margaret will receive Howards End, but no money, at her own request. Dolly points out the irony of Margaret inheriting the house, revealing Mrs. Wilcox's dying wish to Margaret for the first time. Henry admits to what happened, and Margaret appears to forgive him. | romantic, boring, historical, melodrama | train | wikipedia | She still remains a sympathetic character up until the very end when she slowly comes back to her senses.Anthony Hopkins also gives one of his best performances as the cold and hypocritical Henry Wilcox.
Even the minor characters like Nicola Duffet's Jackie Bast and Jemma Redgrave's stony-faced Evie Wilcox are noteworthy."Howards End" is one of the richest, most nuanced films I have seen.
What could quite easily have been a dry study in the cultural dynamics of pre-WWI England becomes an enveloping tale, thanks in no small part to the performances by Hopkins, Emma Thompson, and Vanessa Redgrave, whose Ruth Wilcox remains enigmatic after every viewing.
To have Emma Thompson, Helena Bonham Carter, Vanessa Redgrave, and Anthony Hopkins in one movie together is to see a true synthesis of talent, not to mention James Wilby and Samuel West.
Based on E.M. Forster's novel `Return to Howards End' this film is more or less a set piece in the strictest period-piece tradition, and thus in style is somewhat akin to that great TV series `Return to Brideshead' and even Robert Altman came up trumps with his splendid `Gosford Park' which most definitely takes its well-earned place alongside such classical pieces of this genre.
The film should be commended as well for the fine performances of Emma Thompson, Anthony Hopkins, Helena Bonham-Carter and others.
We are watching something *happen*, not simply a movie or screenplay unfolding.There are many other great things about this film as well, but the feeling stated above is what many (if not most) movies fail to achieve, and with that fail to achieve "greatness".Beyond the great acting and directorial execution we are treated to, the audience also gets a chance with this film to explore class, values, and the interplay of characters that differ in many ways, but come together via certain events.There isn't much more to say.
Even that early time there were many who saw Germany as a potential foe.These two Schlegel sisters played by Emma Thompson and Helena Bonham Carter befriend the Wilcoxes, a family of newly rich plutocrats headed by Anthony Hopkins who seem to be a version of Lillian Hellman's the Hubbards lite.
Their mother is the class of the family and she's played by Vanessa Redgrave who is in poor health.While Bonham-Carter is rejected by Hopkins's son James Wilby as a suitable wife for marriage, Vanessa befriends Thompson finding her to be a kindred intellectual spirit in a house full of moneygrubbers.
Particularly with another of the Schlegel sisters friends, a young clerk named Leonard Bast played by Samuel West trying to make his way in the world as the Wilcoxes have.Emma Thompson won the Academy Award for Best Actress for Howards End that year and the film also won Oscars for Art&Set Direction and for adapted screenplay.
She's so incredibly common and obviously holding him back, you can't blame West for eventually getting involved with Bonham-Carter which leads to tragedy.The team of Ismail Merchant producer and James Ivory director succeed again at bringing the look and manners of Edwardian England as seen by E.M. Forster to life.
It just didn't have the appealing characters "Remains" had and it was a little too soap opera for my tastes but the visuals made up for that, ...and the story, to be fair, was solid and involving.It also had Anthony Hopkins and Emma Thompson, and those two make a great pair.
In his desire to better himself through literature, Leonard Bast (Samuel West) inadvertently stumbles into this world and ends up developing an unwise relationship with the waywardly enchanting Helen Schlegel (Helena Bonham-Carter).
The double standards of male behaviour are realised at the wedding of Margaret and Henry Wilcox (Anthony Hopkins) as the inebriated gatecrasher, Mrs Bast (Nicola Duffett), recognises the gentleman groom from her former life, whilst he in turn will not have the unwed and expectant Helen stay at the empty `Howard's End'.
The sad conclusion has to be drawn that though the rest of us suffer from his devastation, Primeval Man lives untouched by evolution and is in no danger of extinction.Vanessa Redgrave is touchingly charming as the naïve Mrs Wilcox who bequeaths her beloved Howard's End to Miss Schlegel, though in none too an official manner which leads to the plot's convolutions.
Anthony Hopkins is Wilcox the ruthless businessman who marries Margaret after the death of his wife--a luminous Vanessa Redgrave.Two events set things in motion here: the death of Ruth (who has befriended Margaret); and the stolen umbrella that brings Leonard Bast (Samuel West) into the sisters' lives.
As Margaret is drawn into the family life of Wilcox she distances herself from the intellectual pursuits of her younger days; Helen on the other hand is drawn into the Basts' lives and becomes more and more radical.The period detail is flawless, as expected in a Merchant/Ivory film.
well, it's impossible to compare any movie to Fargo.Perhaps too subtle for its own good (judging by its surprisingly low rating on this database), Howards End tells a story that succeeds on multiple levels - as indictment of the Edwardian class system; as an interwoven tale of complex people with truly simple motivations; and as how-to video for up and coming actors.
Witness the way Anthony Hopkins slowly seduces Emma Thompson, or the gentle scenes between Thompson and a bravely naive Vanessa Redgrave, or the movie's brief flashes of visceral passion unleashed by Helena Bonham-Carter, or...
And, to top it all, Richard Robbins's score is mesmerizing.With such a great cast like a snobbish but ambivalent Anthony Hopkins, a fragile and desperate Vanessa Redgrave, a fiery Helena Bonham Carter, a naive Sam West, a gentle motherly Prunella Scales and a host of brilliant supporting actors 'Howards end' shines.
All I'm gonna say is that this movie follows the events of three families in the early 20th century Victorian England - the aristocrats and capitalists Wilcox, the humanistic and philanthropist Schlegels, and the poor and hard-working Basts, and it shows how these so-different families are related to each other.The Oscar-winning screenplay here is based on a novel by E.M. Forster.
The cast features names like Anthony Hopkins, Emma Thompson, Vanessa Redgrave and Helena Bonham Carter, and they are all great.
The eye catching sets and immaculate costumes are perfect, giving one a real feel for the period.The acting too, is good (especially Helena Bonham Carter as 'Helen' and Sam West as 'Leonard Baast'), but that is about the end of it.
Directed by James Ivory, produced by Ismail Merchant and written by Ruth Prawer Jhabvala, it is a remarkably faithful adaptation of the novel, and on top of this is also an elegant, nuanced and fascinating film.The period detail is perfect.
Vanessa Redgrave while her role is brief still leaves a lasting impression in a characterisation that is moving and wholly relevant, while as the cold Mr Wilcox Anthony Hopkins who a year later would give a brilliant performance in The Remains of the Day(another stylish and nuanced film) shows what a fine actor he is as he gives yet another fine performance.
The more minor characters were also very well done, from a spirited Samuel West, whose character Leonard Bast exemplifies the low expectations of the clerking classes, to a suitably serious Jemma Redgrave as Evie Wilcox.Overall, moving, elegant, nuanced and impeccably acted, Howards End is a must see.
This, combined with lovely art direction and costuming and the brilliant cast(particular credit to Emma Thompson as Margaret Schlegal, who serves as the moral and intellectual center of the story)makes the Merchant Ivory production of "Howards End" excellent..
This is the scene that establishes the lushness and loveliness of the English countryside in high summer." Right up until the closing credits, I was waiting for the scene that would involve me in a plot, and make me care about characters.The acting is so unrelentingly cold, arch, and artificial I have to believe that director James Ivory wanted viewers to see only Vanessa Redgrave, Emma Thompson, and Anthony Hopkins, never the characters they allegedly play.
Both great novels have as their theme the irreconcilability of social classes, and it's a measure of that British thoughtfulness which seeks to make things just right (not always successfully, but they try), that both have been assigned perfect directors: the grand sweep of Passage to India gets the master of large scale, Lean, and the almost claustrophobic intimacy of Howard's End gets the master of small scale, James Ivory.Both of Forster's stories offer no dramatic relief in the end: in Passage we are left with an unresolved mystery and justice only partially rendered; in Howard's End we have, really, no mystery, with justice only partially rendered.
Alas, such is the integrity of Lean and Ivory, that we remain frustrated in the filmed versions.As to Howard's End, in particular, one thing that you should be prepared is perhaps the most tragic character in the history of film, maybe even of literature, that of Leonard Bast.
He may have been that way in the book, but it certainly doesn't make for an interesting movie character.And there's the typical rich polo-playing snot Charles Wilcox, who like so many of his ilk think it is entirely in their right to pull out a sword and whack some lower-class scoundrel with the flat end of it like he does to Mr. Bast, who promptly snuffs it, which seems to effect no one...especially Emma's sister, who got him into all this bloody mess by pulling that poor sod's trousers off.Does the w****r actually go to prison for Bast's death?
Henry's refusal leads to great tension in the Wilcox household.Anthony Hopkins and Emma Thompson star in this Merchant-Ivory production.
The conversation in which Henry proposes perfectly shows Henry's true self: unconfident, bad with words, and afraid to be turned down."Howards End" is a great film; a scathing critique of hypocrisy and classism, and at the same time a tale of a man who is too afraid to be himself, and a woman who refuses to be anything but herself.
While the impact of Clint Eastwood's "Unforgiven," (which beat out this production to win the Best Picture Oscar for 1992) has faded somewhat, "Howards End" remains not only a potent study of character and class structure in turn-of-the-century England, but a strong dramatic and extremely emotional story.
In this adaptation of E.M. Forster's novel of the same name, it has a first rate cast which introduced Emma Thompson in her Academy Award winning performance as well as Oscar winner and nominee Vanessa Redgrave in a masterclass performance as a dying woman who misses her home in Howards' End. Sir Anthony Hopkins plays the bereaving widow who remarries Thompson in the film.
It bids filmmaking techniques obliged in no way to the industrialized indelicacy of innumerable modern movies, but together with an gracefully telling script and faultless acting all around from Anthony Hopkins, in addition to Redgrave and most particularly Thompson, what separates Merchant-Ivory's Edwardian cross-stitch are its characters' multifaceted inner lives.
I have just seen "Howard's End," and I think that it is probably the best Merchant-Ivory film they ever collaborated on.
I cant understand why this movie had such a different effect than "Remains Of The Day", same director, same actors, but I think that film had less unneeded characters and was seen through the eyes of Anthony Hopkins' character.
"Howards End" is a Drama - Romance movie in which we watch and follow three social classes of England which are very different one to another.
About the direction which was made by James Ivory I would like to say that it was very good and I believe that he did a great job on it.To sum up, I have to say that "Howards End" is a very interesting movie with some very good plot twists and an equally good direction.
Dir. James Ivory-Pro. Ismail Merchant' s excellent work Howards End , 1992 with Emma Thompson-Anthony Hopkins is adapted from novel of E.M.Foster.
Ruth Prawer Jhabvala earned her second Academy Award for Best Adapted Screenplay, while Emma Thompson won the 1992 Academy Award for Best Actress.The film ended up on Ebert's list of "great movies" in 2005, which is impressive -- typically you only see classics make a list like that, but Ebert went for it.
Howards End.It is truly one of the most beautiful films ever made.Wonderfully directed and superb acting by all!Hopkins and Emma Thompson are at their best here.We are given a look into a world divided by two classes.I enjoyed this social tale and it's colorful english scenery!This film is the perfect example of why I love the movies.NOt only our we priviledge to witness sir Anthony Hopkins in undoubtly one of his finest performances,we also feel the heavy weight of a promise,that the character,Leonard Bass,has on his shoulders.If you have not seen this movie,you should.Maybe,you too,will ask yourself,"Why can't they make more movies like this??".
Merchant/Ivory give E.M. Forster's novel the Masterpiece Theatre treatment, and the result is an accomplished and beautiful-looking film, if one that misses out on the psychological complexity of Forster's novel.Emma Thompson and Helena Bonham Carter play two Bohemian sisters who find themselves embroiled in the affairs of an aristocratic and business-oriented family and its estate when the family matriarch (played imperiously by Vanessa Redgrave) dies.
Fairly poor Margaret Schlegel (Emma Thompson) befriends elderly Ruth Wilcox (Vanessa Redgrave) who leaves her Howard's End, a country estate.
James Ivory (who would make the excellent Remains of the Day the next year), has taken the novell by E.M. Forster to the screen very well and is helped a great deal by his fantastic cast: Redgrave (who was nominated for an academy award) and Thompson (who actually bagged it) in particular are impeccable.The ending may seem a bit sudden and overblown, but what's left is a fascinating story, well directed and perfectly acted.
I was expecting something akin to The Remains of the Day, especially as both movies starred Anthony Hopkins and Emma Thompson.Unfortunately, Howards End doesn't quite have the same engagement levels as The Remains of the Day, nor the emotional impact.
Directed by James Ivory and based on the novel of the same name written by E.M. Forster, Howards End is a film about class struggle in early 20th Century Victorian England and a social commentary which will always seem relevant.The storyline can be described as the junction or the meeting point of the three primary classes of Victorian British society- the upper class of rich aristocrats- the Wilcoxes, the middle class consisting of philanthropic intellectuals- the Schlegels and the poor working class consisting of people who have to struggle constantly to survive- the Basts.The film for the most works due to great acting.
"Howard's End" is not just a riveting story, carried by superb performances -Emma Thompson totally deserved her Oscar as the sweet, caring but strong-willed Margaret- it's also the magnificent epitaph of an old order, in the same intensity and human resonance than "Gone With the Wind", like only the Ivory-Merchant could have produced.
Winning the 1992 BAFTA for Best Film and Best Actress Oscar for Emma Thompson, James Ivory's HOWARD'S END is that rarity - a film whose complexities of character and plot seem more rewarding on successive viewings.
They meet when Helen accidentally brings home his umbrella from a music lecture; and it is the Schlegels' well-intended advice about changing jobs which leads to Bast becoming unemployed.Margaret befriends the slow and elderly Ruth Wilcox (Vanessa Redgrave), owner of a country house called Howard's End. She is the wife of Henry (Anthony Hopkins), a dry businessman who is full of the dry Victorian moral rectitude which is starting to look stifling and pallid in the Liberal England of 1910.
Henry marries Margaret.Bast is the outsider is eventually connects the Schlegels and the Wilcoxs - his wife is a former lover of Henry's and Bast eventually gets Helen pregnant.HOWARD'S END is not only superbly plotted as a screenplay (from the E.M. Forster novel), but the characters also seem alive to the period, and therefore modern within the film's context.
The story concerns itself with the middle-class Schlegal sisters, Margaret (Emma Thompson) and Helen (Helena Bonham Carter).
The story opens in Edwardian England, where we meet Margaret and Helen Schlegel (Emma Thompson, Helena Bodham Carter), genteel sisters who are concerned with the lot of the poor.
Meanwhile, Margaret develops a friendship with the Wilcoxes (Anthony Hopkins, Vanessa Redgrave), a wealthy family whose country home, Howards End, will become an important part of all their lives.Based on E.
Forster was an author of both sly humor and deep sensibility, and a rare male writer with the gift of creating believable, multi-layered female characters.James Ivory directs an adaptation of Howard's End, Forster's masterpiece, focused on the intersecting stories of three families in early 20th century London: wealthy Wilcoxes, with patriarch Henry (Anthony Hopkins), his wife (Vanessa Redgrave); intellectual Schlegels, with sisters Meg (Emma Thompson in an Oscar-winning performance) and Helen (Helena Bonham-Carter); and proletarian clerk Leonard Bast (James West).Acting is magnificent.
I believe that HOWARDS END is one of the great film adaptations of a classic novel, with themes about the need to connect with people who are different than we are.
Her character, Margaret Schlegel , and her sister (Helena Bonham Carter, who is also quite good) find their future invariably linked to the Howards End Estate.
Because Remains of the day is one of the most exellent yet frustrating films of all time if you are a romantic like me you will enjoy watching howards end afterwards to satisfy the need of Hopkins and Thompson to get together..
The Wilcox are an upper class family, living a comfortable existence.As Henry Cox (Anthony Hopkins) states during the film 'The poor are poor, and one's sorry for them but there it is.'Howards End is a house in the fringe of the country owned by Mrs Wilcox (Vanessa Redgrave) left to her by her brother.
Margaret was a friend of Wilcox's first wife Ruth(Vanessa Redgrave)who owned a house called Howards End which she loved. |
tt0097731 | Let It Ride | Jay Trotter drives a cab. His friend Looney, also a cab driver, has a secret microphone in his taxi to record his passengers' conversations. Looney has a tape of two men talking about a horse race and how one of the horses, due to some unethical practice by its owner, is a sure thing to win big. Jay goes to the track to place a bet—despite the fact that the day before, he told his wife Pam that he would quit betting and be home to "start their marriage over" at noon. In the restroom of the bar next door, he prays to God, "Just one day, that's all I'm asking for, one day, I'm due." A man exiting the bathrooms says "Ya? So's Jesus. Let it ride." Jay promptly places a $50 bet. The horse wins in a photo finish and pays $28.40 to win (earning him $710).
Armed with a newfound sense of confidence, Jay approaches the two men from Looney's cab and generously gives them the tape of their conversation. Out of gratitude, they give him a tip for the next race. He places a bet and wins again.
Sensing that this could be his "lucky day," Jay goes on picking winner after winner, letting it ride (betting all of his winnings each time). As he accumulates more money and uses his new friends' membership in the track's exclusive dining room, he starts coming into contact with other gamblers, including the wealthy Mrs. Davis and a sexy vixen named Vicki. He becomes a hero to the ticket seller (Robbie Coltrane) whose window he uses every time, and to the customers of the track's bar.
However, he has totally neglected his wife Pam. Pam flies into a rage when she confronts her husband at the track. He cannot stop. He takes a survey of the track patrons and, eliminating any selection they give him, bets on the remaining horse—Fleet Dreams, which wins. Jay decides to call it a day and goes home to Pam, buying her a diamond necklace on the way. At home he finds Pam intoxicated and passed out.
He heads back to the track to help the patrons of Marty's bar across the street, but when he suggests sharing his luck by betting their money together, they balk at the idea. Disconcerted, he goes for a walk around the track. Vicki offers to "go to bed with him." Jay "breaks the fourth wall" by saying to the audience, "Am I having a good day or what?" Ultimately, he turns Vicki down by professing his love for his wife.
Jay makes a final bet of $68,000 (his winnings for the day) after Looney advises him not to bet on Hot to Trot. As the race begins, Looney and Trotter argue over everything, and the main characters all make resolutions. In Vicki's case, she vows to give up rich guys and consider a poor one, looking at Looney. The race comes down to a photo finish. While everyone awaits the result, Pam shows up to thank Jay for his lovely gift and to tell him not worry about the money, when the announcer reports the winner: Hot to Trot. The entire racetrack erupts in celebration, and Pam asks, "Why is everyone cheering?" Jay replies, "Because I'm having a very good day." | boring | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0077413 | Death on the Nile | Jacqueline De Bellefort introduces her fiancé Simon to her friend Linnet Ridgeway in the hope that Linnet will give him a job. Instead, Linnet marries Simon herself and they head off for a honeymoon in Egypt (the same place where Jacqueline had planned her honeymoon with Simon). A bitter Jacqueline follows them to Egypt, appearing wherever they go.
Hercule Poirot (David Suchet) is also on holiday in Egypt. While staying in the same hotel as the newlyweds, he is approached by Linnet Doyle who is getting tired of Jacqueline's harassment. Poirot doesn't accept the job, as he believes that Jacqueline has been treated shamefully by Linnet and Simon. He nevertheless tries to warn Jacqueline against pursuing the Doyles any further. She ignores his warning and joins their cruise on the river Nile.
Linnet Doyle comments that she is "surrounded by enemies" on the cruise, as some of the other travellers are also known to her. They include Andrew Pennington (David Soul), her American trustee, who has orchestrated their 'coincidental' meeting in Egypt in order for her to sign some legal documents. Linnet has also upset her maid Louise (Felicite du Jeu) by interfering in her romantic affairs. Rosalie Otterbourne (Zoe Telford) and aristocrat-turned-Marxist Mr Ferguson (Alastair MacKenzie) take an instant dislike to Linnet. Miss Van Schuyler (Judy Parfitt) admires Linnet's pearls and Tim Allerton (Daniel Lapaine) has a history of being present when precious jewels have been stolen.
One night, after most of the guests have retired to their cabins, Jacqueline and Simon have an argument in the lounge. Jacqueline (who has been drinking) becomes hysterical, pulls a pistol from her purse and shoots Simon in the leg. The two guests who witness the shooting, Ferguson and Cornelia Robson (Daisy Donovan), fetch Dr. Bessner (Steve Pemberton) and keep an eye on Jacqueline. Dr. Bessner tends to Simon's leg injury.
The next morning, Linnet is found dead in her cabin. Her pearl necklace and Jacqueline's pistol (the one used to shoot Simon) are both missing. Although Jacqueline is a natural suspect she has a perfect alibi, having been sedated and watched all night by Cornelia Robson. Simon was also unable to commit the crime due to his leg wound.
Poirot sets out to solve the murder, with the aid of Colonel Race (James Fox). While conducting their investigations, the maid Louise Bourget (Félicité Du Jeu) is murdered and Poirot realises she probably saw the murderer coming out of Linnet's cabin and attempted to extort money in return for her silence. Rosalie's mother Salome Otterbourne (Frances de la Tour) sees Louise's murderer and is about to tell Poirot when she is shot in the head through an open cabin door. The missing pearls are returned by Cornelia Robson, who has recovered them from Miss Van Schuyler, but they are discovered to be a paste replica. Poirot later reveals that fake pearls were substituted by Tim Allerton.
After various suspects are eliminated Poirot reveals that Simon Doyle murdered his wife, with Jacqueline working as his accomplice. They staged Simon's shooting, leaving him free to murder Linnet while the doctor was being fetched by Mr Ferguson and Jacqueline attended to by Cornelia Robson. Simon was left alone for long enough to shoot Linnet, return to the lounge and shoot himself in the leg. Jacqueline killed the maid and Salome Otterbourne, who were both witnesses to the murders. It is revealed that Simon's marriage to Linnet had been cleverly plotted in order to gain her money. When they realise the evidence is against them, Jacqueline shoots Simon and then herself in dramatic fashion. Colonel Race accuses Poirot of knowing Jaqueline has a second pistol. Poirot answers, "It is not always that simple."
The story ends happily, at least for Cornelia Robson and Dr. Bessner, who become engaged. | mystery, murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0252338 | Command & Conquer: Red Alert 2 | Like all other Command & Conquer real-time strategy games, Command & Conquer: Red Alert 2 contains two separate campaigns, with distinct story lines, one for each playable faction.
After the attempted conquest of Europe depicted in Command & Conquer: Red Alert, the Soviet Union is in utter ruin. Joseph Stalin is dead, and the Soviet military has been all but destroyed. The Allies determine that a regime change would cause mass unrest in the Soviet Union, and in order to gain both support and stability in the region, the victorious Allies name Alexander Romanov, a distant relative of Tsar Nicholas II, as the puppet Soviet Premier. Romanov acquiesces to the Allies' demands at first, though he builds up the Soviet military for "defense purposes" – a cover for an intended invasion of the United States of America.
The game's story line starts off in 1972, with the United States Armed Forces caught completely off guard by the sudden massive Soviet invasion of the United States, with Soviet aircraft, naval vessels, amphibious forces, and paratroopers coming in on both the East Coast and West Coast and with the majority of Soviet ground forces coming in through Mexico, which had recently voted in a communist government, starting World War III. The USA attempts to retaliate with the use of nuclear missiles, but Yuri, leader of the Soviet Psychic Corps and Premier Romanov's top advisor, uses his mind control to manipulate the personnel charged with launching the warheads and leaves them to explode in their silos. Within hours, the USA is overrun with Red Army troops. In response, the US President Michael Dugan establishes an emergency response team headed by General Dan Carville and the Commander known as "The Ghost" (the player) to the Soviet army later in the game.
=== Allied campaign ===
The Allied story line begins with a special forces team led by Special Agent Tanya Adams sent to New York City to repel the Soviet invasion there. The player, with help from Tanya, successfully repels the Soviet invasion of New York City. Tanya and the Commander then go to Colorado Springs to liberate the Air Force Academy and the air base there. As they return home victorious from the battle, it is discovered that a Soviet mind control device known as the Psychic Beacon, a device that can mind-control the people of entire cities, has been deployed in Washington, D.C.
It is seen that the Psychic Beacon has controlled the minds of the President and General Ben Carville and several other key officials in the city, who surrender to the Soviets. However, a strike team is sent into the city and destroys the Psychic Beacon while encountering attacks by mind-controlled civilians, freeing the key officials from Soviet mind control and allowing them to be rescued. Despite this, Washington, D.C. still remains in Soviet hands, forcing the American government and military to relocate themselves to Canada to escape the threat of Soviet mind control.
Allied intelligence has discovered that the Soviets have put another psychic device in Chicago, the Psychic Amplifier, which has the power "to do to the country what the Psychic Beacon did to Washington". The Allies promptly launch an offensive into Soviet-occupied Chicago from their Canadian base across Lake Michigan, freeing the city and destroying the Psychic Amplifier. In retaliation, General Vladimir, the chief commander of the invading Soviet forces, declares that he no longer has much use for the city of Chicago, so he deploys a nuclear missile in the city, completely destroying it.
Alarmed by the situation, leaders of France, Germany, and the United Kingdom agree to help the U.S. if they disarm the Soviet nuclear missile silos in Belarus. Michael Dugan agrees and sends a special forces team led by Tanya into Poland near its border with Germany. The silos are covertly destroyed, and the Europeans join the war against the Soviets. Bolstered by additional men and equipment, the U.S. military is able to launch an amphibious assault on Soviet-occupied Washington, D.C. and recapture the city. Allied intelligence next reveals that the Soviets are planning to capture the Hawaiian Islands and the Commander is sent to Pearl Harbor to defend the islands.
The islands are saved, but the United States is still in a precarious position. The Soviets, with the help from their Psychic Beacon, still control St. Louis and all of the Mississippi River south of the city, seriously handicapping movement between the western states and the eastern states. The Allies then mount an attack on the city, destroying the Psychic Beacon and liberating the city. The Allies also learn of a Soviet project to replicate the Allied Prism technology (A technology that creates massive beams of energy to destroy units) at a research base in Tulum, Mexico. A team of Navy SEALs is then dispatched into the area to destroy the research facility and any prototype prism replicas. The mission is successful and the Allied Prism technology is not compromised.
General Carville, in a briefing to the player, says that they are being shipped off to Germany into the Black Forest to protect Albert Einstein’s laboratory in order to bring a quick end to the war. At Einstein's laboratory, there is Einstein's prototype Chronosphere, a device with the ability to teleport troops anywhere in the world, and the plans for it. As General Carville is leaving his office at the end of the briefing, a Crazy Ivan (a Soviet demolitions expert which deploys explosives) was waiting for Carville and flips open his jacket and detonates his bombs, killing Carville. Despite this tremendous loss, the Commander carries out the mission and repels the Soviet invasion from across the German border. Einstein's laboratory and Chronosphere are saved and Einstein continues his work.
Einstein personally thanks the Commander and says that the perfect place to establish the Chronosphere is on a tiny island in the Florida Keys, not far from Soviet Cuba. The Allies send a force to the island and build a base and the Chronosphere there, and then launch an offensive into Cuba to destroy the Soviet nuclear strike capability there. The Allies then proceed to use the Chronosphere's teleportation capabilities to take an Allied strike team to Moscow. Once in Moscow, after enduring attacks from nearby Soviet bases, the Allied forces destroy the Black Guard defenses around the Kremlin and then teleport in a strike team led by Tanya to capture Premier Alexander Romanov. Romanov gets a man to wear his uniform and pose as him, so that Tanya will take him away instead. However, this plot is easily exposed as the man is completely different from Romanov and Romanov is caught in his underwear. The Soviets suffer a humiliating defeat and promptly surrender.
=== Soviet campaign ===
The Soviet storyline begins with the player being briefed by Premier Alexander Romanov about the upcoming Soviet invasion of the U.S. The Commander leads an invasion into Washington, D.C. and destroys the Pentagon. Another Soviet invasion is launched into Florida to destroy the American fleet, which was threatening the Soviet invasion of East Coast. Even though the Commander is almost fully responsible for these victories, all the credit goes to the top Soviet commander, General Vladimir. While Vladimir is in Moscow celebrating, Yuri recommends that the player capture New York City with a Psychic Beacon, a device that can mind-control the people of entire cities. The player follows Yuri's advice, and launches an offensive into New York City. After capturing the Allied battle lab/research facility, at the World Trade Center, the Soviets deploy their Psychic Beacon and the entire population of the city falls under Soviet control.
To counter the ever-increasing and successful Soviet threat, forces from South Korea launch an amphibious attack on Vladivostok, and the player must "defend the Motherland" at all costs. The Commander holds off the offensive, crushing all invading South Korean forces in a brutal counter-attack. Alarmed by the situation, leaders of France and Germany agree to send troops to the Polish border to help the U.S. fight the Soviets. With the absence of the bulk of the French Military, the Soviets send a special forces team to Paris, with special orders from Romanov and Yuri to level the city. Once in Paris, the Soviets fight to capture the area around the Eiffel Tower. The Soviets then use three Tesla Troopers, soldiers with the ability to destroy vehicles with electric charges, to energize the Eiffel Tower and effectively turn it into a massive Tesla coil. The energized Eiffel Tower quickly destroys all Allied forces in the city and devastates Paris. With this and other key victories in Europe, the nations of Europe are in a position of needing help themselves rather than giving help to the U.S.
During this time, Yuri has been gaining more power by using his Psychic abilities to control Romanov. Romanov gives all military authority to Yuri, greatly angering General Vladimir, who accuses Yuri of manipulating Romanov for his own purposes. Yuri discards these accusations and tells the player to establish "Soviet presence" in the Hawaiian Islands. The Commander is sent to Hawaii and destroys the American Pacific Fleet and all South Korean reinforcements, allowing the Soviets to take over the islands. Meanwhile, Romanov has become very ill and Yuri's intelligence has revealed that the Allies have constructed a Chronosphere, a device with the ability to teleport troops anywhere in the world. The Allies intend to use the Chronosphere to destroy a Soviet research facility in the Ural Mountains. Yuri tells the player that this research facility is vital to the Soviet war effort and that it must be protected. The player takes command of Soviet forces at the research facility and manages to repel several Allied offensives.
Shortly after the research facility is saved, Yuri informs the player that Romanov was murdered by General Vladimir. Yuri orders the Commander to go to Washington, D.C. to eliminate Vladimir, whom Yuri declares to be a traitor and a "nonperson". The player defeats Vladimir's forces and captures Vladimir in the White House with the aid of Yuri's psychic technology. In another mission, a Soviet strike team of psy-corp troopers is then sent to San Antonio, Texas and covertly infiltrates the American installation around the Alamo and then put the U.S. President, Michael Dugan, under Soviet mind-control. The Soviets then discover that the Allies are developing a new super weapon in the U.S. Virgin Islands, known as a Weather Control Device, a device that can create powerful thunderstorms capable of devastating large areas. The Soviets launch an amphibious assault on the islands and successfully destroy the device.
Impressed by the tenacity of the "Comrade General", Yuri asks the Commander to come to Moscow so he can thank the Commander in person. However, Lieutenant Zofia contacts the player, showing a video Romanov recorded before his death. In the video, Romanov, with much difficulty, says that Yuri is controlling his mind and orders the Commander to bring the traitor to justice. The Commander goes to Moscow with the bulk of the Soviet army to apprehend Yuri. Upon their arrival in Moscow, the player’s forces engage with forces loyal to Yuri. The player then launches a brutal attack on the Kremlin and Yuri is believed to have been killed in the battle. From Yuri’s files, it is learned that the Allies have built another Chronosphere in Alaska, which they will use to attempt to launch a final assault into the Soviet Union. Soviet forces are sent across the Bering Strait and destroy the Chronosphere and all Allied forces in the area. With all resistance destroyed, the player is now free to rule the world. However, in the end cut scene, Yuri's mind has somehow survived and telepathically communicates to the commander saying, "It would have been good to see inside your mind, General. I may still get the chance..." | alternate reality, alternate history | train | wikipedia | Great continuation on an incredible game series!.
I was totally thrilled with Red Alert.
The game-play was great, the story was sweet and fun never seemed to end.
Red Alert 2 is not only twice as good, but it's twice as addictive!
Great videos really add to the game, along with a cool new Bad Guy.
The missions are great and not to hard, but not to easy.
Overall, a great game I recommend to anyone who loves real time strategy!.
Well-planned and executed.
I have been a fan of the Command & Conquer series since the first game was released.
From the original with its low-resolution, but more-than-decent, CGI and "talking head" briefings, to Red Alert's second history report, there was much improvement.
C&C2: Tiberian Sun was one more solid step towards C&C: Red Alert 2, which is quite possibly the best RTS game in existence.
It blends *very* good acting and great visuals with a solid, continuing, and consistent storyline.
The only flaw in this game?
It's a pity Joseph Kucan couldn't make at least a cameo in it as he did in Red Alert; everyone's favorite dictator with a messiah complex would have been right at home, advising Yuri and Romanov, just like in the old days with Stalin.
How old *is* that bald guy, anyway?
Cool.
This is one of the funnest games I have played in a long time!!
The Graphics are totaly awsome!
The gameplay is cool.
If you like RTS (Real Time Stradagy) then I'd give this game a try!
It's easy to install and runs good on my system.
You can play as most countrys it's cool.
great.
well i thought they couldn't improve on the first red alert.
but i was wrong.
this is a great video game.
the story line picks up where red alert leaves off.
stalin is dead and the americans put alexi romanov in charge of the soviet union.
romanovis a career politician who speaks of peace and following the allied cause.
however romanov hates the allies that destroyed his "mother russia"and begins plotting revenge.
romanov experaments with mind control and finally he attacks, russians flowing into california, new york and texas.
mind control makes american citizen's into russian slaves.
it's a great game.
barry corbin is the commander of the allied forces.
and like in red alert, he talks directly to you.
a personal favorite of mine that tiberian sun doesn't have.
the cahraacters talking directly to you.
a great game and lots of fun..
Brilliant.
Sheer fun..
Completely over the top strategy game.
Full of very improbable units such as giant squid, mind readers and airships.
Well balanced gameplay with any unit(no matter how cheap) fulfilling a niche and capable of destroying any other unit(no matter how dear) if used properly.Missions are well planned and thought out.
On the side there's a skirmish mode in which you may play as one of nine nations, each commanding a special unit.
Admittly the plot does n't hold much water but the characters featured are amusing(although in some cases a lil' crude) caricatures.
Overall great fun and well worth taking a look at especially if you're already a C&C fan.
A good game AND Kari Wuhrer all in one!.
This is the second best real time stategy game out there (starcraft being #1).
The gameplay is fun and challenging.
The cutscenes were pretty good, and any bad acted that may have occurred was shrouded by Kari Wuhrer's presence.
Yea shes hot..
The best C&C game yet!!!!!.
Having played all the previous games this is by far the most exciting!
The real time strategy makes for great game-play, as well as the built-in movies gives the game a more realistic feel to it.
I hope that the creators at Westwood have more in the pipeline!
Long live Command & Conquer!!!!.
Red Alert turns into a wacky cheesy B-Movie.
Initially I thought that Red Alert 2's much maligned predecessor, Tiberian Sun wasn't that bad.
Only when I tried out Red Alert 2 I realised how uninspired (and what a missed opportunity) Tiberian Sun really was.
With Red Alert 2, Westwood Studios demonstrated that (for the year 2000 at least) they still were kings of the RTS genre.Red Alert 2 featured some interesting changes compared to the original, for one the serious dark undertones made way for a wacky, cheesy B movie setting that doesn't take itself seriously at all, but luckily stop short of attempting a complete spoof of cheesy B movies.
Personally I prefer the more serious stuff when I play war but Westwood seemed to have pulled this aspect off (if only just).
The other big change for me was that the game was sped up considerably, Building, moving & fighting now happens at a much faster pace resulting in missions that are over much quicker than previously.
Again, I actually preferred the slower stuff but you learn to adjust very quickly!
Both the Allied and Soviet campaign's story lines are not exactly award-winning stuff but the cut-scenes are of high quality, fun to watch and does enough to make you feel involved in the story, it's obvious that the actors had fun doing the scenes (very much the opposite of the bored looking has-beens in Tiberian Sun), and it sure helps that they casted some of the best looking B-movie actresses around!
The gameplay is standard C&C stuff with some wacky & generally useful units added to the standard tanks and soldiers (tanks that disguise themselves as trees – I mean really ..
One of my biggest gripes with the original were that the Allied units were just weak compared to the Soviets, this time round they are must better balanced with Soviets relying more on brute force and the Allieds the ones with better technology i.e. Soviets are more durable but Allieds have better guns.
Oh yes, and the new ability for your soldiers to garrison buildings is very useful indeed!
My biggest problem with the game is the A.I.(what a misnomer!) It doesn't seem to have improved at all since the original C&C in 1995.
The A.I.'s method of attack basically consists of sending small groups of units to attack your base at regular intervals, and unless they overwhelm you before your defences are up and running this attacks amount to little more than shooting practice for your base defences.
After a while the A.I. will then just give up and wait for you too release him from his misery.
I believe one of the reasons Westwood sped up the game was to compensate for the useless A.I.That said, no other RTS title released before or around the same time as Red Alert 2 were known for brilliant or event competent A.I. so I won't judge too harshly.
Overall this was one of the better RTS titles I have played and I recommend this game as it is still fun even at 2009 standards..
Westwood Goes to Camp.
Quite a few games are unintentionally campy.
It's difficult to make a game that's both entertaining and has a compelling story, and many efforts wind up with silly-sounding expositionary dialog and characters going out of character.
The first Red Alert, admittedly, has some of this camp quality.
What Westwood did with this sequel was not only admit the camp, but flaunt it.
Every character, every line spoken, everything, campy.
Personally, I didn't really care for the humor, but that's my subjective opinion.
The game is actually considerably easier to get into than one would think, considering the camp.
An interesting new addition was the "par time"...
after each successfully completed mission, you'll be told how long it took you, and the par time, and if you did better than it, you'll get a positive statement, based on that, which does wonders for both ego and re-playability(of the player and the game, respectively).
It also heightens the pace, knowing that...
in fact, one of the first things that I noticed about this, compared to the preceding games of the series, was the high pace.
Right from the awesome intro, a great mix of story-telling and action, to the first several missions, and, really, through to the very end, the game is very fast and action-packed.
The slowest unit moves at a pace that feels fast compared to the other games, and the music yet again gets the adrenaline flowing(complete with a "HM2", a new, unfortunately shorter, version of the excellent track from the first game, which, again, is in the intro as well as on both sides' play-list).
This also means, however, that the game moves through the only twelve missions per side really quickly.
In Westwood's defense, all the missions make good sense, they're nicely introduced and explained, and heck, they even all take place at actual locations(complete with famous landmarks).
The level design is great, and several missions are quite interesting.
Sometimes, though, the objectives are simply "eliminate enemy presence", which, whilst making rather good sense in a game about a war, is something of a cliché within the genre of RTS.
Both sides get a satisfying finish.
Story-telling isn't bad...
before every mission, you get a briefing, and not a single one of them feel as if they were done in a hurry(as they did to varying extent on some of the previous ones).
They knew exactly what they were doing, and took the time to get it right.
The performances are quite good(for being intentionally campy), and all the actors seem well-cast.
Kari Wuhrer *is* Tanya Adams.
Corbin does great as a Texan/Southern general, Wise makes a good president, and Kier *rocks* as Yuri.
The cut-scenes, in general, are among the best the franchise have seen.
The production design is of exceptional quality...
sets, props, costumes, everything looks and feels exactly like it should.
The CGI elements blend in more seamlessly than ever before.
The story evolves reasonably, with just a few unexpected twists.
the units.
They pretty much all rock.
The new ones are interesting, powerful and quite even(including a giant squid, an airship that drops bombs, an aircraft carrier and more).
You need a varied force to attack, as well as to defend.
As far as selection goes, it's interesting how they, for both units(buildings, too...
for example, the Allied radar building is also their airfield), mixed a high amount of units with only putting in ones that are cool and fun to use.
There is a ton of strategic possibilities.
The Soviets get an infantry unit capable of mind-control(who possesses the uber-creepy voice of Udo Kier), which makes for one(but not the only) quite interesting single-player mission.
You can now garrison the regular infantry unit inside any building, and they can then fire at enemies from in there, though they will abandon it once it takes enough damage.
One Allied unit can even enhance the abilities of just about any infantry unit put inside.
The Spy can be put to rather good use, as well.
The super-weapons are beefed up, too.
The Allies also actually get an offensive one...
a thunderstorm(!).
The Chrono-Sphere(teleportation device), which was very tentatively used in the first game, almost becomes common-place here...
the harvesters now Chrono-Shift back to the refineries to hand in the ore and diamonds gathered(silos, by the way, have also been sacrificed in the name of efficiency), for example.
The game is more fun to play than the first Red Alert, however, and not only is the improved Chrono-Sphere cool and powerful, the more uses of Chrono-Shifting also means that an *excellent* infantry unit, the Chrono Legionaire, is introduced.
He can Chrono-Shift anywhere he wants(though the longer the distance, the longer time must pass before he can act again), and his attack is to slowly but surely zap whatever he aims at *out of time*.
He's just as cool as he sounds.
The multi-player is great, very well done.
The sound is very well-done, everything sounds just like it should.
The graphics are very nice, though the many effects can take a lot of resources.
This was the first in this series since Command & Conquer and Covert Ops to kick me out of the game.
Some things are kept from Tiberian Sun, others are abandoned.
This has several features that really help increase the game-play, including ones that *really* should have appeared earlier in the franchise than the *fourth* game in the series...
and unfortunately, it still does lack some.
You can still not tell units to hold their position.
Still, if you found the earlier games enjoyable and felt that a few features were lacking, chances are that they're present in this game.
Most of the new things introduced are incredibly well-done, and the game is almost entirely free of bugs.
A very good effort, and sure to eat up many hours of free-time(if more on multi-player than on single-player).
I recommend this to any fan of the series.
Super War game.
This war game is about the russians invading america.
The graphics are great altough you need only 2mb of video ram.
The sounds isn't much better in comparisation with command $ conquer tiberian sun.
The story is cliche but still it's cool to play the game.
How further you go how more you have to think in stragetic way.
This was the first game i acctually bought and still having fun playing the game.
It's cool to play the game trough a network.
I could recommend this game to anyone wanting to play a fantastic war game...
Have fun..
Have fun..
Have fun..
It Cant Get Any Better Than This..
After being addicted to Red Alert for about 4 years, i wasn't sure that anything could top that game....
then along came Red Alert 2 and i was silenced!
EA and Westwood have managed to improve on every aspect of the original; the gameplay is just as addictive but the storyline of the second is fantastic, the structures and units are greatly improved and as for the video sequences: i was almost blown away!!
They have also corrected several minor flaws which occurred in the first.
For instance: in 'Skirmish Mode' Tanya can only be used by the Allies (as she is an allied agent), and the soviets have created their own terrorist character; also the soviets are the only one to use the Nuke and the allies have developed their Weather Machine (which is equally if not more devastating).
The graphics of the game are much better too as the battle screen has shrunk allowing you to see your structures more clearly and the effects of the superweapons are much better than the first: when a nuke is dropped in the first game all you get is a small mushroom cloud and the blast doesn't really destroy anything apart from the infantry.
WELL, after droppin' the bomb in RA2 i was almost knocked off my seat: you get a gigantic explosion with a screen blocking mushroom cloud which levels all buildings under it, and to top that off, the ground becomes radioactive for about 20 seconds after that so any infantry that walk over it will be killed.
Fantastic.
Westwood have certainly outdone themselves and created a truly excellent game that i will definitely be playing for a long time to come.Bring on Red Alert 3!.
Better than both Tiberian Sun and Red Alert 1!.
I avoided this game when it first came out, though I did enjoy playing its predecessor and winning on both sides (Allied and Soviet) on that same game.
It took me a while, but I beat the game on the Soviet side in 1997 and the Allied side in 2002.
But then I played a little of Red Alert 2 at a friend's house and it was a whole different world.
It made me want to play more.
The graphics were a little dated but the action was all there.
And after hearing all the mediocre talk about the second Tiberium game (Tiberian Sun), I thought Red Alert 2 would be nice.
Guess what?
It's even better than the second Tiberium Game.
And unlike C&C2 there are major improvements to the whole gameplay of the Red Alert saga.
Plus new units and structures.
What else is new?
New characters on both the Soviet and the Allied forces sides and more Tanya.
It's a little underwhelming considering the Soviets don't have much airpower but the Terror Drones make nice parasites on the Allied armor.
But if you enjoyed Red Alert 1 and were disappointed by C&C: Tiberium Dawn and Tiberian Sun, try this!.
best command & conquer game to date.
one of the best games to come out of westwood.It is also the best command and conquer titles games available.you get to fight as two of the biggest superpowers of the world a.k.a the soviets and the allies.Soviets have a sexy mission breifer while allies have a not so good one.but hey its upto you to decide.GEt your hands on this excellent game while you still can. |
tt0316732 | Taxi | Taxi portrays director Jafar Panahi as he courses through the streets of Tehran while pretending to be a share taxi driver. He wants to hear a piece of his passengers' life and declines any payment for the services. His earliest passengers include a conservative-minded man who supports capital punishment and a woman supporting its abolition, a pirated video vendor named Omid who once lent foreign films not available in the country to Panahi, an injured man and his wife who both insist on recording a last will due to their panic, and a pair of superstitious old women wanting to release their goldfishes to a holy spring.
Eventually, Panahi picks up his niece Hana at her school. She discusses about filmmaking and wants Panahi's advice on creating a short film for a school project; her teacher has said about several rules on creating films in Iran, including the avoidance of siahnamayi, or portraying a dark image about the country. However, Hana's teacher also stated that people should create film as they see fit. The two stop near a coffeehouse where Panahi meets with a family friend he has not seen for 7 years. The latter inquires about a burglary he recently experienced and his dilemma of not informing the authorities about the thieves, whom he personally knows, as they are poor and have nothing else to lose. Meanwhile, Hana films a case of siahnamayi herself when she spots a boy who steals money from a couple of newlyweds and refuses to return them.
Finally, Panahi and Hana meet with Nasrin Sotoudeh, a human rights lawyer about to see the imprisoned Ghoncheh Ghavami and possibly convince her to give up her hunger strike. While adjusting her seat, Hana stumbles upon a purse belonging to one of the old women with the goldfishes. Sotoudeh decides to leave early so Panahi can deliver the purse, but not before giving him a rose as a goodwill for filmmakers. Panahi and Hana proceed to the springs and are able to return the purse; at the same time as this happens, a pair of thieves ransack the taxi, before the film cuts off. | flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0040746 | Rope | Two brilliant young aesthetes, Brandon Shaw (Dall) and Phillip Morgan (Granger), strangle to death their former classmate from Harvard University, David Kentley (Dick Hogan), in their apartment. They commit the crime as an intellectual exercise; they want to prove their superiority by committing the "perfect murder".
After hiding the body in a large antique wooden chest, Brandon and Phillip host a dinner party at the apartment, which has a panoramic view of Manhattan's skyline. The guests, who are unaware of what has happened, include the victim's father Mr. Kentley (Cedric Hardwicke) and aunt Mrs. Atwater (Constance Collier); his mother is not able to attend due to a cold. Also there are his fiancée, Janet Walker (Joan Chandler) and her former lover Kenneth Lawrence (Douglas Dick), who was once David's close friend.
Brandon uses the chest containing the body as a buffet table for the food, just before their housekeeper, Mrs. Wilson (Edith Evanson) arrives to help with the party. "Now the fun begins," Brandon says when the first guests arrive.
Brandon and Phillip's idea for the murder was inspired years earlier by conversations with their prep school housemaster, publisher Rupert Cadell (Stewart). While at school, Rupert had discussed with them, in an apparently approving way, the intellectual concepts of Nietzsche's Übermensch, and De Quincey's art of murder, as a means of showing one's superiority over others. He too is among the guests at the party, since Brandon in particular feels that he would approve of their "work of art".
Brandon's subtle hints about David's absence indirectly lead to a discussion on the "art of murder". Brandon appears calm and in control, although when he first speaks to Rupert he is nervously excited and stammering. Phillip, on the other hand, is visibly upset and morose. He does not conceal it well and starts to drink too much. When David's aunt, Mrs. Atwater, who fancies herself as a fortune-teller, tells him that his hands will bring him great fame, she is referring to his skill at the piano, but he appears to think this refers to the notoriety of being a strangler.
Much of the conversation, however, focuses on David and his strange absence, which worries the guests. A suspicious Rupert quizzes a fidgety Phillip about this and about some of the inconsistencies that have been raised in conversation. For example, Phillip had vehemently denied ever strangling a chicken at the Shaws' farm, but Rupert has personally seen Phillip strangle several. Phillip later complains to Brandon about having had a "rotten evening", not because of David's murder, but over Rupert's questioning.
As the evening goes on, David's father and fiancée begin to worry that he has neither arrived nor phoned. Brandon increases the tension by playing matchmaker between Janet and Kenneth. Mrs. Kentley calls, overwrought because she has not heard from David, and Mr. Kentley decides to leave. He takes with him some books Brandon has given him, tied together with the rope Brandon and Phillip used to strangle his son.
When Rupert goes to leave, Mrs. Wilson accidentally hands him David's monogrammed hat, further arousing his suspicion. Rupert returns to the apartment a short while after everyone else has departed, pretending that he has left his cigarette case behind. He hides the case behind some books on the chest, asks for a drink and then stays to theorize about David's disappearance. He is encouraged by Brandon, who hopes Rupert will understand and even applaud them. A drunk Phillip is unable to take it any more; he throws a glass and says, "Cat and mouse, cat and mouse. But which is the cat and which is the mouse?"
Rupert lifts the lid of the chest and finds the body inside. He is horrified but also deeply ashamed, realizing that Brandon and Phillip used his own rhetoric to rationalize murder. Rupert disavows all his previous talk of superiority and inferiority, realizing that there is no way to objectively define these concepts, then seizes Brandon's gun and fires several shots out the window in order to attract attention. As approaching police sirens get louder, Rupert pulls up a chair next to the chest and the film's end credits appear on the screen. | murder, cult, atmospheric, philosophical, suspenseful, storytelling | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0069525 | You're Not Elected, Charlie Brown | Sally Brown comes home and tells Charlie Brown that she is never going to school again out of frustration with opening her locker ("I can't get my stupid locker open!") The next day Charlie promises he will help with her locker. He tells her that some lockers are a little difficult and touchy, and she needs to make sure the numbers are just right. But Sally tells him that is not the problem, the problem is she cannot reach it to open it. He does not know what to say so Sally brings him into her classroom for something else: to use him as her show-and-tell presentation, much to his embarrassment. After this, Charlie sees a poster that says "Student Body President Election". Linus van Pelt thinks that would be a good job for Charlie, but Lucy van Pelt thinks Linus would be the better candidate. Also running is a student named Russell Anderson. Linus runs for the office with a vigorous and enthusiastic campaign, taking an early lead in the polls.
Unfortunately, he suffers a setback when, during his last address to the student body, he decides to ad lib a mention of The Great Pumpkin. Nonetheless he wins the election by one vote–84 to 83–the deciding vote cast from Russell, who has decided that Linus is, in fact, better for the job. Following his victory, Linus goes to the principal with the intention of keeping his campaign promises and laying down the law, only to be taken aback with the realization that he is still strictly subordinate to the faculty and in fact, like most student government positions, has no real power. After he reveals this to Sally then walks away sheepishly, Sally has a fit and accuses him of selling out like all other politicians. She then kicks the bottom of a locker and walks away, just to have it open and be Charlie Brown's. | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | Charlie Brown in Politics?
Polling results at '11:00'.
The cast of the "Peanuts" gang are getting caught-up in a world of politics, power and promises!!
Watch out!
Because, here comes Lucy, the campaign manager, adviser and publicist for her brother Linus's ill-fated political student body presidential career.
Well, maybe it's not that bad, but it is a whole lot of fun!!
And you can't exactly call Lucy and Linus a puppet regime either, because they're not Muppets, just cartoon characters after all.
This episode is truly another 'Peanuts' great.
Talking about the political process at the 'school' of Charlie Brown, who in this case, declines to take a verbal 'nomination' from his buddy Linus for student body Prez.
So Lucy hits the streets to meet the public and be a 'pollster'.
She figures after pre-stumping for her brother's 'popularity' that he looks like a shoe-in for the office and that things in that school are about to happened.
The timing and political climate is right, for 'change' or a tremendous political sun-burn.Everyone turns out for the campaign of Linus, even Snoopy and Woodstock.
A short 'cameo' appearance from 'Joe Cool' is in order.
The music score is worthy of praise, from a solid, stylish, Guaraldi.
Linus is in for a surprise when he learns that it's not always easy when you're 'Elected'.
This one makes the political grade.
Joe Cool, that's all I need to say....
"You're Not Elected, Charlie Brown" includes one of jazz genius Vince Guaraldi's greatest compositions: "Joe Cool".
The short sequence is truly great and worth every Peanuts fan's attention.
The rest of the 25 minute long special is pretty unremarkable, but enjoyable nonetheless..
"I remember one time he gave me half of his peanut butter sandwich.
I'd vote for anybody who took me out to lunch.".
The Peanuts gang tackles politics as Linus (not Charlie Brown, despite the title) runs for student body president.
Lucy is his campaign manager.
Lots of funny bits of business to be had here.
Linus' campaign speeches are hilarious.
This is an underrated gem among the Peanuts specials.
Aside from the great political satire and all-around good fun that comes from Charlie Brown & friends, this one offers up the first animated appearance of Snoopy's best alter ego: Joe Cool.
Vince Guaraldi crafts a wonderful song to introduce him ("Joe Cool, back in school, hangin' around the water fountain actin' a fool").
The version currently being shown by ABC, following the Great Pumpkin, is edited.
Particularly the beginning and ending have been altered.
It's still enjoyable but try to catch the unedited version.
This is a very fun cartoon.
Peanuts fans will, of course, love it..
It's ElectionTime.
Eighth animated special based on the Charles M.
Schulz cartoon strips is one of the better ones, as Linus decides(with Lucy's help) to run for student body president, and how he makes nice speeches and many promises that he may have trouble keeping, especially when he mentions the Great Pumpkin again...
Meanwhile, Sally is having trouble with her locker, but has faith in Linus, who is facing stiff competition from a classmate who still seems undecided about who he'll vote for.
Amusing and thoughtful special about school life and political realities may be instructive to youngsters, and of course there's Snoopy as Joe Cool.
Nice continuity with the Great Pumpkin mention!.
Oh Good Grief.
I only say "Oh Good Grief" because any one who knows the Peanuts knows that the famous line of Charlie Brown, Linus, Lucy and all the other members of the peanut gang.Normally the plots of these specials would focus on Charlie Brown for this time around the plot center around Linus as he runs for School President with Charlie Brown and Lucy serving has his campaign managers.
Plus Snoopy and his Joe Cool look and he does have a funny segment.Now this is not your normal every day Charlie Brown special as it doesn't have the focus on Charlie Brown.
With Linus as the center character it does make it different.The animation for this special is what you can expect from any Charlie Brown and it is very good as well as it is well time animation along with the traditions that makes The Peanut Gang special.
The voice acting is very funny as you can get a good laugh for each joke from the characters in the special plus with a interesting song for Snoopy in the film.The story for the film is very good as any fan of The Peanut gang can appreciate this film for kids and adults.There is just nothing that holds the greatness from making this fun for all ages.I give You're Not Elected, Charlie Brown an 8 out of 10.
Good, but.....
Still worth the full and solid 7 Stars I gave it, but I watched it the same night as I watched 'It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown' and I just can't rate this one as high as I did for the Great Pumpkin.
I really like the Snoopy and Schroeder scene at the piano.
Snoopy is a funny character in this cartoon.
Still quite enjoyable and definitely a classic cartoon for the growing children..
The Peanuts Election..
This showcases the time when Linus Van Pelt (Stephen Shea) tried to run for class president.
Linus is backed by his best friend Charlie Brown (Chad Webber) and his sister Lucy Van Pelt (Robin Kohn).
This one doesn't really focus too much on Charlie and I think that's what makes it weaker than the others.
It's still good, but it doesn't really hold a candle to the other Peanuts films.
The story is all right, and the acting is good so it succeed there, and there certainly are some memorable moments like when Snoopy does the Joe Cool segment.
But overall it just doesn't seem to be as good or as memorable.
I actually watched this around the time of the 2008 election.
Certainly not my favorite Peanuts movie.
But overall it's just okay..
There's a reason the theme music mentions the wrong title.
"The song at the title screen, it sang: 'You're elected Charlie Brown!', but they should of sang: 'You're NOT elected Charlie Brown.'"There's a reason for this; the first time it aired, it was called, "You're Elected, Charlie Brown," and used the theme music with that title.
However, sometime after that, presumably somebody noticed that, as Charlie Brown wasn't actually elected, the title made no sense, so the title was changed, and the theme music changed to a different song without lyrics.
(It is possible that the on-screen title was changed at the last second, but note that CBS commercials for the show's first airing used the original title.).
You're not even running for office, Charlie Brown..
With the office of class President available in the coming elections Linus and Russell compete with each other in an effort to take over the school.
Lucy threatens most of the students into voting for Linus while everyone else pitches in and helps.
Even Snoopy and Woodstock help out with the picket signs.
Snoopy also comes to school as 'Joe Cool' and fails to impress anyone.Linus wins the campaign by one vote but turns himself into a laughing stock when he mentions the Great Pumpkin in his inauguration speech.
It's fun and entertaining, even if some of the scenes bear no relevance to the story.
Why exactly is Snoopy turning up to class?
And the title is a bit odd.
Charlie Brown doesn't even compete, so he's obviously not going to be elected..
You're Not Elected, Charlie Brown is subtly satiric take on politics.
The most memorable sequence in this Peanuts special is the "Joe Cool" one with Snoopy in sunglasses and Joe Cool T-shirt at the water fountain failing to impress the girls who pass him by.
All this is done to Vince Guaraldi's vocals for "Joe Cool".
Cool indeed.
Linus thinks Charlie Brown should be school president.
Lucy polls the student body and finds Charlie has no chance.
Linus becomes the nominee after sister Lucy "persuades" various classmates to support him.
Linus almost blows it when he mentions the Great Pumpkin.
It's eventually a close race between him and Russell...Nice satire of the political process made in an election year (1972).
Shown after It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown on ABC on October 27, 2006 in edited form since the previous show was shown intact resulting in an extra five minutes.
Still worthwhile viewing and it is available on DVD intact with Pumpkin..
I really enjoyed this, actually.
It's a bonus episode on the Great Pumpkin DVD, so watching it was a serendipitous experience for me.
As for the 25 minutes without Joe Cool, I thought they were enjoyable also.
I especially like all the adult jokes thrown in, all the little political jabs (non-partisan) that are made throughout.
Lucy and Linus taking callers on a live radio talk-show, campaign speeches from Shroeder, and the great race for votes between Linus and Russell...all poking gentle fun at our election process without getting nasty.
I loved it.
Plus, it is a perfect fall time episode, which alludes to the Great Pumpkin...And, it there is a relatively happy ending.
Unusual for a Peanuts cartoon..
Another enjoyable Peanuts TV special.
Linus runs for school president with Lucy and Charlie Brown serving as his campaign managers.
This time Charles M.
Schulz's characteristic sweet and witty humor is well used to take plenty of sly satirical digs at politics and the intrinsic absurdity of the whole electoral process: Lucy intimidates people to vote for her little brother, Linus gives a gloriously histrionic first speech in which he makes all kinds of ridiculous promises, Schroeder compares Linus to Beethoven, Linus appears on a talk radio show and gets bombarded by clueless callers who can't get their questions right, and Linus almost blows the whole campaign when he talks at length about the Great Pumpkin in his second major speech.
Of course, Snoopy is in his usual delightful mischievous form: The irrepressible beagle ransacks a refrigerator and makes an elaborate breakfast for himself, assists Sally by making campaign signs (he puts a paw print on the sign he makes), and, in the show's single most hilarious segment, goes to school as grinning hipster Joe Cool only to wind up being ignored by all the kids (Joe Cool even has a great groovy theme song).
Vince Guaraldi's bouncy and sprightly score further adds to the considerable frothy fun.
A pleasant romp..
fun but lacking inspirational insight of 'A Charlie Brown Christmas'.
Sally can't open her locker and she brings in her big brother Charlie Brown for Show-and-Tell.
Linus pushes Charlie Brown for student body president but Lucy tells them that he has no chance.
With Lucy's bullying demeanor, her poll indicates that Linus has 99% support.
Charlie Brown is assigned to assist campaign manager Lucy with the help of Snoopy and Woodstock.
While the rival candidate Russell Anderson promises to do his best, Linus promises the moon.
The campaign is going great until Linus talks about the Great Pumpkin.
It's a close race and Russell breaks the tie by voting for Linus.
In the end, Linus finds he has little power to the dismay of Sally who just wants to open her locker which is too tall for her.This is a fun Charlie Brown show but not as famous as 'A Charlie Brown Christmas' or 'A Charlie Brown Thanksgiving'.
It doesn't really get replayed on every election day.
It also lacks an inspirational or feel-good central idea.
The ending is a little cynical.
This one centers more on the Van Pelts and the Browns.
It's fun to see Joe Cool and Woodstock.
This is a bit of fun..
You should of been elected, Charlie Brown..
You should of been elected, Charlie Brown..
I got this show as one of the bonus episodes on the 3 Peanuts holiday pack.
I think this show is the only poor show in the collection.
At the beginning when Sally was walking home, she didn't said anything.
I'd like the beginning if Sally said "I hate school!
It's driving me crazy!" 2.The song at the title screen, it sang: "You're elected Charlie Brown!", but they should of sang: "You're NOT elected Charlie Brown!" 3.When Sally showed Chalie Brown for show and tell I didn't get what Sally said.4.I watch this with captions because I like to know what are the people saying, and I don't want captions to say in-proper spelling.
When Lucy was asking to vote for Linus to Rucelle and he says why he said no, he said the sort word for "because" and the captions said it to.
I HATE it when that happens.5.When Linus was on the talk show, who was talking on the phone?6.I didn't know what was the reason why Linus didn't get elected.
I should of knowed.Well, this show is poor.
Ignoor this one and stick with the other shows in the 3 Peanuts holiday pack..
Another central character this time and some interesting references.
This 1972 short film has a bit of a misleading title.
They always included Charlie Brown, but really here the candidate for class presidency is Linus.
Maybe this is also why I enjoyed this half hour special more than other Charlie Brown short films.
Hands down, brown's self-pity and whining gets annoying at times.
But most of the rest is as always about this movie.
It is directed by Melendez, written by Schulz and as almost always Emmy-nominated.
At this point in 1972, they made one new peanuts film every year, frequently even two.
And the year is also interesting for another reason.
This half-hour television movie came out not too long before the Presidential election.
And while the race between Nixon and McGovern could not have been any more one-sided, the race between Linus and Russell could not be any more close.
In the end, one vote is decisive.
There are some more parallels.
Pay attention to how a random pumpkin reference by Linus almost costs him the victory in the end.
It's a tough world and one unlucky statement can destroy all ambitions.
Also in one scene we see how Lucy intimidates voters into choosing her brother.
The rest of it is pretty harmless though.
The call-in show with Linus answering questions was maybe the funniest thing even if Snoopy had to yawn.
I didn't have to while watching this short (unlike some other Peanuts shorts), so this gets a solid 3 out of 5 stars, also a majority.
Recommended. |
tt0045752 | The Farmer Takes a Wife | Dan Harrow goes to work as a driver for Samson Weaver on the Erie Canal, but his heart is set on buying a farm and settling down, even though his father was a canal man. This ambition and his distaste for fighting puzzle Molly Larkins, the girlfriend and cook of Jotham Klore, but she develops a liking for him anyway.
When Samson wins $5000 in a lottery, he gives Dan a half share of his boat. This prompts Dan to propose to Molly, but she wants to stay on the Erie Canal, not live on a farm, so she will only go work for him, much to Jotham's displeasure. Jotham arrives at a big fair at the same time as Molly and Dan. Samson warns Dan, so he asks Molly to leave for Utica. Molly is ashamed of him, thinking he is a coward, but he confesses that he is going to Utica to finalize the purchase of a farm. Molly is so disgusted by this news that she quarrels with him. He departs for his new farm, leaving his share of the boat to Molly and warning her that the Erie Canal's days of prosperity are numbered, as the railroads move in.
Molly is miserable, but refuses to admit it. She tells her friend Fortune Friendly that she might have gotten used to the idea of being a farmer's wife, but she could never marry a coward. Fortune decides to take matters into his own hands. He goes to see Dan. He lies and tells Dan that Molly is being shunned and insulted for having worked for a coward. Dan decides to have it out with Jotham. Molly then tries to prevent the fight, but without success. When Dan manages to beat Jotham, Molly tells him he is the new champion of the Canal and that he should stay, but he finally gives up on her. He tells that he no longer wants her and heads home. However, she follows him to his place, and he embraces her. | romantic | train | wikipedia | Just enjoy this lighthearted musical.
It's easygoing, middle-of-the-road entertainment so no point taking it too serious or being critical.
I happen to like Betty Grable films and this one is a lovely setting for her to shine in, a very photogenic lady.Dale Robertson, as Daniel, is the farmer who finds work on the canal to pay his way so he can join a ladylove and settle down to farming in future, but plans don't always work out as intended.
I feel it's a lesser role for Dale compared to other movies of his I've seen such as Golden Girl (1951) which was a very good role for him to star in.Thelma Ritter too is a favorite of mine and here she plays the rich widow, Lucy Cashdollar, who plans on having a husband No. 6.
She's beautifully dressed in all scenes, more so than I've ever seen her in other films, which of course fits her role here.There's the usual barroom mêlées or free-for-all fights, songs sung by the lead characters, and romance where as they say, Love always finds a way.
It's just charming entertainment meant for a pleasant Saturday afternoon, and is a video I like to have for cheering up when needed..
Charming, Forgettable Piece of Fluff.
"The Farmer Takes a Wife" is a charming, forgettable piece of fluff of the "Boy meets girl; boy loses girl; boy gets girl back" school of film musical.
Fox musicals were almost always rather forgettable, with their insipid songs and frequently bad singing.
However, they were also bright and colorful, since Fox used Technicolor longer and more frequently than the "Tiffany" studio, MGM.
"The Farmer Takes a Wife" is especially charming in costume, art and set decoration.Betty Grable is, well, Betty Grable, and if you adore her (and I do), you're likely to adore "The Farmer Takes a Wife".
Betty's ably supported by Dale Robertson, John Carroll, Eddie Foy, Jr. and, the always wonderful Thelma Ritter.
I won't pretend it's a great movie, or even a good movie, but "The Farmer Takes a Wife" is a "Betty Grable" movie, and that's good enough for me.
I give "The Farmer Takes a Wife" a "6"..
Could serve as the "last gasp" of the Hollywood musical....
"The Farmer Takes a Wife" is so disappointing that it could serve as an example of "the last gasp of the Hollywood musical." It's hard to believe that the marvelous "Seven Brides for Seven Brothers" came out the following year.
To start with, none of the songs are memorable, and the production numbers are so stylized and overstuffed with flounces, ruffles and ribbons that they are effectively deadened.
Grable herself looks slightly overblown in this context and John Carroll who has a very pleasing voice and good presence, is not allowed to sing at all other than humming a few bars.
Dale Robertson, who is not a singer and probably had his singing dubbed, is given one of the best songs to sing while taking a bath in a rain barrel...and is repeatedly shown apparently scrubbing at his crotch while performing the song!
Viewers are well advised to skip this one, which is for extreme Grable and/or Carroll fans only.
Even they will have a hard time tolerating it..
Navigating On The Erie Canal.
It's sad that The Farmer Takes A Wife was owned by 20th Century Fox instead of Warner Brothers.
Had Jack Warner been in charge he had the right person for the female lead in Doris Day. As it is this musical adaption of the Frank Elsner-Marc Connelly play has a most miscast Betty Grable doing a part that had Doris stamped all over it.
When Betty says 'Uticky' it doesn't quite come out right.The original play ran for 104 performances in the 1934-35 season and was the vehicle that made Henry Fonda a star.
In fact producer Walter Wanger took the highly unusual step in bringing Fonda to Hollywood to star in the role that made him.
Playing the parts that Betty Grable and John Carroll have in this version are Janet Gaynor and Charles Bickford.Of course with this being changed to a musical and the billing reflecting it, the emphasis was changed from the male to the female lead.
Seeing Dale Robertson as Dan Harrow though, he makes an admirable substitute for Fonda.
Too bad that Harold Arlen and Dorothy Fields didn't write anything memorable in the score.
And for the life of me I can't figure why John Carroll who does sing well, wasn't given more to do musically.The story is an old fashioned rustic one set during the final days of the Erie Canal.
Everyone but Betty seems to realize the railroad will eventually put the canal out of business as the major venue of transportation.
Still she and soft spoken farmer Robertson do eventually come together as Robertson wins her over Carroll who is a real lout in this film.
I can readily see Charles Bickford in that part in the first film version.
At the same time Betty was doing this, Doris Day was doing Calamity Jane over at Warner Brothers in a similar role with much better songs.
Maybe with a better score, The Farmer Takes A Wife would have been more memorable.Still I think it would have needed Doris Day..
A relatively bland remake of a rather bland film..
The one thing you'll no doubt notice when this film begins is that Betty is clearly older.
She's 37 and playing a part designed for a teenager or perhaps a woman of 20...plus she simply looks older than 37.
She also apparently had far less clout by 1953, as she was cast along with Dale Robertson--not exactly a household name.
RObertson wasn't bad in the film, mind you...but he was a big comedown from folks like Don Ameche or Victor Mature in the 30s or 40s.
Studio veterans John Carroll and Thelma Ritter are on hand to lend support.
This loss in popularity also might help to explain why the once big star was forced to do a remake of a completely unremarkable film.
The 1935 version was only fair and here almost two decades later it's essentially the same film but with music and Technicolor.
This remake is certainly no better due to the miscasting of Grable, a few very unremarkable songs and a plot that just seemed to drag.
Not a bad film but one that clearly showed that Grable's days as a star were nearly passed.
Watch it if you'd like but it's only a time- passer and nothing more..
"You look good enough to eat." ...
"Wait'll you taste my cooking.".
Agreeable 20th Century-Fox musical, a remake of their 1935 Janet Gaynor-Henry Fonda comedy-romance, based on the novel and play "Rome Haul", is uncertainly directed, full of static staging, and embarrassed by at least one terrible dance number--but it does have Betty Grable, full of her usual sass and vigor (which this vehicle definitely needs).
On the Erie Canal in 1850, a young lovely and her fiancé/business partner run a barge hauling supplies (she cooks, he drinks); she hires a horse-driver to pull the barge, a low-keyed farmer with a sweetheart in Chicago, but when her fiancé is thrown in jail for fighting with the incoming railroad folk, the girl goes into partnership with the handsome newcomer, sparking romance.
Director Henry Levin doesn't seem to know anything about staging a musical number on the screen; though the mediocre songs by Harold Arlen and Dorothy Fields are clearly no help to him, Levin hasn't paced the narrative with the energy needed for a musical, and the introductions to each song are creaky with hesitation.
"We're in Business", featuring Gwen Verdon (who pops in without an introduction), is the worst of the lot, while the reprise of "Today I Love Everybody" includes a brief vocal by Thelma Ritter that proves the actress can't do everything.
Grable and quiet, polite Dale Robertson aren't an exciting match, but his gentle tone cools down her brashness.
There's a streak of early feminism in Grable's character when she flatly refuses to become a farmer's wife (without her feelings on the matter even being considered!), which is then abandoned in the face of true love, however she and Robertson look good together.
The color is gloppy, and the finale--where Levin apparently chose to move the material back to its stage roots--is perplexing, yet the movie is upbeat and pleasurable despite its faults.
Takes Her Nowhere.
A career-killing movie for Betty Grable, who is wasted, along with everyone except Eddie Foy Jr. in this prettified musical version of the movie that made Henry Fonda a star.
Dale Robertson plays the farmer, who is a moron, Thelma Ritter is wasted and some fake-looking scenery still leaves one mystified at how people can live in riverfront saloons and on farms and know nothing at all of the facts of life or the baser side of human nature -- it must be those perfectly maintained canal boats with red-striped awnings they travel in.
The songs are also pretty poor, including an ode to Schenectady that did not make Rodgers and Hammerstein jealous.While none of Gable's starring musicals are likely to make any top-100 lists, most of them have fairly good musical numbers and enough plot and comedy relief to get you from one standard to the next.
Rather disappointing effort for a nice cast.
I would lke to give this a 6 but I just cannot even though I am a big Grable fan, Also a fan of Robertson but this was not his best performance by far.
Maybe he felt as out of his element as I perceived him to be.However the weak script and scenes lets the two of them have several moments that the songs couldn't completely ruin.I did burn this to DVD because I really do want to have a complete library of both the stars.The costumes were nice and the color was nice and the 4 major actors/actresses did as much as you could hope for in a weak vehicle.Watch it but don't expect too much and you won't be disappointed.As I think on it a 5 might be a little high but I will stick witn it.
Too much lipstick and electric lights!.
Typical 1950's Hollywood production.
Costumes are not period, zippers, high heeled pumps and pony tails were not part of the 1850's.
The men wear dinner jackets with bow ties and everyone's outfit is sparkling clean and starched, despite the fact that they have been working all day plowing, washing and cleaning.
Penciled in eyebrows, eyeliner and lipstick a hundred years too early.
Betty Grable still looks like a a pin up girl, and Dale Robertson has a pompadour hair style, also why are they using southern accents in Rome NY?
This movie is cute but not Betty Grable's best picture by far.
Lovely 1950's period piece in long skirts..
Underrated, charming, Technicolor musical remake of nonmusical '35 version, starring Betty Grable..
Caught this on a FXM viewing.
Despite the title, we never catch sight of a farm or farm house, except from a distance in one scene, until presumably in the finale, with the farm being a mere cartoonish background painting.
Otherwise all the action is scripted as taking place along the Erie Canal of 1850 or the canal city of Rome, where construction of the canal began, historically.
Handsome Dale Robertson plays the farmer: Dan Harrow.
He shows up in Rome, trying to make some extra money to follow his recent fiancé, who is taking a boat to Illinois(weird!).
Dan meets sexy Molly Larkins(Betty Grable) in Rome.
She is the cook and girlfriend of boat owner Jotham Klore(John Carroll): a stereotypical hard drinking , brawling, canal man : not really Molly's idea of an ideal husband.
Although not specified, Jotham is most likely the son of one of the many Scot Irish who dominated the work force in building the canal.
Larkins is an Irish surname.
Another main character is Fortune Friendly: a ne'er -do-well drifter, played by Eddie Foy Jr.: a holdover from vaudeville, also Irish, of course.
Much beloved Thelma Ritter, as the well off 5X widow Lucy Cashdollar(appropriate name):an older friend of Molly, rounds out the main characters.
She is paired romantically with Foy, despite his destitute status.
I was surprised how much Robertson reminded me of the yet undiscovered Elvis Presley, in his looks, laid back persona and southern drawl, if not singing.
His speech makes him seem a very unlikely born and bred up state New Yorker!This is basically a remake of the '35 film of the same title.
Prior to that, it had a run as a play, also starring Henry Fonda as Dan. I haven't seen this earlier film for comparison, However, besides the different actors, there are 2 obvious major differences: 1) Technicolor vs.
the B&W of the earlier film 2)This is a musical vs.
the nonmusical(I assume) earlier film.
The all original score was composed by the team of Harold Arlen and Dorothy Fields.
While no hit parade songs resulted, they are serviceable songs for the screenplay.
Early, on Betty frolics around town, singing the joyous "I Love Everybody".
This would be reprised for the finale, on her wedding day, with a team of bucolically-dressed chorus in support.
"Something Real Special" was also here very briefly reprised, having been sung by both Dan and Betty, referring to each other.
While they are frolicking, taking a breather from refurbishing the abandoned boat Molly was born on, they sing and sometimes dance to "We're in Business", sometimes including a bunch of onlookers.
This project, in the absence of the jailed Jotham, serves to further cement a growing romantic relationship.
Just prior to this, Dan sings "With the Sun Warm Upon Me", while reclining in a meadow, reminding him of his farm.
"On the Erie Canal" is sung by various towns people, celebrating the importance of the canal.
"We're Doing It For the Natives of Jamaica" is a drinking song for Jotham and his buddies, after filled with rum.
Eddie Foy does a song and eccentric vaudeville-styled dance to "Can You Spell Schenectady?"We have several conflicts in the screen play.
There are two significant impediments to a Dan & Molly marriage.1) Both already have a boy or girlfriend.
However, these prove not as important in the end.
More important, Dan insists on remaining a farmer, whereas Molly insists on remaining a canal 'rat'.
Being a farmer's wife she imagines as being too boring and hard a life.
Secondly, there is a conflict between the canalmen and the hated railroad builders, who threaten to make the canal obsolete.
The canalmen actually overestimate the immediate impact of a competing railroad.
True, the railroad soon stole most of the passenger traffic.
But, the canal still offered much lower freight rates for decades to come, which saved it from early obsolescence.The barriers to a Molly & Dan marriage are finally resolved by 2 events, 1) Dan receives a letter from his Illinois fiancé, saying she married another farmer.2) During a formal race between Jotham's boat and the boat refurbished by Dan and Molly, Dan and Jotham roll around all over the boat fighting over Molly.
Dan is the unofficial winner when he finally knocks Jotham into the canal.
This magically causes Molly to forget about her determination not to live on a farm!
The next scene features their wedding reception, presumably in Dan's farm house.
This ending is very hurried and unconvincing!
Simultaneously, Foy marries Lucy, which he previously quipped would be a fate worth than death!(She offered to pay his betting debt if he married her).The take home message for contemporary audiences was similar to that in the contemporary musicals "Anne Get Your Gun" and "Calamity Jane" : Even gorgeous feisty young women should defer to the ambitions and egos of the man they love, if they hope to have a happy love life.
This was the era of the say-at-home mom, after the WWII era, when many women were forced to become the 'family boss' and factory wage earner, with their men overseas.As depicted, 2 horses or mules was the norm for pulling most canal boats.
However, there were 2 teams that alternated, one being housed within the boat!
There was only one tow path, hence the boat race was not a practical reality.
As dramatized by Dan's headlong dive into the canal, originally, it was only 4 feet deep, although it was later deepened several times, to allow larger boats. |
tt0100994 | Young Guns II | In 1950, attorney Charles Phalen is contacted by an elderly man named "Brushy Bill" Roberts. Brushy Bill tells Phalen that he is dying and wants to receive a pardon that he was promised 70 years before by the Governor of New Mexico, claiming that he is really William H. Bonney aka "Billy The Kid", whom "everyone" knows to have been shot and killed by Pat Garrett in 1881. Phalen then asks if Bill has any proof that he is the famous outlaw.
Brushy Bill's story begins with the remaining Regulators having gone their separate ways. Billy has become part of a new gang with "Arkansas" Dave Rudabaugh (Slater) and Pat Garrett (Petersen). The New Mexico governor has issued warrants for the arrests of those involved in the Lincoln County Wars, including Billy, Doc Scurlock (Sutherland), and Jose Chavez y Chavez (Phillips), who are dragged into town and imprisoned to await hanging.
Meanwhile, Billy meets with the new governor Lew Wallace who agrees to pardon Billy if he testifies against the Dolan-Murphy faction. Billy soon finds out that he was tricked into being arrested with no chance of testifying against his old enemies. After escaping, Billy along with the help of Rudabaugh and Garrett, pose as a lynch mob to spring Doc and Chavez from jail. When the gang successfully escape Lincoln, Billy mentions the Mexican Blackbird (a broken trail only he and few others know that leads down to Mexico). Garrett decides not to go with the gang and, instead, open a boarding house. As they make a run for the border along with farmer Henry William French (Alan Ruck) and 14-year-old Tom O'Folliard (Balthazar Getty), cattle baron John Simpson Chisum (James Coburn) and Governor Wallace approach Garrett to offer him the job as Lincoln County Sheriff and $1000 to use whatever resources he needs to hunt Bonney down and kill him. Garrett agrees and, forming a posse, begins his pursuit of the gang.
Billy and the gang soon come to the town of White Oaks where they meet up with former companion, Jane Greathouse (Jenny Wright) who runs a local bordello. Later that night, the town lynch mob comes for the gang and are intent on a hanging. Deputy Carlisle tries to negotiate a deal, "the Indian" (Chavez) for a safe rideout. Billy refuses the offer and pushes the Deputy out the door, who is then accidentally killed by the lynch mob. Garrett soon tracks Billy to the bordello, but is too late. Billy and his gang are continuously tracked by the posse, narrowly evading capture, but Tom (being mistaken for Billy) is soon shot dead by Garrett. As they hideout, Billy admits that the Mexican Blackbird doesn't exist; it was just a pawn to get the gang back together and to keep riding. Doc is angered and tries to leave for home, but he is shot by one of Garrett's men and sacrifices himself to enable his friends to escape.
Billy the Kid is soon brought back into Lincoln by Garrett and is sentenced to death by hanging. He is visited by Jane Greathouse, who arranges to leave a pistol in an outhouse. Billy uses the pistol to kill two guards and escapes to Old Fort Sumner. By the time he arrives, Dave has abandoned the group to make his way to Mexico, and Chavez is dying from a bullet wound. During the night Garrett finds Billy unarmed. Billy asks Garrett to let him run to Mexico and tell the authorities that he killed him. Garrett declines because he believes Billy would not be able to resist coming back to the United States (which would lead to Garrett's death for lying). Billy turns around, forcing Garrett to have to shoot him in the back, which he does not. In the morning, a fake burial is staged for Billy and Garrett's horse is seen being taken by an unknown figure (implied to be Billy). Brushy Bill admits he never stole a horse from someone he didn't like, and further admits he didn't like Garrett; he loved him. Phalen, convinced that Brushy Bill is Billy the Kid, agrees to help him.
The epilogue reveals that Arkansas Dave was beheaded once he reached Mexico to discourage more outlaws from crossing the border; Garrett's book detailing his pursuit of Billy was a dismal failure and he is eventually shot and killed in 1908; Brushy Bill met with the Governor of New Mexico but despite corroboration from several surviving friends of The Kid, he was discredited and died less than a month later; whether or not Brushy Bill was Billy the Kid remains a mystery. The final shot shows Billy pointing his gun at an off screen target, saying to the target "I'll make you famous". | cult, humor, comedy | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0496375 | Prisoners of the Sun | The synopsis continues a plot begun in The Seven Crystal Balls.
Young reporter Tintin, his dog Snowy, and friend Captain Haddock arrive in Callao, Peru. There, they plan to intercept the arrival of the Pachacamac, a ship carrying their friend Professor Calculus, who is being held by kidnappers. Tintin boards the ship and learns from Chiquito, the former assistant of General Alcazar and one of the abductors, that Calculus is to be executed for wearing a bracelet belonging to the mummified Incan king Rascar Capac.
Tintin barely escapes the ship with his life, and he and Haddock alert the authorities; but the abductors evade the police and take Calculus to the Andes mountains. Tintin and Haddock pursue them to the mountain town of Jauga, where they board a train that is sabotaged in an attempt to kill them. When they attempt to investigate the whereabouts of Calculus, the local Indios prove to be peculiarly tight-lipped. But then Tintin befriends a young Quechua boy named Zorrino after saving him from Spaniard bullies. A mysterious man observes this act of kindness and gives Tintin a medallion, telling him that it will save him from danger. Zorrino informs Tintin that Calculus is taken to the Temple of the Sun, which lies deep within the Andes, and offers to take them there.
After many hardships - including being pursued by four Indios who try their best to leave them stranded or dead - Tintin, Haddock, and Zorrino reach the Temple of the Sun, finding it to be a surviving outpost of the Inca civilisation. They are brought before the Prince of the Sun, flanked by Chiquito and Huascar, the mysterious man Tintin encountered in Jauga. Zorrino is saved from harm when Tintin gives him Huascar's medallion, but Tintin and Haddock are sentenced to death by the Inca prince for their sacrilegious intrusion. The prince tells them they may choose the hour that Pachacamac, the Sun god, will set alight the pyre on which they will be executed.
Tintin and Haddock end up on the same pyre as Calculus. Tintin has, however, chosen the hour of their death to coincide with a solar eclipse, and with a little play-acting, the terrified Incas believe that Tintin can command the Sun. The Inca prince implores Tintin to make the Sun show its light again. At Tintin's command, the Sun returns, and the three are quickly set free. Afterwards, the Prince of the Sun tells them that the seven crystal balls used on the Sanders-Hardiman expedition members, who had excavated Rascar Capac's tomb, contained a "mystic liquid" obtained from coca that plunged them into a deep sleep. Each time the Inca high priest cast his spell over seven wax figures of the explorers, he could use them as he willed as punishment for their sacrilege. Tintin convinces the Inca prince that the explorers wished only to make known to the world the splendours of their civilisation. The Inca prince orders Chiquito to destroy the wax figures and at that moment in Europe the seven explorers awaken. After swearing an oath to keep the temple's existence a secret, Tintin, Haddock and Calculus head home, while Zorrino remains with the Inca, having accepted an offer to live among them. | paranormal | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0095262 | Kidô senshi Gandamu: Gyakushû no Shâ | Set in a fictional universe in the year 2124 (Universal Century year 0079 according to the Gundam Calendar), the Principality of Zeon has declared independence from the Earth Federation, and subsequently launched a war of independence called the One Year War. The conflict has directly affected every continent on Earth, also nearly every space colony and lunar settlement. Zeon, though smaller, has the tactical upper hand through their use of a new type of humanoid weapons called mobile suits. After half of all humanity perishes in the conflict, the war settled into a bitter stalemate lasting over 8 months.
The story begins with a newly deployed Federation warship, the White Base, arriving at the secret research base located at the Side 7 colony to pick up the Federation's newest weapon. However, they are closely followed by Zeon forces. A Zeon reconnaissance team member disobeys mission orders and attacks the colony, killing most of the Federation crew and civilians in the process. Out of desperation, citizen boy Amuro Ray accidentally finds the Federation's new arsenal—the RX-78 Gundam, and neutralizes the situation. Scrambling everything they can, the White Base sets out with her newly formed crew of civilian recruits and refugees in her journey to survive.
On their journey, the White Base members often encounter the Zeon Lieutenant Commander Char Aznable. Although Char antagonizes Amuro in battle, he takes advantage of their position as Federation members to have them kill members from Zeon's Zabi family as part of his revenge scheme. Amuro also meets ensign Lalah Sune with whom he falls in love, but accidentally kills when facing Char. When the Federation Forces invade the Fortress of A Baoa Qu to defeat the Zeon forces, Amuro engages on a final one-on-one duel against Char due to their shared hatred for Lalah's death. Having realized he forgot his true enemy, Char stops fighting to kill the last surviving Zabi member, Kycilia Zabi. Amuro then reunites with his comrades as the war reaches its end. | sci-fi | train | wikipedia | Very Good Mecha Anime Film.
Very good Mecha Anime film that puts a good closing story on the original MOBILE SUIT GUNDAM tv series.Very good quality drawing animation.The story however is not friendly to viewers who did not follow the mentioned tv series.Despite this flaw,the film holds up as a classic anime for all fans of the genre.Very good last 20 minutes too.......
Pretty good..
The Amuro-Char rivalry could not have ended better.
I'm not going to say how, but the ending was totally satisfying.
I also liked Bright Noa's predicament here.
He's always been the flawless starship captain, and now he has to deal with his son Hathaway being underfoot.
I'll leave the telling of the plot to somebody else.
The ending theme, "Beyond the Time" was what got my attention the most.
Wow.The thing with this movie is that it suffers from Red Shirt Syndrome (RSS).
Red Shirt Syndrome is when lots of extra characters are brought into a story and then killed off for no apparent reason other than adding to the tragedy/seriousness of the story.
Red Shirt Syndrome is so named because on the original 'Star Trek', a crewmember would accompany Captain Kirk and crew down to the planet...and the red shirt wearing crewmember would be killed for no apparent reason.Char seems to have gone through quite a bit of change in this movie.
Compare this Char to the Char in the original series, and you'll see a difference.
In this movie, Char begins to become like his father, Zeon Zum Deikun.
He gives speeches and becomes a political figure...a change that started when he was going under the name Quattro Bagina in Zeta Gundam.
On the other side, Amuro hasn't changed much.
He's lost a bit of his idealism, but he's still the same Amuro.
Basically.I think that Quess and Hathaway would've made a charming couple.
The excellent finalle to Gundam!.
The end of the Gundam Saga with Char and Amuro could not have been portrayed any better.
The animation is stunning, the plot is great, and the fighting in space was outstanding.
I could not find any flaw with this, it was excellent.
I strongly suggest this movie to any Gundam fan out there.
It is truely a work of art..
End of Rivalry.
The movie adaptation of "Char's Counterattack: Beltorchika's Children", follows the novel almost to the letter.
There are only a few minor differences in both versions created by Yoshiyuki Tomino.
1-Amuro Ray is engaged to Beltorchika Irma (Chien Agi in the movie) who also appears in Z Gundam.
2-Some names differ from the movie: Gyunei Guss (Glab Gas in novel), Nanai Miguel (Mesuta Mesua in novel).
3-The origin of the psycoframe is different in the novel as from the movie.
The rest of the movie is pretty much exactly like the novel.
In the novel Amuro's girlfriend Beltorchika is expecting a baby and the baby plays an important part in the story.
In the movie it's the psycoframe Chien Agi uses that is an important part of the story.
There are more things explained clearly in the book and are missed in the movie..
Awesome movie drastically underrated.
This movie was so amazing and it's so very disappointing that so many people will miss out on it and refuse to watch it just because it's animated instead of live actors.
I think this movie does a really great job of capturing the many aspects of oppression and rebellion, perhaps not in the best way, but still in a uniquely striking fashion.
Having prior knowledge to Gundam's Universal Century enriches the experience even more.
Char's transformation is definitely a major aspect, but there's also so much more.
The relationship between Amuro and Char has evolved and come much farther; it's at a point in this film that keeps you riveted, wether you be fond of Amuro or tend to lean towards Char.
I would recommend this movie to anyone, regardless.
It may seem like just an action movie or cartoon at just a glance, but once you see the movie and get a feel for the story and everything that goes on, I'm convinced you'll be satisfied afterwards, provided that you just have an open mind.
And obviously I'm talking more towards everyone else out there, and not so much my fellow anime fans..
The best of the Gundam movies, and the standard by which the Saga should be measured..
Char's Counterattack is a worthy climax for the saga of Mobile Suit Gundam, as started in 1979's television series.
A strong story, which logically concludes the storyline started in the original, is paired off with some of the best Mecha designs ever seen on screen and some seriously good performances by the voice actors who have made these characters into careers over the last 20 years.Unfortunately, the film also contains the single most annoying character ever devised for Gundam, or even any anime.
Quess Paraya, the girl you just want to reach out and strangle..
Gundam concludes with bang.
You have asked wondered "who will survive" and you have "seen the tears of time".
Now, the final chapter of an anime legend, the Universal Century Gundam saga, comes to its mind blowing conclusion.
Char's Counterattack is the culmination of years worth of Gundam storyline, in particular, the rivalry between Amuro Ray and Char Aznable that was established in the 1979 Gundam series but was never really followed through in the sequels.The numerous factions from Zeta Gundam and ZZ Gundam have been done away with and we are back in familiar territory now;Char Aznable leads the Neo Zeon movement and Amuro Ray is part of the Londo Bell task-force sent to quell this uprising.As a stand alone Gundam movie, Char's counterattack does not do much for the newer audience.
It expects that the viewer is already familiar with Gundam lore and the established rivalry between Amuro and Char as it immediately throws you into the thick of the story and the heat of the action.
A couple of new characters like Quess Paraya and Hathaway Noa are introduced but they come across as uninteresting and seem like throw-away characters whose only purpose is to fill up screen time when we are not focusing on Char or Amuro.
There is a very uncomfortable attempt at creating a shaky love triangle story but the execution of that plot thread was not as good as it could have been.Poor attempt at romance aside, Char's counterattack features a number of other themes that the viewers can easily relate to.
There is a coming-of-age theme in how Hathaway Noa desires to step out of his father's shadow and discover his own identity, and there is a good deal of wartime rhetoric thrown about by Char.
That being said, only once Amuro and Char take center stage does the movie finally find its footing and delivers an engagingly entertaining experience.
They are the perfect opposites, each representing widely differing views on war and the idealistic pursuit of peace.How far is one willing to go to end a war?
Can peace be attained only through bloodshed?
Are people only a means to an end when one is so obsessed with pursuing an ideal?
Questions like these pop up during the course of the narrative which challenges the viewer to think and question.Some fans have complained about the lack of character development of many of the cast, but i can only say this: Char's Counterattack should not be viewed as a stand alone movie.
It is not a movie to develop the characters but a movie to bring about a RESOLUTION to the characters that have been developed over the course of the previous Gundam series.
That is why i definitely recommend re-watching at least the original Gundam 0079 TV series or compilation movies before watching this movie.
Re-watching "Zeta Gundam" would also add to a better understanding of Char's character development over the years.
Jam packed with epic action sequences thanks to a higher budget and more experienced staff, Mobile Suit Gundam: Char's Counterattack is the exciting concluding chapter in the grand sweeping tale of Amuro Ray and Char Aznable..
Very good animated sci-fi movie.
A must for every Gundam fan, it contains the end of the principal struggle of the Gundam saga.
Enjoyable for anyone who loves "military" and hard science fiction..
Pretty decent ANIME.
If you have been following the Gundam saga (tv series), this is one animated feature you could not miss.
Even if you are not a Gundam fan, you will still enjoy the art works..
Epic conclusion to the original UC Gundam saga.
6 years after the events of both "Zeta Gundam" and "ZZ Gundam", Char Aznable has resurfaced after a few years of hiding to fight for the independence of the space colonies by dropping the former AXIS asteroid onto Earth to cause a worldwide nuclear winter and forcing humanity to live in outer space and evolve into Newtypes.
Once again Amuro Ray must fight Char and bring their long time rivalry to an end.Unlike most anime movies based off their respective TV series, "Char's Counterattack" is a direct sequel to the previous Gundam series which ties up loose ends, runs over 2 hours and brings the Amuro-Char UC rivalry to an epic and satisfying conclusion.The animation is much more improved from the TV series with a movie budget and brilliant action sequences between the Gundams especially the final fight between Char and Amuro.
Little bit of trivia is that one of the robot designers for the movie was Hideaki Anno who would later go on to make "Neon Genesis Evangelion" another one of my favorite anime series.Voice acting is great for both Japanese and English dubs as both has their original voice actors with Tōru Furuya and Brad Swaile as Amuro, Shūichi Ikeda and Michael Kopsa as Char, the late Hirotaka Suzuoki and Chris Kalhoon as Mr. Bright.
All give excellent performances respectively."Char's Counterattack" is a brilliant and epic conclusion to the Char-Amuro era and should not be missed by any Gundam fan.
I should note that if you plan on watching the movie, you should be familiar with at least the first two Gundam series, otherwise you might be lost and have no satisfaction when watching this movie..
A very beautiful animation.
Char's Counterattack is soaked in melancholy, potent and elegant.
It's large use of conversation and character development in between its action may turn off some, but it has enormous payoff when the third act rises.
The score is just perfect and the animation fantastically crafted.
Film's like this can rise or fall on their main cast yet not only are the lead protagonist Amuro Ray and his adversary Char Aznable throughly fleshed out but the movie is flooded with a vibrant supporting cast that you care about.
The fact that its part of a larger canon will discourage a larger audience I'm sure, but even if a virgin viewer doesn't understand all the movie's subtleties its well worth the trip to experience..
COOOOOOOL!!!.
This is without a doubt the best Gundam ever.I have seen some of the original series but I did not see Zeta Gundam since it was never released in North America(which makes me wonder how people write reviews about it) I think the story could not have worked without Quess.
It could have worked without Rezin Schneider, Kayra and Astonage.
This is the best movie I ever saw.
See it, if the romance annoys you at least you'll like the animation..
An Excellent Finally.
The Finally showdown between Amuro and Char in the only way it could be.
This movie is for the real Gundam fans, although there are those that may be able to appreciate this movie too.
And when you put this movie into the Gundam time line those mobile suits are the state of the art of mobile suits.
I really don't know why the ones in Gundam Wing aren't using the 360 degree view cockpits seem like a step down to me.The characters and the story was all Gundam.
Char and his master plan for human improvement, and Amuro who still believed in the good within man.
The story however didn't really need Quess, other than to show of the influence Char could hold on some people I suppose..
HAIL ZEON!.
Char's Counterattack is one of the best anime moves out there.
Its got animation that looks amazing even today, a pretty good story, and the sounds and music are dead on.
I dont have any complaints with the dub.
It helps if you have seen everything up at least to zeta gundam, zz isnt that essential.
its nice to see not-so-essential characters like astonage, but where the f is sayla?
and another thing: quess must die!.
Excellent film, considered one of the high points of one of the greatest sci-fi sagas ever created..
This movie is what it is, a film sequel to 1980s Japanese mecha sci-fi shows, and as long as that it what you expect out of it, you will love it!
It has everything you'd come to expect from Tomino's work; human drama, mecha action, and breathtaking visuals.
I suggest watching at least Mobile Suit Gundam, Mobile Suit Zeta Gundam and Mobile Suit Double Zeta Gundam before viewing this film, because the directors assume that you know the Universal Century plot line.
If you are not into Japanese film yet, I suggest a simpler title before diving into gundam, but if you are a veteran otaku, this movie is well worth it, even if the DVD is a little on the expensive side!.
One of the best I've ever seen (Contains Spoilers).
Mobile Suit Gundam: Char's Counter Attack is by far one of the best animated films I've ever seen.
How ever it could have done with some things changed (Contains Spoilers) #1 Quess Paraya: Not only is she annoying but you're actually happy when she dies.
#2 New Characters: It's kinda hard to care for people who die when this is the first time we're seeing them i.e. Chan and Kayra #3 Where the heck is Sayla: For any of you who have seen the original series and Zeta, not to mention read the books of Mobile Suit Gundam you know that Sayla and Amuro get together and it even says in Zeta Gundam that the two were together before Amuro was put under house arrest.
Plus I think it would really add to the fire which is Amuro and Char's Rivalry if Char found out Amuro was doing his little Sister.
And Last #4 Why kill off your Main people I mean Amuro and Char are by far the coolest Gundam Pilots ever.Well besides those things the film was great.
It was a little slow in the middle but it was great.
The Animation was great, the story was awesome, and this movie has the coolest fight between a Gundam Pilot and his Enemy Ever!!!.
Good movie, but victim of Bandai Entertainment R1 release..
The movie itself is great.
It's based on the novel, Beltorchika's Children, with several major differences.
I would've liked to have seen it more accurate to the novel.
The biggest difference is that in the novel, Amuro's girlfriend was Beltorchika (the same girl from Zeta Gundam), and she was pregnant with Amuro's child.
Unlike Chan, Beltorchika survived the novel.
Bandai did not want Amuro having kids, especially out of wedlock, and they did not want Amuro married, because the fan-girls wouldn't like it.
Aside from that, Amuro's Hi-Nu Gundam was also cut out, to save time.
I don't know much about the rest of the differences, but I would still say this is a very good movie.The American release, however, is trash.
There's no swearing at all, things are translated wrong ("ikimasu" does not translate to "let's do it!"), and "Sieg Zeon" is translated "Hail Zeon" in both the subs and the dub.
With a cataclysmic war resulting in over a billion deaths in the original series and many many more in series following, it's nice to know Bandai will be there to save the day, making sure that nobody gets hurt, or at least in the American version.
Blah..
Amazing movie, if you've seen the rest of the series....
Tomino finally cut the kiddy stuff after the fiasco that was ZZ.
Unfortunately for everyone in the united states, when CCA was released on DVD and shown on Cartoon Network, only the most die-hard fans of gundam who had gone out of their way to get their hands on illegal copies of Zeta Gundam (and in some cases the even more illusive Double Zeta Gundam) had any idea what was going on.
Seeing as the final episodes of Mobile Suit Gundam were never aired in the US because of 911, and Zeta Gundam was just released as a limited edition box set, and Double Zeta will probably not see the light of day for years to come, it made no sense for them to release the theatrical climax that concludes the saga after 3 series and roughly 145 episodes worth of women dying in outer space.
And lets face it.
Even gundam fans in Japan hated Double Zeta so it's gonna be a looooong time for we get it in the states just to see what happened and how Haman and Mineva are killed/deposed. |
tt0062301 | The St. Valentine's Day Massacre | An organized crime war breaks out between two rival gangs in Chicago during the Roaring Twenties. The leader of the Southside Mob is the notorious Al Capone, who resents his nemesis George "Bugs" Moran's activity in the city. Moran, too, wants control of the town's bootlegging and gambling operations. His lieutenants Peter and Frank Gusenberg use threats and intimidation to make tavern owners do business with them in exchange for "protection." Peter Gusenberg also argues and fights with his moll, particularly over her extravagant spending of his money.
Moran gives the order to have a crony of Capone's eliminated as the Chicago body count escalates. Inclusive are flashbacks to a lunchtime attack on Capone at a restaurant outside of Chicago by Hymie Weiss and Moran in September 1926 and the murders of Weiss in October 1926 and Dion O'Banion in November 1924 by Capone's gang.
In a bid to get rid of Moran once and for all, Capone goes to his winter home in Miami, Florida to establish an alibi while his henchmen, some dressed as cops, ambush and execute seven members of Moran's gang, including Peter Gusenberg, in a northside garage on February 14, 1929. Also at the garage - and caught in the attack - were Johnny May (Bruce Dern), a mechanic, and Reinhardt Schwimmer, an optician who enjoyed being around gangsters. Of the victims, only Frank Gusenberg, Peter's brother survives and is taken to a hospital. Despite knowing that he will soon die, Frank refuses to tell the police anything. Ironically, Moran himself, the apparent focus of the attack, was not in garage, and escaped certain death.
Each character is given a verbal voiceover biography as they are introduced, and in some video releases, the biographies of Rheinhard Schwimmer and Adam Heyer, two of the massacre victims, are removed from the soundtrack, possibly due to protest from surviving family members.
In the aftermath, Al Capone is shown dispatching those responsible for carrying out the attack. Moran dies in prison. No one is ever charged for the murders of St. Valentine's Day of 1929. | cult, suspenseful, neo noir, murder, historical | train | wikipedia | And if it falls short of being a great film, it's a near miss rather than one by a mile.In this dramatization of the final showdown between the South Side and North Side gangs for control of Chicago's underworld in 1929, Jason Robards takes center stage as Al Capone.
Not only does this provide an easily-understood guide for who's who, but it helps to get the viewer involved with these characters however unsympathetic or unsavory they might be.In brief but well-played roles, on the Capone side, there's Paul Richards as Charlie Fischetti, Joseph Turkel as Jake Guzik, and Harold Stone as Frank Nitti, with a more conspicuous role played by Clint Richie as Jack McGurn, who gets put in charge of organizing the title massacre.
Not to be overlooked is the always excellent Frank Silvera as Nick Sorello, a not completely innocent pawn used in trying to set up Moran.Almost every actor with a speaking role gets at least one good scene and a chance to shine, from the major actors right on down to several of the minor supporting players.
"The Saint Valentine's Day Massacre" is a very good gangster movie, released five years before the all-time great "The Godfather".
Also, the authoritative voice-over that runs the entire length of the movie pre-dates 'Goodfellas' by some 20-odd years.At first one might think that Jason Robards is woefully miscast as Al Capone, but this is not so.
The scene with George Segal and Jean Hale is reminiscent of the one between Glenn Ford and Hope Lange in "Pocketful of Miracles." And, after watching it, one wonders why Jean Hale's filmography is so short.Only Jason Robards, Jr. really overdoes it, but who's to say that Capone himself didn't overact a bit?
Whereas GODFATHER gropes for a rich, mythic timelessness, MASSACRE seems brittle, thin, a mere pastiche of, variously, 30s Warners gangster films, 40s B-movies, or Corman's own early work.
Whereas Coppola's characters have passed into popular culture, Corman's gangsters are thinly characterised, theatrical, parodic; whereas GODFATHER's plot is slow-burning, tense, silent, punctuated with shocking shards of tangible violence, MASSACRE is almost cartoon-like in its relentless gunfire, which, because it's not rooted in character, does not have as traumatic an effect.Some of us, however, might recoil a little from the major film's more questionable posturing, and MASSACRE has many excellencies.
Most immediately pleasurable is the plot, mathematically simple, as Corman narrates the titular bloodbath like a theorem, showing A (Capone) meeting B (Moran) to create C (the massacre).
The theatricality of the acting adds to this, with Robards especially hamming away to amusingly grand effect, but theatricality is embedded too, as narratively crucial scenes become sites for rhetoric, oratory, dramatic performance, an actor declaiming to an enrapt public, hanging (for dear life) to his every word.Add to all this Corman's stunning, playful direction, confident and fluid, making interiors and objects live, fixing characters in their place.
Hence we have been treated to The Prohibition/Depression Era Gangster films like ROGER TOUHY,GANSTER(1944)*, AL CAPONE and THE PURPLE GANG(both 1959), THE GODFATHER(s), I,II & III(1972,'73, '90) and soon and so forth, down thru the ages.And of course on TV we had THE LAWLESS YEARS(1959-61) and of course, last but hardly the least,THE UNTOUCHABLES(1959-63)to give further lore to the celluloid underworld.
After all, that's where Roger Corman used to hang his hat.This 20th Century-Fox production is really a well done movie, deserving of a new respect and frequent showings.** The costuming, the autos and the sets are all very good and approximate the real locales in Chicago and nearby suburban Cicero, Illinois.
The previously mentioned Narrator, Voice Actor Par Excellance, Paul Frees, is very busy from beginning to end in supplying us with factual material about the criminal careers of the peoples involved.As a historical fact we observe the Gangland Killings of Northside Big Shot Hoods Dion O'Bannion(Chicasgo Native John Agar)and Hymie Weiss (Reed Hadley) and the continued battling over territories.
When the untouchables were first broadcast on tv I enjoyed them.This movie is a continuation of that kind of entertainment even having some of the guest stars that were on that show like Paul Richards,Leo Gordon and Frank Silvera.Jason Robards plays Capone in his own style,not comparing him to other actors who have had the Capone part I would say his performance showed he was talented.A talent that would really show itself about a year later when he played the part of Cheyenne in"once upon a time in the west".In this gangster film a lot of quality is shown in the dress, cars and settings.The film is also in color which put it a notch above many previous mob films.The shooting scenes give the audience their fill.In one scene Bugs Moran and one of his men are doing a hit from a window,while his man lets loose with a chopper he uses a repeating shotgun(that's a guess)faster than anyone I've ever seen in the movies.What really could of gotten this movie a 10 is a bit more music,that kind of music that plays low but works on the emotions and nerves.Having a small part in the movie is Alex Rocco,later he would go on to play Moe Green In the "godfather".Curious dept: When Al Capone is being interviewed in Florida he is asked a question by a reporter with a moustache.To me the actor looks like Tony Dow from leave it to beaver.Anyone know?.
Featuring a good cast, including: George Segal, who's rarely better than he is here -- Ralph Meeker (Moran) --Corman's standby Dick Miller, Bruce Dern, and the intensified Jason Robards as Al Capone, in a part many feel he was miscast for.
"The St. Valentine's Day Massacre" was the first major studio/big budget film made by Roger Corman.
The film is not just about the mass killing but all the events leading up to it as well as an epilogue telling the sad finales of these folks.With an exceptional cast of excellent supporting actors, Roger Corman directing and a gritty sense of realism, you can't help but like and appreciate this movie.
When I first saw "The St. Valentine's Day Massacre" in 1967, I never would have guessed that legendary B movie maestro Roger Corman's attempt to break into the big-time would become one of my favorite films, but it did for a time.
Jack Nicholson is briefly glimpsed and even more briefly heard explaining why hitmen wipe garlic on their bullets ("If the bullets don't kill you..."), and he, too, echoes earlier caricatures of movie mobsters by speaking his one line in a silly rasp."The St. Valentine's Day Massacre" is a pleasant enough diversion for those who fondly recall their first exposure to Cagney and Bogart in "The Roaring Twenties" or scores of other gangster classics.
Funny thing is I think both Al Capone and Bugs Moran would have scoffed at the idea they would become modern mythic characters.Though it boasts color and better production values, the St. Valentine's Day Massacre is really just a warmed over version of what the public had seen only a few years ago on The Untouchables.
For that matter The St. Valentine's Day Massacre was also released too soon after the film Al Capone that starred Rod Steiger in the title role.Jason Robards, Jr. as Al Capone and Ralph Meeker as Bugs Moran fit the roles well.
The film stops just this side of being played for laughs.The St. Valentine's Day Massacre is a good factual retelling of the tale that kind of brought the gangster era in Chicago to a close..
So if Segal seems like Cagney, it is because they were both playing the same kind of doomed Irish/German hood.There is some criticism I have heard of Jason Robards as Al Capone but I find his performance great.
I watched this movie several times and Jason Robards does an excellent job as Al Capone.Yes I know Robert DeNiro did his part as Capone but the Untouchables was not about him so what he added to the movie was typical DeNiro('YOU Talking TO ME')attitude.Ben Gazzarra also did Capone but it seemed more of an effort for him to get it right, so the performance came out a little stale in the end.No,in my opinion Jason Robards did it right.I especially like the scenes that lead to the killing of Aiello..Where he talks to his friend Patsy and tries to warn him about the rumors he's hearing about Aiello trying to kill him and then finds out that Patsy was double-crossed by the person he thought was his friend (Aiello).The scene where Al (Robards)gets the phone call that Patsy is dead floored me because Jason Robards started speaking fluent italian with such anger it made the whole scene believable that you felt THAT WAS THE WAY IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE PLAYED!
Let me say this from the beginning, in the realm of serious film making "St Valentines day massacre" is not a great movie, but in the Corman realm, it is a masterpiece.
Stone as Nitti (for some reason Hollywood likes casting Jews as Italians, i.e. Brando & Caan in GF 1) the great Ralph Meeker as Bugs Moran and before they made it big, Bruce Dern as a driver for the mob and Jack Nicholson, in an uncredited part as the wheel man for the guys who actually do the "massacre" shooting at the Clark Street garage.
And, by what I saw, I don't think that he recklessly squandered that dough on this production.Set in the year 1929 (in the crime-drenched metropolis of Chicago), TSVDM's story is, indeed, based on actual events that led up to a very special sort of Valentine's Day surprise that made the most sensational headlines that you could possibly imagine.Featuring plenty of swell-looking cars, cheap-looking whores, and deadly, drive-by shootings, TSVDM is an exciting gangster picture of treachery and double-crosses that, convincingly enough, captures the nostalgic feel of a "Depression Era" America.Other than a few "damns", and a couple of "hells", thrown in for good measure, this rough, tough macho-man picture contained no profanity, whatsoever.My one big beef about this picture has to do with the gross miscasting of actor Jason Robards as the ruthlessly violent Al Capone character.I mean, let's face it, Capone was, without question, one of the meanest and lousiest bastards imaginable.
The film has a strange feel to it never really conveying the intensity of the violence of the situation but then getting close occasionally (for example a fight between a gangster and his moll).However it does feel like a B-movie in some ways it is a bit pulpy and it looks cheap at some points.
However it still manages to be enjoyable but never, ever gets close to the gangster heights of things like Goodfellas or Godfather.Robards is a strange choice for Capone and he pales when compared to De Niro and others who have played the role.
Likewise much of the cast don't convince as gangsters and they don't convey either the danger or the glamour of their life styles.Overall it's worth a watch once as it is pretty interesting and it is probably one of Corman's best films.
Even though Roger Corman's 1967 gangster flick The St. Valentine's Day Massacre is based on fact and boasts an occasional documentary-style voiceover, don't go expecting gritty realism: Corman's mobsters are larger-than-life caricatures, more Bugsy Malone than The Godfather, and the action is of the over-the-top, rat-a-tat-tat, tommy gun blazing variety.That said, Corman's approach makes for a whole lot of fun, the comic-book violence and scenery chewing performances being hugely entertaining, like a melodramatic '30s B-movie given a lavish, technicolor sheen.
Corman commands memorable turns from an excellent cast that includes George Segal (cast against type as vicious thug Peter Gusenberg), Jason Robards as Al Capone, Bruce Dern, Joe Turkel, John Agar, Corman regular Dick Miller, and even an uncredited Jack Nicholson.Visually, the film is a treat: from the opening snowy scenes of Chicago to the inevitable bloody finalé, the film looks like a million dollars (because that was the budget), with wonderful production design, excellent period detail and great cinematography.
And you may even feel sorry for Bruce Dern in this film.The movie was directed by Roger Corman, and features some of his stock players, including Dick Miller as one of the hit men.
This 1967 Roger Corman gangster flick is a rare up market sortie for the usually bargain basement producer, though the film looks to of been shot entirely on the old Fox studio lot, that and the colour film gives the movie a unrealistic unauthentic atmosphere.The movie is fairly accurate representation of known events though highly condensed but i found the narration particularly irritating and unnecessarily.But my biggest grip was the miscasting of Jason Robards as Al Capone he looks nothing like the real Capone and showed none of the charm that Capone was said to possess.
Big Al's Greatest Hit. The infamous St. Valintine Day Massacre in 1929 was the beginning of the end of Chicago mobster Alfonse "Big Al" Capone, Jason Robards, in that it drew the attention of the US Justice Department as well as IRS on him that eventually ended up putting him behind bars, for of all things tax evasion, and out of commission for good.
Director Roger Corman's first major movie that had him being taken seriously by the Hollywood big wigs who never thought that much of him and his talent as a serious filmmaker.P.S It was Capone's use of fake police to do his dirty work that was soon to be copied by fellow big time mobster "Lucky" Luciano two years later in the notorious September 10, 1931 massacre-Depicted in movies like "Stone Killer" & "The Valichi Papers"- of some 40 old line Mafia hoods in NYC and its surroundings that in the end made the mob or Mafia far more effective dangerous and successful, by letting non Sicilians to join it, then it even was during the Al Capone era..
I think Jason Robards was great as AL Capone he was neat and at the end close to the end of the movie he said why don't you Rodd in Hell.
The film focuses on the main players in both the gangs and focuses on the events up to and including the incident.As anyone who knows anything about Roger Corman would expect; the film does not benefit from a big budget and in some ways feels like a cheaper version of several big budget crime flicks.
The film has a sense of inevitability to it all the way through as it's always clear how it will end and while it contains no surprises; The St Valentines Day Massacre is at least a successful retelling of the famous event of it's title..
(his over-the-top portrayal of Al Capone has to be seen to be disbelieved), Ralph Meeker (appropriately tough as his Irish nemesis Bugs Moran), George Segal (as one of Moran's chief hoodlums at one point, ludicrously involved in a bedroom brawl with his blonde moll), Bruce Dern (as a meek mechanic and father of 7 kids innocently mowed down in the notorious titular carnage), Frank Silvera (quite good as an Italian small-time hood who ends up playing a pivotal role in the proceedings), Harold J.
Then again Roger Corman spent most of his budget on a cast of thousands so maybe they were the only Screen Actors Guild members available for this semi-epic.Imagine "The Untouchables" television show (but in color) with Ralph Meeker reprising his Raymond Chandler stuff (but as gangster "Bugs Moran") and Jason Robards in the advance stages of rabies infection.
Jason Robard excellent as Al Capone and the dude Bruce Dern as the mechanic dude, James May was cool as well.This is my favourtie gangster movie of all time and to me it's scandalous only getting 3 stars in the film guideDUDES- YOU MUST WATCH IT!.
He was supported by a great cast that included Bruce Dern (Coming Home) and Jack Nicholson (One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, As Good as It Gets).The documentary style employed by director Roger Corman (Frankenstein Unbound, The Wild Angels) really made the film as it was all based on true facts..
It's also funny to watch a gangster tracing the street on a Chicago map with his finger going from W-E instead of N-S.My heading refers to the fact that the films uncredited narrator is Paul Frees, famous cartoon voice actor who played Boris on the Bullwinkle show.
Great gangster movie from Roger Corman.
Roger Corman's "St. Valentine's Day Massacre" was filmed on a budget of exactly $1,000,000.
And look what he got for his cool million; Jason Robards, Ralph Meeker, George Segal, Joseph Campanella, Bruce Dern (a Corman stock player back then) and a host of other famous names including soon-to-be movie star Jack Nicholson.
The film stays relatively close to true events and except for the fact that Jason Robards doesn't look anything like the real Al Capone and is too old for the part, the movie is mostly historically accurate.
Robards could play this sort of almost lunatic anger better than anyone.Overall, not a bad movie, though more of a cult item for Roger Corman fans than gangster history buffs.
I'd like to think that Roger Corman and the cast had a jolly good time making this outrageous movie.
For "The St. Valentine's day Massacre", he was given a million dollar budget and three recognizable stars (Jason Robards, George Segal and Ralph Meeker) to play the leads.
The film was released by a major studio, 20th Century Fox.The picture tells the story of the famous 1929 Chicago massacre of seven gangsters and the events leading up to it.
Told in a documentary style not unlike TV's "The Untouchables" and narrated by Paul Frees, the story centers around the conflict between Al Capone (Robards) and "Bugs" Moran (Meeker).
Although Jason Robards doesn't look very Italian, he exudes The Big Feller's flamboyancy throughout this documentary styled movie about the infamous prohibition era massacre on February 14, 1929 at the Clark Street Garage in Chicago. |
tt0022286 | The Public Enemy | As youngsters in 1900's Chicago, Tom Powers (James Cagney) and his lifelong friend Matt Doyle (Edward Woods) engage in petty theft, selling their loot to "Putty Nose" (Murray Kinnell). Putty Nose persuades them to join his gang on a fur warehouse robbery, assuring them he will take care of them if anything goes wrong. When Tom is startled by a stuffed bear, he shoots it, alerting the police, who kill gang member Larry Dalton. Chased by a cop, Tom and Matt have to gun him down. However, when they go to Putty Nose for help, they find he has left town.
Tom's straightlaced older brother Mike (Donald Cook) tries, but fails, to talk Tom into giving up crime. Tom keeps his activities secret from his doting mother (Beryl Mercer). When America enters World War I in 1917, Mike enlists in the Marines.
In 1920, with Prohibition about to go into effect, Paddy Ryan (Robert Emmett O'Connor) recruits Tom and Matt as beer "salesmen" (enforcers) in his bootlegging business. He allies himself with noted gangster Samuel "Nails" Nathan (Leslie Fenton). As the bootlegging business becomes ever more lucrative, Tom and Matt flaunt their wealth.
Mike finds out that his brother's money comes not from politics, as Tom claims, but from bootlegging, and declares that Tom's success is based on nothing more than "beer and blood" (the title of the book upon which the film is based). Tom retorts in disgust: "Your hands ain't so clean. You killed and liked it. You didn't get them medals for holding hands with them Germans."
Tom and Matt acquire girlfriends, Kitty (an uncredited Mae Clarke) and Mamie (Joan Blondell) respectively. Tom eventually tires of Kitty; in a famous scene, when she complains once too often, he angrily pushes half a grapefruit into her face. He then drops her for Gwen Allen (Jean Harlow), a woman with a self-confessed weakness for bad men. At a restaurant on the night of Matt's wedding reception to Mamie, Tom and Matt recognize Putty Nose and follow him home. Begging for his life, Putty plays a song on the piano that he had entertained Tom and Matt with when they were kids. Tom shoots him in the back.
Tom gives his mother a large wad of money, but Mike rejects the gift. Tom tears up the banknotes and throws them in his brother's face. "Nails" Nathan dies in a horse riding accident, prompting Tom to find the horse and shoot it. A rival gang headed by "Schemer" Burns takes advantage of the disarray resulting from Nathan's death, precipitating a gang war.
Later, Matt is gunned down in public, with Tom narrowly escaping the same fate. Furious, Tom takes it upon himself to single-handedly settle scores with Burns and some of his men. Tom is seriously wounded in the shootout, and ends up in the hospital. When his mother, brother, and Matt's sister Molly come to see him, he reconciles with Mike and agrees to reform. However, Paddy warns Mike that Tom has been kidnapped by the Burns mob from the hospital. Later, his dead body is returned to the Powers home. | revenge, murder | train | wikipedia | "Public Enemy" brought two things to the screen: the little tough guy, fast-talking, unscrupulous gangster characterization by James Cagney which was to follow him throughout his entire screen career, and the grapefruit scene
Though "Public Enemy" created the Cagney image, he had already appeared in two other gangsters films for Warners, as a murderer prepared to let someone else pay for his crime in "Sinner's Holiday," and as a double-crossing hoodlum in "Doorway to Hell.""Public Enemy," however, was a bigger-budget production, directed by William Wellman, and it contained all the elements of success
It is the story of two brothers who become Chicago booze barons in the Twenties...
One was Cagney, the other Edward Woods
It is sometimes claimed that the story of "Public Enemy" is based on that of "Little Hymie" Weiss, leader of the North Side Chicago gang after the murder of Dion O'Banion by the Capones in 1924
What is more likely is that the Cagney characterization is based on "Little Hymie"; the plot itself is pure fiction
When Cagney, in his striped pajama, sat opposite Mae Clarke at breakfast and decided he had had enough of this boring broad, he wasted no time
He picked up half a grapefruit and planted it full into Clarke's face
It was a piece of screen action which has lasted down the years as the ultimate in violence from the gangster to his moll
Of course, it isn't it just seems that way
Since then gir1s have been slapped, kicked, beaten up, run over, shot, stabbed and raped, all in the tradition of mobster violence
But at the time this scene was daring, and the more daring because it was totally unexpected
We remember Mae Clarke in "Public Enemy," yet forget that Jean Harlow was in it, too
There may have been good reason
The New York Times, reviewing the film in 1934, commented: "The acting throughout is interesting, with the exception of Jean Harlow, who essays the role of a gangster's mistress." Cagney made violence and a life of crime magically seductive, and "Public Enemy" made him Warners' number 2 gangster, second only to Edward G.
Tom Powers (James Cagney) and Matt Doyle (Edward Woods) are just small time crooks, and so they remain throughout the movie.
But they are both bad (that's the word) and they use the freedom and opportunities of their democratic country to make evil.In "The Public Enemy" we find probably the first instances of the beautiful stylish cinematography and clever camera-work that will become the trade-mark of later gangster and noir movies.
Robinson to stardom, THE PUBLIC ENEMY brought forth another new screen personality, James Cagney, displaying a different kind of movie thug: rough, with guys who betray him; tough, with women who get on his nerves or play him for a sucker; and ready, to succeed by socking, punching, slapping or killing anybody who gets in his way.
His only soft spot for his mother, but far from being a "Momma's Boy." Through its passage in time element starting in 1909 Chicago, THE PUBLIC ENEMY plays in the biographical mode, displaying the origins of its main characters, Tom Powers and Matt Doyle, as boys (Junior Coughlan and Frankie Darro), leading to their adult lives (James Cagney and Edward Woods) as tough thugs.
As things start going well for Tom and Matt in the bootlegging racket under Paddy Ryan's (Robert Emmett O'Connor) leadership, Scheiner Burns, a rival gang leader, attempts on taking over Ryan's establishment, leading to more gun-play, especially for Tom, quick on the trigger, only to have things backfire on him.If not the most famous of the early gangster films, THE PUBLIC ENEMY is one of the most revived.
Whenever a topic pertaining to THE PUBLIC ENEMY arises, it's not the story that immediately comes to mind, but Cagney's individual scenes consisting of squirting beer from his mouth into the bartender's face; Tom's cold-blooded killing of Putty Nose (the man who let him take the rap for a crime) while playing his last song on the piano; and Tom's off-screen shootout with a rival gang in a fancy nightclub, stumbling out in the pouring rain saying to himself, "I ain't so tough." All these scenes pale in comparison until reaching its most chilling climax ever recorded on film.
Several documentaries profiling gangster films have indicated Woods as the initial star of THE PUBLIC ENEMY with Cagney assuming the subordinate role, with director Wellman seeing an error with the casting and wisely having these actors switch roles.
Donald Cook, Beryl Mercer and Robert O'Connor appearing in subordinate roles, are essential with their parts, but never outshine Hollywood's finest movie thug, a/k/a Public Enemy, James Cagney, whose tougher roles, ANGELS WITH DIRTY FACES (1938) and WHITE HEAT (1949) were years into his future.
I've always maintained that musicals and gangster films are the only two movie genres that date from the sound era.Of course this film about a young man's rise to prominence in the bootleg liquor business during Prohibition made James Cagney a star.
Her portrayal for me rings true.Oddly enough in The Roaring Twenties Cagney is a veteran who enters the rackets because he can't get a legitimate job and its easy money.Both The Public Enemy and Little Caesar are short films, edited down to the essentials so the viewer ain't bored for a minute.
A young and vicious hoodlum named Tom (James Cagney based his performance on Chicago gangster Dean O'Bannion, and two New York City hoodlums he had known as a youth) along with his fellow Matt (Edward Woods) rise up through the ranks of the Chicago underworld.
Edward Woods was originally hired for the lead role of Tom Powers and James Cagney was hired to play Matt Doyle, his friend .
He retired as a director after making the film, reportedly enraged at Warner Bros.' post-production tampering with a movie that meant so much to him .¨The Public enemy¨ , rating : Well worth watching , above average ; the picture will appeal to classic cinema buffs and James Cagney fans .
It is said that Cagney's role was originally much smaller in here but he was so good the script was changed to give him the starring spot....and his career took off from there.Speaking of billing and stardom, Jean Harlow gets second billing in this film but really has only a bit part; Blondell gets fourth billing has only a few lines.The story is a fast-mover and the movie is over in less than an hour-and-a-half.
However a couple of years on a new kind of star began to emerge, those with unique voices, full of character, not necessarily realistic but injecting some smart-sounding talk into cinema after the silents.James Cagney wasn't originally supposed to be the lead in The Public Enemy.
And what is more, although his role is consistently unsympathetic, Mr. Cagney manages to earn for Tom Powers the audience's affection and esteem." In its own time, the film was thought of as a bit too violent, and there are a few moments that might still be considered shocking today.
Author TJ English feels this is "perhaps the most influential gangster flick in the history of American movies", but that may be overstating it a little.Some credit must be given for "Public Enemy" succeeding and remaining a top film, however.
Public Enemy has gone down in film history as a piece of pre-code brutality, and some scenes are indeed worthy of notoriety: the grapefruit-in-the-face scene is legendary, and the piano execution has always impressed me.But without Cagney's fiery turn as Tom Powers, this gangster parable would be bland as toothpaste.
It states, "The Public Enemy is not a man, nor is it a character, it is problem that we, The Public, must solve." James Cagney gives a magnificent performance as Tom Powers, a man who started off as a petty thief with sidekick Matt Doyle (played excellently by Edward Woods) and rose to become a powerful beer smuggler during the era of Prohibition and Gang Rule.
THE PUBLIC ENEMY was an early gangster movie from Hollywood, starring the then up-and-coming actor James Cagney who would become synonymous with the genre in time.
Cagney gives an assured performance, even though his anti-hero character is difficult to like or empathise with.Although tame by modern standards, the direction of THE PUBLIC ENEMY makes certain scenes stand out like the notorious grapefruit moment.
A classic scene that one.Joining Cagney in the cast are blonde bombshell Jean Harlow, Edward Woods and Joan Blondell as Powers's mum.This is a must see for all movie fans.
James Cagney, a legend on-screen, gives a dynamic portrayal of Tom Powers, a hard-nosed man who we see evolve over time, from tripping little girls on roller skates to...let just say, "bigger crimes".
Cagney's character has a streak of cruelty along with his criminal activities, never more evident than in the grapefruit scene with MAE CLARKE or when his violent temper causes him to lose control over the death of a buddy.It was the start of Cagney's career and he makes the role a memorable one, although it's still not up to the standard set by his future role in WHITE HEAT.JEAN HARLOW and JOAN BLONDELL have little to do as the women in his life, but since the story revolves almost entirely around Cagney and his mob connections it doesn't seem to matter.
The rest of the film is a mixed bag.For starters, filmmakers showed Cagney (Tom Powers) and co-star Edward Woods (Matt Doyle) as boys Frank Coghlan Jr.
"The Public Enemy," which launched Cagney into the Hollywood big time, doesn't so much tell one cohesive story as much as it offers a series of vignettes linked by Cagney's sheer star power.Cagney is Tom Powers, childhood hoodlum who grows up to become an adult hoodlum and meets his end as part of a bloody gang war in 1920 Chicago.
The script affords most of the other characters one or two good moments of their own, and aside from a couple of loose ends, the story as a whole is well-conceived.Because of all these strengths, "The Public Enemy" is among the most memorable movies of the first few years of cinema's sound era.
Behind the condemnation of crime and hellish road that is growing up and raising one gangster stands out as a proposal for the viewer to live up to that image and to weigh it as the nature of which is not to be necessarily damned and negative to the world the law and the authorities, but that account with what there is in fact wrong and what is right.In essence, the point of the film is about how American society has to wake up and deal with the criminals, because the human relations by the day drifting towards the underworld.James Cagney as Tom Powers was after this film became a tough guy.
William Wellman directed this early gangster picture, that stars Jimmy Cagney as Tom Powers, a brazen and ruthless young man who is determined to make something of himself, so he, along with his best friend Matt Doyle(played by Edward Woods) become bootleggers during prohibition, becoming rich and powerful as a result, though Tom becomes increasingly violent and bold, which alienates himself from his straight-arrow brother, and puts his life in jeopardy, as a rival gang, fed up with Tom, decides to take drastic actions...
He had more screen presence than just about anyone who has ever appeared in any film in movie history.This is James Cagney's fifth film, The Public Enemy, as it still shocks today with its incredible violence and story of two best buddies who get into crime together.
Besides James Cagney the movie also features Jean Harlow in an early big and talking role.I loved how the movie had some extremely good and effective camera-work, featuring some wonderful looking compositions.A really great early gangster-movie!9/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/.
James Cagney is "The Public Enemy" in this 1931 film also starring Jean Harlow, Edward Woods, Donald Cook, Joan Blondell and Beryl Mercer.
The film concerns two buddies, Tom Powers (Cagney) and his friend Matt Doyle (Woods), who start getting into trouble as kids, becoming mobsters involved in bootlegging when they reach adulthood.
An astounding portrayal.The rest of the acting varies - Joan Blondell has a supporting role as Matt's girlfriend, and she's adorable; much is made of the grapefruit scene, though in truth, Mae Clarke, who had enjoyed some stardom beforehand, is actually uncredited as Kitty; Donald Cook acts in a very old-fashioned, melodramatic style, though he enjoyed a long career not only on Broadway but in film.
James Cagney as bootlegger and all around (not so) tough guy Tom Powers, is introduced to the world and the movie going public in this classic gangster movie from the pre-code era.
But it creates Tom Powers as more of a sympathetic character than Rico was and therefore we end up actually caring about this gangster who really does nothing to deserve our sympathy.Willam Wellman's style is also what makes The Public Enemy just that much more enjoyable to watch then Little Ceaser.
Even his patriotic and do-gooding older brother Mike (played a little too theatrically by Donald Cook) can't talk any sense into him and occasionally finds himself getting into fisticuffs with Tom as the black sheep of his family.Nobody is sacred in Tom's mind, not even the fair young ladies who get a good slap or verbal thrashing when they aggravate him long enough (this is the movie that contains the famous breakfast scene where a fed-up Cagney shoves a fresh grapefruit into Mae Clarke's yakety-yakking face).
Tom killing the horse that killed his friend Nails Nathan......the shootout in the poolroom where Tom stumbles out in the rain and collapses in the street with that famous quote, "I 'aint so tough".....the killing of Putty Nose...........and of course, the final, very grim scene.Cagney has such a screen presence that although he is bad to the bone, you still find him likable which makes the ending even more unpleasant.This film, along with Little Caesar and Scarface, should be required viewing for all who are interested in the history of film.
Powerful Portrait of the Rise and Fall of a Vicious Gangster, i'm Starting to like James Cagney Movie After Movie i've seen 3 films so far:
Childhood friends Tom Powers (James Cagney) and Matt Doyle (Edward Woods) end up as enforcers for the Chicago mob during probation in this excellent pre-code gangster film that established Cagney as a Hollywood 'tough-guy'.
Typical of the genre, 'The Public Enemy' is quite brutal at times: while Doyle seems to have some conscience, Powers is quick-tempered and abusive, and the film includes the legendarily misogynist scene in which he shoves a grapefruit into his girlfriend's (Mae Clarke) face.
The film is full of classic gangster slang, tough-guy posturing, towering fedoras, gats, and good-looking frails (including Jean Harlowe), Cagney is outstanding, and the final scene is unforgettable.
Perhaps the best of the early gangster flicks of the thirties.Magnificently shot by Dev Jennings and directed by William Wellman.And it has young James Cagney in a great performance,which made him a star.This classic has aged well.Thoroughly enjoyable.
The Public Enemy is not the best that the 1930s gangster movie period had to offer- Hawks' Scarface and Curtiz's Angels With Dirty Faces certainly top it in terms of overall quality and bravura performances- but it is still one you wouldn't want to miss to understand the force that was and remains so potent today of James Cagney.
The story of its kind has been told and told again (indeed the whole aspect of two kids starting young and then one turning criminal and the other straight, in this case shown with Tom and his brother Mike, would be repeated to better effect in Dirty Faces), but what draws one in, aside from Cagney and Harlow in her few weirdly captivating scenes, is how William Wellman keeps things focused.
Cagney, with that peculiar intensity and that face which is angelic and devilish by turns, gives a performance which brings out both sides, playful even when he's at his worst, and as his boyhood buddy turned gangster sidekick Edward Woods does a great job, never quite tipping over into pure comic relief.I'd like the movie even more if Joan Blondell and Jean Harlow had swapped roles (that speech Harlow murders in her big scene with Cagney would have been pretty damn sexy coming from the lovely Joan!), but most of the female characters have so little to do that it ends up being a very minor gripe.
He also gets to smoosh a grapefruit into Mae Clarke's face (producing the all-time classic still photo)."Public Enemy" joins the trio of classic gangster films, including "Scarface" (Hummphrey Bogard) and "Little Caesar" (Edward G.
The Public Enemy is a 1931 American crime film starring James Cagney and directed by William A.
The film is based on a real history where Cagney as usual is excellent in the role of Tom Power but not the rest of the cast, including Jean Harlow and Joan Blondell.
It still packs a powerful punch--serious drama, great acting, and a stark message.Most famous for the "grapefruit-in-the-face" scene between James Cagney and his on-screen girlfriend played by Joan Blondell (no, Jean Harlow was the OTHER moll in this movie!), Public Enemy is the granddaddy of nearly all crime-doesn't-pay flicks.
Told in crisply dated vignettes, the film progresses through the Depression and World War I as it offers Tom (Cagney) and brother Mike (Donald Cook) taking separate paths under the watchful eye of Ma Powers (Beryl Mercer).The movie has more than it's share of defining scenes, most viewers will identify with the Mae Clarke grapefruit smackeroo, but there are a lot more.
James Cagney's blazing performance as gangster Tom Powers in THE PUBLIC ENEMY did not just 'flip the script' of screen acting in 1931.
Tom Powers was meant to be played by James Cagney, he was cocky, fast talking, and loyal making him the perfect gangster on the movie screen. |
tt0084667 | Shakti | Aishwarya (Ileana D'Cruz) is the daughter of central union home minister Mahadevraya (Prabhu Ganesan). Due to security reasons, he doesn't allow his daughter to go on a trip with friends. She nonetheless goes to the trip. She then meets a guide, Shakti (Jr. NTR), who takes the group on a trip to several places. At first, she hates him because he uses every chance to get money from her. But when he saves her, she starts liking him. Afterwards, a few people who are chasing her finally find her in Haridwar and try to kill Shakti as he hurt them earlier. Their plan fails as Shakti turns out to be a Secret Agent and defends himself and catches the main person in this plan. When Aishwarya goes back to her father, he forgives her and asks whether she had taken a box in which there is a holy stone. When she replies in the negative, he says that it is more important than his own daughter. Later, when Shakti goes to a temple, the box falls off a basket his mother brought with flowers on top of it. They inform Mahadevaya who asks them to immediately come to Hampi with the box and Aishwarya. Their travel is blocked by a strong man named Raakha who is son of an Egyptian enemy Faqtooni (Pooja Bedi) who is then defeated by Shakti. He then kills one more person who tries to grab the box. Then Mahadeva Raya and a Swami (Nassar) come to him and then the flashback is revealed.
It is said that Mahadeva Raya'a father Vijayraya (S. P. Balasubrahmanyam) was a royal king who was extremely generous and had the blessings of god which gave him the power that whenever he touched the stone, it used to shine brightly emitting light. He reveals that apart from the 18 Shakti peeths there is a secret one which protects India and only their family knows of it. There is also a protector who guards it at all times. His name is Rudra (Jr. NTR). After every 27 years, they must go to the shakti peeth where the protector will perform several spiritual rites which must be compulsorily performed. When he starts performing them, an Egyptian king Mukhtar (Sonu Sood) who knows of this comes to destroy the shakti peeth. The protector kills the king but a person who works under the Mahadeva Raya's father, Janaki Varma (Jackie Shroff) cheats him and kills both the protector and Vijayraya as he sought money from the king. He also steals a sword (Maha Trishulam) which is necessary for the rites to be performed. When the protector is killed, his wife (Manjari Phadnis), at the same time, delivers a baby boy (Shakti) whom Rudra gives to his loyal servant. The servant tries his best to save the boy but circumstances force him to throw the boy into the river. The boy is then found by a childless couple who adopt him. After finding out his past, he sets out for revenge.
Shakti then goes to Janaki's country where he is presently the underworld don and a multimillionaire. He kills Janaki and gets the sword. Finally he goes to perform the rites but is stopped by the Faqtooni and her powerful son Raakha who comes back and cannot be defeated. The swami then tells him that the strong man can only be defeated by damaging his eyes. He then kills him and performs the rites. | murder, flashback | train | wikipedia | "Shakti", to my opinion, is one of the best Indian movies..
The film "Shakti" is one of my favorite movies.
Wonderful, accurate play of the actors Amitabh Bachchan and Dilip Kumar.
And one understands that he could act in both ways: like the hero of Amitabh Bachchan and like the hero of Dilip Kumar.
I love to watch this film again and again, and every time I do it, this movie touches my heart like at the first time when I saw it 20 years ago...
Though Shakti (power) is the story of a father and a son who get distanced because of a misunderstanding that took place in the childhood of the son and that distance gets bridged only when the life of the son comes to an end, let me make it pretty clear that this movie is made on the lines of the most memorable movie of Amitabh Bachchan's career which labelled him as the Angry Young Man forever, i.e., Deewaar (1975).
The writers of Deewaar, Salim-Jaaved revisited that classic movie seven years later by using the similar storyline which was originally for a mother and two sons, this time for a father, a mother and a son.
In Deewaar, the mother was torn between one righteous son and one criminal son of hers whereas in Shakti, the mother gets torn between the law-protecting husband and the law-breaking son.Supercop Ashwini Kumar (Dilip Kumar) is dead honest and highly dutiful who considers his duty above everything including his family.
And when the question comes whether to do his duty or to save the life of his little son who has been kidnapped by the baddies, he prefers performing his duty as a committed cop over performing his duty as a loving father.
Years later, when the son, Vijay (Amitabh Bachchan) is a grown-up man, the unresolved issues of childhood still trouble him.
The most hit by this father-son conflict which is more subtle, less loud is the mother (Raakhee).
Falling in love with Roma (Smita Patil) and then marrying her also does not bring any positive change in Vijay's life and finally he reaches what is the destiny of a criminal in the hands of his father only, realizing before his death how much his father loves him.The biggest strength of Shakti is neither the screenplay nor the characters but the power-packed performances of the lead actors performing the father-son duo.
Dilip Kumar and Amitabh Bachchan have delivered towering performances and so this movie has called a Clash of the Titans by many spectators as well as critics.
Action star Amitabh Bachchan has delivered another highly emotional performance in a role which contains the shadows of Deewaar.
One of the pillars of parallel cinema movement, (Late) Smita Patil joined the commercial cinema and her pair with Amitabh Bachchan appears quite cute on the screen.
The song - Arre Jaane Kaise Kab Kahaan Ikraar Ho Gaya is an example of the lovable romance and amazing on-screen chemistry of Amitabh and Smita.The movie starts with Anil Kapoor who plays the grandson of Dilip Kumar (and the son of Amitabh Bachchan who is no more) and his grandfather tells him the whole saga, explaining how difficult it is to do your duty as an honest and committed policeman.
Ramesh Sipply who happens to be the director of the epic movie, Sholay has ably directed this movie according to the demand of the script and the stature of the cast.R.D. Burman's music is good.
The ending dialog of Dilip and Amitabh underscores it perfectly when Dilip says to Amitabh, 'Main Bhi Tumse Bahut Pyar Karta Hoon Bete (Me too loves you very much, son) and then Amitabh asks, 'To Aapne Kaha Kyon Nahin Daddy ?' (Then why did you not express it, father ?).I rest my case..
Dilip kumar is an honest cop who declines to pay the ransom to free his child who gets away free any way.
The child grows up to be Amithabh Bachchan who has this love-hate relationship with his father.
One of the finest performance by the bollywood superstar of all time, Amitabh where he is able to display all colors of emotion, yet appears to be very restrained.
Dilip Kumar gives a matching performance too.
Simply one of the best bollywood movie of all time..
It is indeed a feast to watch the performance of the superstars in the movie.
And Amitabh stands shoulder to shouler with 'Mughal E Azam' Dilip Kumar.
Shakti starred two of the biggest Actors in Bollywood.
When Amitabh was young he was kidnapped by terrorist in return his father (Police Jailer) has to free the convicts.
Dilip Kumar in a sarcastic way tells the Terrorist that he wont release their men and that he doesn't care about his son.
Amitabh in a spectacular performance, but he was beaten in the awards against nominee Dilip Kumar playing his father in the same film.
It would be appropriate to call him the William Wyler of Indian cinema.With the help of two superstars, Dilip being more mature and compelling than Amitabh; Sippy was successful in churning out an emotionally charged blockbuster with excellent acting performance by all, even Ashok Kumar in his cameo role as the IGP.
Good songs and great acting by the cast constitute something which is devoid in present day movies.The climactic, action packed and emotionally electrifying ending of the film is something special to remember for the audience.
Dilip Kumar excels while Amitabh continues to carry the torch of stardom..
Two mega stars of Bollywood, Dilip Kumar and Amitabh Bachchan star in this action drama.
The story is pretty familiar, with the father cast as a dedicated inspector and son a criminal.
Instead of regular stunts and villains, the film focuses much on the psychological relationship between a father and the son, who both love each other immensely but fail to understand each other until it is too late.
In their roles as a father and son, both mega stars have performed brilliantly and instead of their star power they have shown their pure acting skills.
The flaws if you want to point out include certain sequences which are familiar from other Amitabh Bachchan movies like the regular cop and criminals chase, Amitabh's alcoholic scene, or the regular image of the police.Rating: 2 stars out of 4.
Amitabh drubs Dilip Kumar..
Amitabh plays a wayward son to Policeman Dilip Kumar.
Dilip Kumar who is known to have a polished way of acting without much shades in any film of his, he goes smoothly playing a father, he does very well as a disciplined police officer.
He is the bad boy of the movie, the story revolves around him, he is very good to his girl friend & is a mama's boy.
Everybody can see the vast difference when comparing why Amitabh was way too good, it was as easy as saying Amitabh is taller than Dilip & all big heroes physically also.
Rakhee too has 2 shades to the role she played, supporting both husband & son.
A must watch for every movie goer to watch Amitabh the supreme actor in action..
Shakti was famous for the fact that the two titans of Bollywood, Dilip Kumar and Amitabh Bachan starred in this movie for the first and only time.
The story revolves around Policeman (Dilip Kumar),his wife(Rakhee Gulzar)and their son(Amitabh).
Dilip Kumar tells the kidnappers that they can do whatever they want with his son.
Dilip Kumar was trying to fool the kidnappers but his plan goes awry when his son, who is still being held captive overhears him.
Amitabh even gets involved with gangsters who Dilip Kumar is trying to bring to justice.
The opening sequence, in which Anil Kapoor steps off the train to be greeted by his grandfather Dilip Kumar is similar to that of Sholay.
Amitabh was good but it was Dilip Kumar in my opinion that stole the entire show as loyal policeman Ashwini Kumar.
The end scene is a real tearjerker and is testament to not only Dilip Kumar talents but also Amitabh Bachan's.
I consider Shakti to be not only one of Amitabh's best movie of the 80's but I consider it to be one of the top 10 most underrated Bollywood movies ever..
Another great performance from Amitabh Bachchan.
Amitabh Bachchan plays Vijay Kumar, son of a righteous police officer, who comes to resent the law because he feels his dad's job causes him to neglect his family.
Even though I could watch Amitabh Bachchan all day (lucky given the length of Bollywood movies ), I did get kind of bored watching basically the same things happen again.
Amitabh gets to smoulder intensely a lot more, and again exudes the levels of cool and charisma that make him India's number one superstar.There's quite a lot to like in SHAKTI, and it's perhaps unfair that I judge it after so recently seeing DEEWAR.
In a way it's like Yash Chopra's 'Deewar' except that this time it is between father and son instead of two brothers.
The movie drags on and on for hours when it could have easily been tightened.Amitabh Bachchan is stiff and downright bad in many scenes, especially in the final sequence which is unintentionally hilarious.
His best scenes are those with Rakhee and Smita Patil (minus the drunken sequence - which was another example of bad acting).
For the most part, Dilip Kumar does the best with what he's given but he too has his moments of bad acting.
She was known in the 80s for playing the typical mother roles but in 'Shakti' she is the only actor who manages to draw sympathy from the viewer.
A mother and wife so torn between her husband and son that it takes a serious toll on her health but even that doesn't resolve the conflict between Ashwini and Vijay.
The actress downplays her part with élan and this is perhaps one of her best and most underrated performance.To sum it up, 'Shakti' is a poorly made movie.
The highlight of the film is the powerhouse performances by both the legends-Amitabh Bachchan and Dilip Kumar.
Amitabh able displays all emotions with such talents(His character is more or less similar to that of Deewaar) and he gives and equally stunning performance.
Dilip Kumar too gives a superb performance that won him the Best Actor award.
Deewar and Shakti have similar story lines but yet they are so different.
In addition to being the story of a mother torn between two sons on the opposite side of the law, Deewar is also a comment on the prevailing socio economic conditions in India in mid 70s.
More precisely the tense relationship of three characters - father, mother and son.
Its the story of a father and son conflict with the mother unable to side with either.
Remember the final scene where dying Vijay (Amitabh Bachchan) tells his father Ashwini (Dilip Kumar) that in spite of trying hard to not he always loved his father.
The movie was one of the most awaited movie of the year as it was seen as the war of two of the greates actors of indian cinema Dilip Kumar and Amitabh Bachchan.
Dilip Kumar got filmfare award and Amitabh all the accolades.
The plot is that Dilip kumar is an honest cop who declines to pay the ransom to free his child who gets away free any way.
The child grows up to be Amithabh Bachchan who has this love-hate relationship with his father.The intensity of their hatred was so intensely presented that nobody even notices the performances of Rakhi and Smita Patil.
If not the greatest movie it is definitely one of the greatest movies of all time with two memorable performances The last scene of the movie where amitabh dies is best and very emotional.
amitabh is know as angry man but I think his best comes out when he does an emotional scene like this one..
After Sholay and the not successful Shaan, Ramesh Sippy came together again with Big B this time in a more serious Shakti(1982) which brought Amitabh and Dilip Kumar for the first and only time together.
The film was panned by Amitabh fans due to the feeling that DK overshadowed him or was given a better role but thats all foolhardy.
The film is more of a psychological drama where Dilip Kumar who plays a cop and Amitabh who plays his son are on 2 sides of a coin.
In the start the young Amitabh is kidnapped by Amrish Puri, Dalip Tahil and then DK refuses to accept their options and says do what they want with his son which he says in rage but it creates bitterness in AB's character.
Amitabh grows up to be a bad guy who supports the gangsters and this creates a Deewaar like situation but there's lot of difference.
The film also has a subtle romance between AB and Smita Patil(who starred with him in Namak Halaal too in the same year) and there also live in which was rare in Bollywood in 80s.
while Lata's Humne Sanam ko Khat Likha is good, Maangi ThI Dhua on DK and Raakhee is a good song by Mahendra KapoorDilip Kumar is simply fantastic in his role as usual, in the same year he had Vidhaata too.
Raakhee is good in her role, while Smita Patil is great Amrish Puri, Dalip Tahil, Khulbushan Kharbanda are all good We also have young Anil Kapoor in a cameo before he debutted as a lead.
The movie starts and ends with strong emotions, where a mother though over-whelmed with the decision of her son is still proud of the high- morality and high-dignity path which her son decided to take, despite listening to a story associated with his very close & dear ones, and which tests the moral principles of a man who compromised just too much in his personal life so that he could hold his head high and contribute towards a large cause by abiding to his professional duties.high commendations to great Dilip Kumar who played in an impacting manner the character of a duty and principle-bound police cop who in situations of dilemma between profession and personal life, always consistently is loyal to his profession and who advocates equality of treatment to any criminal, be it a stranger or a direct relation, but at the same time does not bear undue grudge against his son for not following a correct path and who always makes an attempt to remind and persuade his son to leave the world that he has got into.a respect to his character, who expresses a tremendous degree of happiness after his daughter-in-law informs him of her marriage with his son, it just reflects the open-mindedness of the character, who welcomes her so graciously even though there are ongoing clashes between the father and the son.
in fact admire the writer for elegantly creating characters with starkingly varying traits, such as an highly emotional and sensitive mother, who constantly is battling out to resolve the differences between the father-son and who manages to exhibit a feeling of respect & awe towards her husband and concurrently exhibiting a feeling of love and affection towards her son, despite knowing the weaknesses and drawbacks of both these people.
and of the character of Smita Patil, who does not discourage her son from becoming a police officer.
Though she loves her husband, she is appreciative and cognizant of the dilemmas of her father-in-law and very well understands the reasons of her father-in-law's behaviour and outlook towards her husband.The character of Amrish Puri though having a smaller role comparatively, is important in the script for indirectly straining the relations between the father and son.
Though the character of Amitabh Bacchan is shown to compromise on morality, and possess a feeling of animosity towards his father's principles, the acting is worth applause.
The winning of filmfare best actor award of Dilip Kumar says everything about his performance.
A great watch which would take you to the old days of stardom of young angry maverick Amitabh Bacchan.
The Police Officer (Dilip Kumar), when asked by gangster JK (Amrish Puri) to pay up the ransom (in exchange for release of his young son,) out of bravado, retorts that the gang can kill his kidnapped son Vijay, he will never compromise.
This incident is the turning point of the movie as a whole and though the Police Officer-father is somewhat contrite about this, the 'wayward' son (Amitabh Bachchan) never sees him as a father.
Acting by Amitabh Bachan and Rakhi was amazing...it was a little awkward to see them in son and mother's role considering they both played romantic roles in most previous films but I guess, realistically speaking, Indian backward mentality of any woman 30+ starts playing mama's role for same actors they starred opposite.
Same thing is happening with today's starts like Sharukh and Salman who are close to 50 and yet playing opposite to girls who could be their daughters but same role is never reversed with an actress in her 40s starring opposite to actors in their 20s.Coming back to this movie...I was surprised seeing so many positive feedbacks even though story highlighted a big flaw (IMHO) where who is sane mind would put their job/ duty over their family?
In reality, I don't think...it, for me, this point is debatable and sadly the writer (Khan and Akthar) appear to be enforcing their point of view till the very end without even realizing that two people (son and mother) both died because of father's duty in the movie.
The mother died saving father and son was killed by father in the name of duty and there was no sense of regret or realization from the character of Dilip Kumar of his decisions were questionable in the movie.I will give it 3 out 10 only because of superb acting by Big B and Rakhi. |
tt2231253 | Wild Card | Nick Wild (Jason Statham) is a recovering gambling addict who takes odd jobs in Las Vegas as a "chaperone" (his version of a bodyguard) to support his addiction. After helping a client impress a woman (Sofia Vergara), he accepts a proposition from a young man Cyrus Kinnick (Michael Angarano) to show him around Vegas and provide him with protection while he gambles.
While eating at a diner, Nick's waitress friend Roxy (Anne Heche) hands him a message from a woman he knows, Holly (Dominik Garcia-Lorido), who wants him to stop by her house. Holly, a professional escort, explains she had a date the previous night at the Golden Nugget. Afterward, she was brutally raped and beaten by three unknown men in their hotel room. Holly asks Nick to find out who they are so that she can sue them.
Nick discovers that the man responsible for raping Holly is Danny DeMarco (Milo Ventimiglia), a gangster. DeMarco had his two thugs dump her in a hospital car park. Nick goes to the hotel to confront DeMarco, disguised as someone sent by another criminal. A confrontation develops but Nick defends himself, overpowering DeMarco and his men, who are tied up as Nick calls Holly. In the room, Holly contemplates castrating DeMarco, who breaks down and begs her forgiveness, Holly decides to take the $50,000 from DeMarco's desk and leaves.
Holly splits the money with Nick and leaves Las Vegas. Nick takes Cyrus to a casino. Playing blackjack with dealer friend Cassandra (Hope Davis), Nick then goes on a huge winning streak with the next dealer, amassing over a half a million. But when he goes to the cashier, he has a sudden anxiety attack, and loses his winnings as well as his original $25,000 on a single blackjack bet with Cassandra. The next morning, Cyrus, revealed to be a self-made millionaire, wants Nick to mentor him on being brave, but Nick declines. At the bar, DeMarco's men arrive to deliver Nick to DeMarco, but Nick beats them off.
Nick meets with Baby (Stanley Tucci), the mafia boss of Las Vegas. Baby has received a complaint from DeMarco, who claims that Nick broke into his hotel room, pistol-whipped him, and killed two of his men – all to fund his gambling addiction. Baby takes Nick to a room with DeMarco, where Nick tells his side of the story: that DeMarco killed his men later and that DeMarco bears a cut on his penis. Baby tells DeMarco to drop his pants to prove Nick wrong, but he refuses, and leaves.
At the local diner, Cyrus offers Nick a check for $500,000 and a plane ticket to Corsica for what he has learned from Nick. DeMarco and his men appear in the diner. Cyrus shows his newfound manliness by singing loudly as a distraction so Nick can escape. Nick thinks about his sailboat and then kills the thugs and DeMarco with his utensils behind the diner. Afterwards, Cyrus insists Nick take the check and the ticket, and Nick accepts. Nick then drives out of Las Vegas. | comedy, suspenseful, neo noir, murder, violence, flashback, revenge, sadist | train | wikipedia | Even seeing Jason in a movie like The raid, would be better than movies like this (wild card).I gave it a 6/10 because i enjoyed it, only because of the fight scenes..
OK, it is not that action filled, and the plot may not be the most original (what plot is anyway?), but I really enjoyed this movie.Jason Statham makes one of his best performances here, I have to say.
I had to re-watch the longest one like, three times immediately after the credits rolled.Go into this expecting an easily digestible thriller/drama with a couple, two, three great action/fight sequences and you are golden!.
Admittedly, I'm a big Jason Statham fan, since he's about the only action star worth watching anymore, but what makes this work is the director doesn't ask too much of him.
No big demands on his acting, just let him be himself and show off his martial arts skills -- which, after all, is what we watch him for.Statham plays a compulsive gambler who earns his living in Las Vegas by providing his unique services to people who need help.
If your a fan of his films and are looking for action, you'd be better off watching Safe, Expendables I/II, Transporter,Crank Homefront or many of his other better movies.5/10.
The trailer for Wild Card is very misleading, the film is not just a revenge movie staring Martial Art expert, ass-kicking, lethal weapon Jason Statham.
There are a lot of side stories in this one film, the stories give you context, a get better sense of who Nick Wild (Statham) is, but in this case it's a little bit much.
He talks as much as he fights in this film and if you like Statham throwing fits and handling knives you'll be pleasantly surprise to him talk.Wild Card is a better movie than I expected, don't get me wrong it's not movie of the year, but it's kind of good and entertaining..
With De Palma stepping away, Statham enlisted the competent but much less exciting Simon West with whom he'd already collaborated on The Mechanic and The Expendables 2.West was excited to work with legendary screenwriter William Goldman again after The General's Daughter and assembled an impressive supporting cast around Statham, the likes of Stanley Tucci, Anne Heche, Jason Alexander and many more.
A vastly underrated actor, Statham easily holds his own among these and gives a fine performance as Nick Wild, first played in the 1986 original by Burt Reynolds.That picture was a notoriously troubled production that left a sour taste in William Goldman's mouth, but he obviously thought highly of his screenplay, as story-wise, Wild Card plays almost exactly like the original, beat-by-beat.
However, watching the on-screen proceedings it is hard to believe this is the same man responsible for such classics as Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, All the President's Men, The Princess Bride and so many others.From its top notch cast to its look and pacing, Wild Card feels like it wants to a gritty drama, a moody character piece with bursts of action in the vein of Michael Mann's Collateral, a film with which it shares quite a few characteristics.
It's a tribute to the "loner" action-hero movies of the '70's - with Jason Statham as a Steve McQueen-esque epigon.Of course it helps to have the Sin City as a location, where the glitz and modern life can't muffle the sweating smell of mob goons and dirty old games..
He plays the "I'm in pain, I have a lot of junk going on and if anyone messes with me; they're gonna be hurtin for certain...This movie (wild card) slipped by un-noticed, I just watched, for the first time, today.
When the action takes place then this flick is at it's best but it also has a few moments at the casinos were Nick (Statham) is playing blackjack and it takes too long to be honest.It's really the director Simon West (from Con-air (1997) and Lara Croft (2001) fame) who takes this flick to a better level.
The story is about Nick (played by Jason Statham) a bodyguard in Las Vegas who is stuck in a dead end situation and desperate to make it out of there.
It looked very realistic and that added to the enjoyment of the action scenes.However, all in all, then "Wild Card" ended up as being a mediocre movie by Jason Statham standards, and I must admit that I was somewhat disappointed once the movie came to an end after an explosive last 15 minutes or so..
Las Vegas bodyguard Nick Wild (Jason Statham) has a gambling problem and gets in bad with the Mob. Oh, oh.Seems like the script for this Jason Statham movie was done in a matter of minutes, but the reason we watch a Jason Statham movie is to watch his fight scenes.
(hey, it's only movie magic)Since the story was lacking, I was surprised to see the notables herein: Jason Alexander, Sofia Vergara, Anne Heche, and Stanley Tucci as Baby who probably had the best role within as he is always good even if we don't recognize him at first with a newer toupee.
Except for the fight scenes which were choreographed to perfection, this was disappointing, but watchable for a Jason Statham movie.
It gives the impression it's going to then become a rather tough serious revenge thriller , but then the knockabout cheekie chappie light hearted thrills of nearly every Statham movie you've ever seen comes to the fore again along with an excess of speed ramping in the action scenes .
As jason is the hero , so many of us waiting and expecting for an action from the beggining but its a crime drama based action movie.movie is very slow in the start , lot of conversations till 35 mints.overall it is one time watch movie and jason fans will not disappoint with action and fight scenes in the middle and at the end..............
Nick Wild (Jason Statham) is a bodyguard and recovering gambling addict living in Las Vegas, Nevada.
I think the reason the film has received negative reviews is because one goes into this movie looking for a Vegas action movie, and they get a character study which are movies that many people find boring—particularly someone looking for a movie like "21" (2008).
But there's no great drama or great emotional impact.As an "action thriller" it is better than most, but the fight scenes don't measure up to "Transporter 1".Fine, mindless entertainment but it lacks the non-stop action of some of Mr. Statham's other films..
It seems, that out of nowhere Nick Wild, the Titular Character, is given a Life Defeating Gambling Problem, for What?, Who Knows?A Bunch of Cameos try to Fill in the Boredom Between the Few Fight Scenes but Hardly Succeed in making this anymore than an Average B-Movie with an A-Movie Talent Roster.
Unfortunately, the action scenes can be counted on the fingers of one hand.Nick Wild (Jason Statham) is a kind of bodyguard offering his services to wealthy gamblers as they are trying their luck at the gaming tables in the casinos of Las Vegas.
Some of the best fight scenes I've ever seen in a Jason Statham film!.
Jason Statham takes over the lead role, from Burt Reynolds, and the movie costars Michael Angarano, Milo Ventimiglia, Dominik Garcia-Lorido, Hope Davis, Sofia Vergara, Anne Heche, Jason Alexander and Stanley Tucci.
I loved the movie, and think it's one of Statham's best!Statham plays Nick Wild; a bodyguard working in Las Vegas, who's also trying to get over a compulsive gambling problem.
Simon West also does an excellent job directing the flick; which has some of the best fight scenes I've ever seen in a Statham film!
The film pretty much has everything you could want, in a cool crime thriller; especially if you're a Jason Statham fan!Watch our movie review show 'MOVIE TALK' at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUT8JIkuU9Y.
Wild Card is another action film starring Jason Statham.
The final action scene is amazing, and this is where someone like Jason Statham really excels.
I love a good score in cheesy action films like this, and if you do as well then you will be disappointed as well.In closing, Simon West and Jason Statham offer up another great action film together.
Something that no other film to my mind has managed to pull off since Transporter.There's the right quantity and quality of dark humour, sharp dialogue and contrasting personalities - against a sordid yet appealing background - among the fight scenes (and damn fine ones at that) to make this a well rounded action movie.Those of us who have a penchant for this genre are more often than not disappointed with the result - poor acting, shallow pseudo-intellectualism, mindless bangs and booms,...
A Las Vegas bodyguard with lethal skills gets in trouble with the mob when he helps a young female friend who was left for dead.Based on the 1985 novel Heat (Edged Weapons in the UK) by William Goldman and the remake of Burt Reynolds' Heat (1986) there's a fast car, periodic fight scenes, a mild mannered moralist character, Jason Statham must check them off and sign on the dotted line.
The setting feels real and written intentionally or not what it lacks in pacing structure and credible fleshed out supporting character relationships it makes up for with Statham's charisma and hand to hand action setups.Part revenge, part self realisation film, its reminiscent of The Gambler (1974), Payback (1998)/Point Blank (1967), Get Carter (1971 and 2000 remake) to name a few.
Quickie Review:When Nick Wild (Jason Statham), a bodyguard for hire in Las Vegas gets into trouble with the mob he must risk it all to finally have the life he dreams of.
Wild Card is the typical Jason Statham movie, depending on the person that could be either a good or a bad thing.
I think that will be the appeal for many others who watch this movie.First off the action scenes are definitely a lot of fun.
Instead watch without even reading the summary and the surprises might make the movie more enjoyable.When checking out a Jason Statham movie the first thing I want to know is, does it show off his great fighting skills?
jason statham's movie who is father of action i already told that is men who fit in action scene and it just make scene like real and they all suite to his and also he look like angry men well in this movie nothing interesting in story in beginning he take a revenge of a call girl's who is beaten by some guy and after this he wins enough million money in casino in whole night and in morning he just lost all of it in one game and he just think more not much fighting scene is exist here maybe twice or thrice scene but they twice are very good he just kill men's not with guns with some instrument like spoon etc.
Great action sequences and a good performance by Statham, but the story line leaves a lot to be desired.
Every year we seem to get at least one jason statham action movie and this year was no different with this film.
-Jason Statham's fight scenes in this movie are the best I think I've ever seen in any of his movies.-Also, I think this is basically a better version of The Gambler (2014)..
Jason Statham is a very good actor who sometimes wastes his talents in mediocre films like this one.
This film is like most of his other films, too few very good action scenes, with week story lines and plots.
For fans of the Stath's famous butt kicking routines, Wild Card (a remake of an old Burt Reynolds flick) may come as a bit of a shock to the action loving system as while it features some pretty impressive moments of the bald brit taking it to the bad guys with all manner of implements (credit cards, poker chips, ash trays etc.), it's a much more mellow and downtrodden affair than its synopsis suggests and also a wildly strange tale that acts as one of Statham's more original yet not overly impressive movies in some time.Based on William Goldman's novel and written by the author, Simon "Con Air" West's film is a mixture of dark humour, violent showdowns and a lesson in why one shouldn't gamble and also a film that fails to nail down a centre point that could've allowed Wild Card to be a truly memorable excursion to Vegas.
The film also has a considerably strong start that makes one think where in for a one heck of an unpredictable journey only for much of the films good work to become undone in an overly complicated and unfulfilling middle act.Statham's Nick Wild is one of his typical tough guy characters, strapped with his usual satirical quips and mean looks and his at his most interesting in the films early stretches where we're unsure of just who or what this man is or capable of.
It feels as though Wild Card could've been a longer movie, a strange thing to say in today's climate of films outstaying there welcome, yet it feels like it's a rushed story that had more to give to its audience and actors.A whole lot more off kilter than I personally was expecting, Wild Card certainly isn't your typical Statham tale yet it has many of the familiar elements that have now become a hallmark of his career.
Like most Statham movies, you get some cool fighting scenes were Nick Wild walks of untouched but I still was expecting more after seeing the trailers.
On the plus side, I did feel for Nick Wild when he was gambling away his money but apart from that, it's just another average movie from Statham.Budget: $30million Worldwide Gross: $2millionI recommend this movie to people who are into their action/crime/dramas about a bodyguard in Las Vegas who has a gambling problem and the mafia on his tail.
I really like watching Jason Statham movies.
It's like the writers were Vegas and decided to have some action and hence, we got a Statham movie.
If you love Statham, you'll watch this movie no matter what cause he is again really good at action scenes.
The biggest values of the movie are some performances (Jason Statham as Nick Wild and Stanley Tucci as Baby, above all) and well executed fighting scenes.All in all, not so bad, and less that 1.5 hours.
I like jason statham in movies albeit he plays the same character.
Before I get started I want to point out that I'm a huge fan of Jason Statham and the typical action type film that he puts out, looking at the trailer I thought this was it.The movie seems confused as to what style it wants to portray, at first it seems like it's going to be all action then it flips to all drama and character development and then back and forth again.
All in all this is played up like an action film, delivered halfheartedly as a drama and barely worth watching unless you have nothing being to do and admire Jason Statham..
Movie Review: "Wild Card" (2015)Actor Jason Statham delivers in a tailored action-character role as Nick Wild as one of Las Vegas common inhabitants, seeking a glorious exit with an hardship-calculated money-amount of so-believed eternal bliss, when Wild blows his chance gets into trouble with the usual suspect gang, alongside glamorous supports from actress Sofía Vergara over Dominik Garcia-Lorido to always upscaling Stanley Tucci under the fast-tracked direction of "Con Air" approved director Simon West, when this 85-Minute movie brings the goods for a quick take of entertainment and leading man in best form to enjoy with no strings attached in two excellent-executed because precisely-chereographed as elegantely captures gun-hand-gun combat scenes with sharp-edged twist of splendid slow-motion shots much to portfolio benifits for capable as talented cinematography Shelley Johnson, elevating this action-drama to be a "Wild Card" in motion pictures indeed.
Nick Wild is also a great Statham character because while he can handle himself physically, and he does in some tremendously choreographed, beautifully shot, violent as all hell fight scenes, he also has a nice sense of humour, a strong moral principle and a weakness for the cards.
In WILD CARD, Jason Statham plays Nick Wild, a hard drinking bodyguard with a gambling problem who is trying to leave Las Vegas.
Wild Card is a Jason Statham action vehicle which is also a remake of a flop Burt Reynolds movie called Heat from 1986.
Jason Statham is the only active movie star these days who ONLY does action films and nothing else.
Jason Statham plays Nick Wild, a jaded bodyguard who has a gambling addiction problem.
That is all you need to know."Don't be fooled by the awesome poster that has Jason Statham pulling off an acrobatic stunt because Wild Card is more of a character driven drama than an action film.
Jason Statham is supposed to be this compulsive gambler living in Las Vegas working as a fixer thanks to his special skills, but we would't actually know these things about the character until about forty minutes into the film so everything leading up to that seems like a waste of time.
This time it's Jason Statham as Las Vegas security expert Nick Wild, who possesses a particular set of skills
to go along with a drinking and gambling problem.
Probably because it was spaced out well.-Wild Card is an action movie with Jason Statham.
I even went back at the end and watched the fight scenes again they were so good.The cast give reasonable performances and all in all its not a bad film at all.
Wild Card gives us what we are used to from a Jason Statham film, we know he will end up in a fight against multiply opponents while trying to do the right thing.
(7/10)Action: Wild Card has a couple of fight scenes that all come off very good in the end. |
tt0093286 | It's Alive III: Island of the Alive | This film is set years after the first two. The movie begins with the scene of a woman going into labour in a cab. It is raining at night and the cab driver in panic runs out to get a police officer to help. As the officer goes to deliver the baby he asks the driver to call for an ambulance from a public phone. When the driver comes back, he sees the mutant baby killing the officer and the mother. Next, the movie jumps to the scene inside a church where the corpse of the dead mutant baby is found. From here on the main plot of the movie gradually builds up. First, the courtroom drama where Judge Watson (Macdonald Carey) decides that Jarvis' mutant baby and four other mutant babies who are under the government custody be quarantined in some remote deserted island. Second, scenes of how Jarvis (Michael Moriarty) faces his life after the courtroom drama. Third, the incursion to the island of the mutant babies by the pharmaceutical company's boss, Cabot (William Watson) and a few of his people to kill the babies so that his company can manufacture again the drug which resulted in these mutant babies, but under a different label. In the end, all of them are killed and eaten by the mutant babies who have grown bigger while the helicopter pilot is killed on board the helicopter when he tries to escape and the helicopter explodes in mid-air crashing into the sea. Fourth, Lieutenant Perkins (James Dixon) informs Jarvis personally that they have been recruited by Dr. Swenson (Art Lund) to join him and his team in an expedition to the mutant babies' island. The expedition ended in disaster with only Perkins and Jarvis being left alive. Finally, Perkins is left alone on the island while Jarvis, his mutant son, the other grown mutants and a new infant mutant leave the island in the sailing ship which brought Jarvis to the island for Florida. In Cape Vale, Florida, Jarvis' mutant son gets to meet his mother, Ellen (Karen Black) with his female mate and leave their infant child with her before they die from measles. | cult, satire, violence | train | wikipedia | A father fights for the right for his mutant child to live, the court grants that and his child plus another 4 are sent to an island to live.It was Warners Brothers idea for a third It's Alive film, which would be shot back to back with Return to Salem's Lot. It was meant to be release straight to video with RTSL, but it got a limited theatrical release.This film had a little bit more money than that of the 2 previous films, but this time around the film is an over the top black comedy compared to the bleak and serious tone of the first two films, which had subtle humour.This film was far less effective in the horror and atmospheric department, but not the laughs and it's been more action packed than the previous films.
Though it is a stupid and lightweight film, it was still quite fresh (with a different take on the Alive films) and enjoyable to watch
that's if you're in the right frame of mood.Cohan has a knack of casting the right people, with reasonable performances or you can call them hammy from Karen Black playing the mother to one of the babies and James Dixon (only one in all 3) as Detective Perkins and the standout performance and scene stealer would have to be Michael Moriarty as the father.
He brings a strong central character that has a weird sense of humour and goes suddenly bananas with his lunatic behaviour when the film goes along.Not only is the casting good, but also the script is full of wit and satirical comments (like the other 2 films) on American and Cuban relations, people's emotions, Aids and the media.
Too much of the creatures are shown, making it laughable (especially the grown-up versions of the babies), but that's what makes this fun viewing.The film seems to lose itself and becomes incredibly stupid when the grown up mutant's decide to leave the island and head back to the mainland.
Larry Cohen returns after nearly a decade to finish off his mutant baby trilogy with mixed results.
Stephen Jarvis (Michael Moriarty) battles in court for the rights of the mutant baby he had with his wife Ellen (Karen Black).
Cohen is also betrayed by the FX for the grown mutants, which look like the babies on steroids.
Also, Cohen regular James Dixon returns in his biggest role to date as Lt. Perkins, the only character to appear in all three films (outside of the killer kids)..
Actually, that's almost his only strength -- he has no budget, is poorly organized in his shooting schedules and writes much of his scripts on the fly (which is quite obvious).Two of horror's icons appear here: Michael Moriarty (as Stephen Jarvis) and Karen Black (as Ellen Jarvis).
Personally,I didn't see a single boom shot in the whole extravaganza.There were some shots that were incredibly out of focus,but it turned out they were deliberate choices by the filmmakers.Parts of this film are actually wickedly funny,as all horror films should be.I couldn't help thinking though while watching this film that it might have actually been quite terrifying if the babies just looked like real babies!.
At the same time I don't know if Cohen is making fun of his own film with some of the more sentimental dialogue (Cubans, then enemies of the U.S. wishing Jarvis the best) and the over the top scenes (a dying baby monster trying to Baptise itself).How about the babies?
Unfortunately, the latter half of the film takes place after the babies have matured and the impressive little demons are replaced by silly rubber suits.
The most interesting thing about this film was seeing Golden Globe and three-time Emmy winner Michael Moriarty rant and rave about the fact that they wouldn't leave his child alone.
While the surface plot involves an island of mutated babies, the film also holds commentary on abortion, the media (and how it manipulates and destroys lives) and even Cuba.
But in Island Of The Alive Cohen found the tone he should have used for the two preceding films and the right actor to set the tone.Michael Moriarty and Karen Black play a parents of the latest mutant baby and Moriarty goes to court on a preventive strike to win his kid's life.
He does, but it and some other mutants are placed on a Caribbean island in exile to be studied to find a solution to a growing problem.Moriarty with his swaggering style dominates this film.
Starring: Michael Moriarty and Karen Black.A TV actor is plagued with a mutant baby that he wants to live.
5 years later the washed up actor is a shoe salesman because no one will hire him, and he decides to find his baby, and make a trip to the island.
Once on the island, he learns that the babies have grown up, and the baby wants to meet it's mother (a waitress played by Karen Black).
Everyone responsible in any part for this film should never be allowed to work in the motion picture industry again.Probably the best film ever made about bad stop motion mutant babies living on an island..
Unfortunately, in Larry Cohen's hands, it's more amusing than great, although the island setting is quite evocative.
He's definitely taking every opportunity to lather in his trademark social commentary, and I don't have a problem with that, but he abuses his own premise here with sheer silliness.The babies look like Garbage Pail Kids crossed with Party Beach monsters.
Relocating the goings on to a tropical island gives Cohen many opportunities for gorgeous photography and he doesn't miss a chance to highlight his movie's breathtaking visual look.
Cohen also benefits from improved special effects, which look crude to modern eyes but at least allowed the director to expand the internal mythology of his series..
to do another sequel to his landmark thriller "It's Alive", Larry Cohen responded with this tale set several years after the events of the first two movies.Only five of the murderous mutant babies remain, and after Stephen Jarvis (frequent Cohen star Michael Moriarty), a failed actor and father to one of them, makes a case for the kids to be spared, they are taken to a deserted tropical isle.
Stephen is asked to tag along.Kudos to Cohen for not keeping this *completely* predictable (not that much time is actually spent on the island), and for using this opportunity to make some pointed commentary on things like abortion, the AIDS epidemic, and the way that people will heartlessly exploit human interest stories for the sake of a few bucks.
Also, "Island of the Alive" possesses one thing that some genre movies just don't have: an ability to make an emotional connection to the characters.The performances are better than you might ordinarily see in such fare.
Co-starring are Karen Black ('Trilogy of Terror') as Stephens' ex-wife, James Dixon (another Cohen repertory player again reprising his role of Lt. Perkins), Gerrit Graham ("Used Cars") as a grandstanding attorney, Patch Mackenzie ("Graduation Day") as his opposing counsel, the incredibly sexy Laurene Landon ("Maniac Cop") as a prostitute, film director Neal Isreal ("Bachelor Party") and Art Lund ("Black Caesar") as scientists, and William Watson ("The Mack") as the head of a pharmaceutical company.The haunting musical theme by Bernard Herrmann ("Psycho") is once again utilized, with good new music by Laurie Johnson ("Captain Kronos - Vampire Hunter").
Daniel Pearl ("The Texas Chain Saw Massacre") handles cinematography duties, and it's a real change of pace to see Cohen tackling a production that actually looks like it had a decent budget.
Some viewers may be disappointed with the effects, but Cohen never holds on these shots for too, too long, and he does serve up some pretty entertaining gore.Overall, a nice conclusion to this initial trilogy, and followed in 2008 by a remake of the original movie.Seven out of 10..
Wanting to rid themselves of the babies, the decision to import the mutants to an uninhabited island leads to a later expedition to study the creatures which shows that they're attempting to get back to the mainland to continue their line and must prevent them from doing so.This was the best of the series but is still somewhat of an issue.
The concept of the tropical island where they're being stored away from humanity gives this a solid and nicely appealing storyline involving the continuation of the themes and ideas from the previous films coming together into the fine series of attacks shown in the final half.
Stephen Jarvis (Michael Moriarty) argues in a courtroom for the life of his mutant son.
The judge mandates for the isolation of the mutant babies on an abandoned island.
I guess no love is greater than that of a father for his son.Michael Moriarty's eccentric performance and Larry Cohen's direction enhance a clumsy and uninvolving script.
The dark humor and social commentary on AIDS, media exploitation, abortion, and Cuba-US relations elevates the ensuing B-movie schlock and manages to make the film slightly transgressive.Be warned, this movie is nothing more than cheesy dialogue and bad special effects.
This film has got on your face dead pan humour, with good acting by the entire cast, especially Michael Moriarty who is perfect in his portrayal of Jarvis.
Of all the movies in the "It's Alive" series, this entry, despite some obvious problems, is possibly the best of all three.
Decent Fun. It's Alive 3 (1987) ** (out of 4) A court orders that all mutant babies must be sent to a deserted island.
Larry Cohen takes this film a lot less serious and goes over the top with things but he didn't go far enough.
The thought of seeing the babies grown up was a great idea but it takes an hour for us to reach the island.
Director/Script: Larry Cohen, Cast: Michael Moriarty, Karen Black, James Dixon This is, of course, the last film in the 'Its Alive' trilogy by Larry Cohen.
By this third film,they have multiplied and several couples are producing these mutant demon babies.
This film starts out in court with the father of one of the babies.
Director/writer Larry Cohen opens with a scene in a a cab where a woman is about to have a baby.
Next, we are taken into a court room and presented with the facts of Michael Moriarity's fight to keep his baby alive despite a large group that want to see it obliterated.
This scene is done quite effectively, even though Moriarity gives one of his usual, yet convincing, performances of a man that seems not to care but does(?) Anyway, I have always had problems figuring out Moriarity's motivation at times, but I think he and Cohen were going for more of a black comedy approach to this material.
Anyway, Moriarity convinces the court and in particular the judge, played nicely by MacDonald Carey, to come up with some alternative living accommodations for these infants - thus comes the Island of the Alive.
This time around a court order has forced all the deformed, mutant, babies to be transported to an isolated island.
This ranks down their with other such Larry Cohen films such as "The Stuff" and "A Return to Salem's Lot".
It's a very entertaining movie and an excellent closure to Larry Cohen's wild 'monstrous infants' trilogy.
In this particularly fantastic opening, Stephen Jarvis (Moriarty), father of a mutant-baby, defends the rights of these ugly creatures and wants to prevent that more unfortunate babies are destroyed immediately after birth.
Five years later, Stephen Jarvis is forced against his will to join a scientific expedition towards to island to see how the babies have developed.
The expedition crew will soon find out that the former babies still have ferocious tendencies but Jarvis equally discovers that they gained telekinetic powers and that they formed a community on their own...Larry Cohen's still growing sense of black, offbeat humor is terrifically illustrated through some of the deranged plot-twists and especially through Moriarty's eccentric character.
His sarcastic one-liners about his unsuccessful acting career or his unwanted popularity as the "father of the monster" makes this "Island of the Alive" one of Cohen's wittiest achievements to date.
Keep your eyes open for all the ingenious little ideas Cohen adds during the trip to, and return from the island!
Like for example a totally unrelated hunting-trip of greedy thrill-seekers to the island early in the film or a study of Karen Black's troubled love-life after giving birth to a monster.
Whether for good or bad, Larry Cohen's mutant baby sage continues.
The government is closer to eliminating them when a father (Michael Moriarty) of one of the babies gathers a group to protest in mass the wholesale demise of the mutants.
It's Alive III: Island of the Alive starts in court as state prosecutor argues that the mutant babies that are being born across the US should be killed at birth & are not human, mutant baby father Stephen Jarvis (Michhael Moriarty) manages to convince the court that the babies have feelings & should be allowed to live.
Judge Milton Watson (Macdonald Carey) rules in favour of Jarvis & the babies right to live but orders them all to be placed on an isolated island away from humanity so they cannot hurt anyone & that the location be kept secret.
Five years later & Jarvis is contacted by cop Lt. Perkins (James Dixon) who has agreed to go to the island with a team of Government funded scientists to study the babies & how they have adapted, as a father of one of the mutant babies they want Jarvis to accompany them which he also agrees to.
Once at the island the team discover that the babies have grown up remarkably quickly, have telepathic powers & have started breeding amongst themselves...Executive produced, written & directed by Larry Cohen this was the third entry in his It's Alive trilogy, the first It's Alive (1974) is generally considered to be a strong film while it's sequel It Lives Again (1978) expanded upon the original's themes without being quite as good which leaves It's Alive III: Island of the Alive as probably the weakest of the three films in my opinion & I have now seen all three in the space of three days.
The script here seems rushed, the film jumps from one random subplot to another, from the court case to Jarvis being rejected by a woman because he's the mutant babies father to a hunting expedition on the island to the scientific research team to a bizarre scene in Cuba to an ending where the mutant baby wants to find it's mother the film as a whole never quite gels together with the various strands of the plot dangling around without nothing to tie them together.
It's Alive III: Island of the Alive just seems like a lazy film, it just seems like Cohen had various ideas but didn't quite know how to knit them together so he would just put one idea into the script, get bored with it & have another idea & go with that one instead forgetting about the previous one.
Once again the babies are barely seen, this time around there's stop-motion animation & we see them grown up but like when they are babies it's just quick flashes of what they look like.The island scenes were apparently filmed in Hawaii but the editing is still choppy & it does look a little cheap at times.
The acting varies, Michael Moriarty is always watchable but he puts in a crazy performance here, from mumbling to himself to singing songs while on the open sea to various sarcastic one-liners to sexual harassment of female scientists.It's Alive III: Island of the Alive is the weakest of the three It's Alive films, that's all there is to it really.
It is the Isle of Mute and the inhabitants are Mutants ***** SLIGHT SPOILERS *****Anyway you get the drift , I live on an island and I come across mutants all the time so I was going to relate to a film dealing with mutant babies being confined and I wasn`t disappointed by what I saw .
ISLAND OF THE ALIVE is a very entertaining bad taste horror comedy , maybe not a classic like Peter Jackson`s BAD TASTE but still fairly good as the film opens with a woman giving birth in a New York taxi cab and a cop trying to shoot the new born baby , while the next scene features the knowingly stupid line " It took four bullets before it died - That`s some baby " , and of course there`s scenes of the mutant killer babies ( Done by stop frame animation , none of this CGI rubbish )going on killing sprees , and I haven`t even mentioned Michael Moriarty doing a great Al Bundy impression .
The killer babies are back, and this time they are sent to an abandoned island so they can no longer be a threat to humanity, and vice versa.
It sounds like a great idea, but too much of the movie does not take place on said island.
The cast includes Cohen's go-to-guy, Michael Moriarty, and the always hammy Karen Black.
best in the series but still average at best it's got a hammy script and it gets a tad ridiculous in the finale but Director Larry Cohen keeps it fairly amusing with quirky humor and a decent pace but as i said it gets a bit too ridiculous and silly.
and the effects are terrible the baby's look like puppets and are laughable however there is plenty of blood shed and a somewhat cool ending to help.
The Acting is Good Michael Moriarty is great as usual he is always so goofy and over the top but it lots of fun to watch and is an underrated actor he did great here!. |
tt1225292 | Insidious | A married couple Josh (Patrick Wilson) and Renai (Rose Byrne), their sons Dalton (Ty Simpkins) and Foster (Andrew Astor), and infant daughter Cali have recently moved into a new home. One night, Dalton is drawn to the attic when he hears creaking noises and sees the door open by itself. He falls from a ladder while investigating and sees a figure in the shadows. Hearing his terrified screams, Renai and Josh rush to his aid and declare the attic "off limits" to the children. The next day, Dalton falls into an inexplicable coma.
After three months of treatment without result, Renai and Josh are allowed to take Dalton home. Soon after, paranormal activity begins to occur; Renai begins hearing voices over the baby monitor when no one is in Cali's room, Foster says that Dalton sleepwalks at night, Renai sees a frightening figure of a man in Cali's room, who vanishes when Josh comes and the burglar alarm is repeatedly triggered for no reason with the front door open. After Renai finds a bloody hand print on Dalton's bed, she questions Josh about the house, but he ignores her. That night, Renai is attacked by the figure from Cali's room, and the Lamberts decide to abandon the house and move elsewhere.
In the new house, Renai sees the ghost of a dancing boy who leads her to Dalton's room. Josh's mother, Lorraine (Barbara Hershey), visits them one day, and says she had a dream in which a figure in Dalton's room replies "Dalton" when she asks what it wants; at the same time, she sees a monstrous red-faced demon standing behind Josh and screams, while Dalton's room is ransacked and Dalton himself is found lying on the floor.
Lorraine calls demonologists Elise Reiner (Lin Shaye), Specs (Leigh Whannell), and Tucker (Angus Sampson). Upon entering, Elise senses a presence in the house and upon entering Dalton's room, she sees something on the ceiling; to which Specs draws the demonic, red-faced figure Lorraine saw.
Elise explains that Dalton is not in a coma; he was born with the ability to travel mentally to the astral plane. He has traveled too far and become lost in a purgatory realm called "The Further", a place inhabited by the tortured souls of the dead. Without his mental presence, Dalton's body appears comatose and spirits can use it to enter the physical world. Josh is skeptical until he realizes that all of Dalton's drawings are of the demonic entity drawn by Specs.
Elise performs a seance to communicate with Dalton, but they contact the demon who threatens them before using Dalton's body to attack them until it is stopped by Elise. She reveals that her acquaintance with Lorraine is decades old, because she previously performed the same service on Josh when he was eight years old (he was terrorized by the parasitic spirit of an old woman). Josh also possesses the ability to astral project, and Dalton inherited this trait from him. Elise tells Josh that the only way to rescue Dalton is to go into the Further.
Elise puts Josh in a trance and he is able to project himself to their previous house. He goes to the attic and finds a red door, but is attacked by the mysterious figure that attacked Renai. After defeating him, Josh enters the Demon's lair, where Josh finds Dalton chained to the floor. After a tearful reunion, Josh frees him, but they are caught by the demon. Josh tries to fight it, but they are forced to flee with the demon in pursuit. Returning through the red door, Josh confronts the old woman that haunted him as a child. The old woman dissolves into darkness after Josh shouts at it to leave him alone. When Josh and Dalton return to their bodies they wake up in their new home and the spirits seem to disappear.
As they celebrate the apparent end of their ordeal, Elise starts packing her equipment with Josh, when she senses that something is wrong (she notices Josh's hands look old and dirty, similar to the old woman's), and proceeds to take a photo of Josh. Josh goes into a violent rage, as he doesn't like to have his picture taken and strangles Elise to death. Renai is horrified when she discovers Elise's dead body and searches for Josh to inform him of her sudden death. Renai picks up the camera and sees that the image Elise took of Josh is the old woman that haunted him as a child, implying that Josh has been possessed. Josh suddenly puts his hand on her shoulder, says Renai, I'm here, and she turns around and gasps. | violence, murder | train | wikipedia | This flick has a style of its own. Finally caught this flick, and the arrogant a-hole critics missed it by a mile. This is a low budget independent film, not a $100 million dollar tent-pole movie that's been made a dozen times before. That kid, James Schram as 'Donny' was good, with a great look, energy and authenticity. There are so many things I liked about this film: the music, the treasure chest of characters and fresh faces, each scene like a short movie in it self, the transition shots, and the fact that I wanted more at the end. The writer director hit upon something; a gritty down and dirty story of New York City with a style of its own that deserves an encore. What a great idea for a future pay cable series.. Makes you think. I saw this movie in Florida in October and loved the naturalistic approach the director used in building the story and the visuals. He shot it simply, yet it has great depth, with some of the most beautiful and unusual New York City shots I have ever seen. The back ground music and songs have a haunting quality to them, and do not overpower the spoken words, like most movies I see these days that are music videos with some dialogue.This is a mysterious film, with some very strong performances, especially the young man who portrays the lead role of Donny, and the gal that plays Arin. The story, intertwines a lot of New York characters that all come together toward the end of the film.This movie has some great lines, that stick with you afterword's, and the story is really relevant in todays world. I have always loved films that let me make up my own mind about what is happening, rather than being force fed on what to think, and this film delivers that in spades.They should do a sequel or turn this into an on going series on cable.. Character and Story Driven. It is always a roll of the dice when watching a new movie. Will I (and the movie) roll a winner or crap out? I never expect much, considering the quality and state of re-makes and rehashed story lines in this new millennium. I was pleasantly surprised by this independent drama, as it sucked me in to its multiple story lines, and kept me engaged until the final frame. What a great, refreshing, and creative way to communicate many slices of life as an experiential journey. I was inspired by the conviction (and the performance) of the young character, Donny. A young man whose world comes crumbling down around him, and how he navigates the obstacles, as he continues driving toward his goal.Loved the New York City locations, and the natural approach the director brought to the screen. I walked away a winner on this roll of the dice. |
tt0117476 | Riders of the Purple Sage | The events depicted in Riders of the Purple Sage occur in mid-spring and late summer 1871. Early in Riders of the Purple Sage, Jane Withersteen's main conflict is her right to befriend a Gentile. (The word Gentile means "non-Mormon" and is used a lot in the book). Jane Withersteen’s father wished Jane to marry Elder Tull, but Jane refused saying she did not love him, causing controversy and leading to persecution by the local Mormons.
Jane’s friend, (cowboy) Bern Venters is "arrested" by Tull and his men, but is not clear under what authority. Jane defends Venters, declaring him her best rider. Her churchmen refuse to value the opinion of a woman:
"Tull lifted a shaking finger toward her. 'That'll do from you. Understand, you'll not be allowed to hold this boy [Venters] to a friendship that's offensive to your bishop. Jane Withersteen, your father left you wealth and power. It has turned your head. You haven't yet come to see the place of Mormon women ...'"
It is here we first hear of Lassiter. Ironically, at the moment when Venters mentions Lassiter’s name, the actual Lassiter is seen approaching in the distance by Tull’s men.
Upon his arrival, Lassiter expresses his trust in the word of women, at which Tull rebukes him, telling him not to meddle in Mormon affairs. Tull’s men begin to take Venters away, and Venters realizes who he is and screams "Lassiter!" Tull understands that this is the infamous Lassiter and flees.
Lassiter inquires as to the location of Millie Erne's grave, to which a transfixed Jane agrees to take him. Venters later tells Jane he must leave her. When she protests, Venters delivers this statement: " ... Tull is implacable. You ought to see from his intention today that ... but you can't see. Your blindness ... your damned religion! Jane, forgive me ... I'm sore within and something rankles. Well, I fear that invisible hand [of Mormon power in the region] will turn its hidden work to your ruin.", showing that Venters could see far into the future, and although Jane rebukes his statement, he is indeed correct.
Jane’s red herd is rustled shortly afterward and Venters tracks it and returns it to Jane. Bern finds the herd, but, in his travels, wages a gun battle with two of Oldring’s rustlers, killing one and managing to wound Oldring’s notorious Masked Rider. Upon further examination, he removes the mask and shirt of the wounded rider and learns that the Masked Rider is a young woman named Bess whom he believes had been abused by Oldring. Venters experiences a large amount of guilt about shooting a girl and decides that it is his duty to save her.
Venters discovers Surprise Valley and Balancing Rock, where he takes Bess, the girl he has found. Bess gradually gains health and begins to fall in love with Venters who begins to fall in love with Bess. Each explain their individual stories ambiguously, but through Venters' dedicated care for Bess, the pair forms a mutual love that leads to their resolve to marry. Bess also discovered the truth concerning Oldring’s rustlers, who rustled cattle only to disguise their true lifestyle of surviving off gold in the streams and business deals with the Mormons.
Venters then determines that there is a need for supplies warranting a trip back to Cottonwoods. On his way, Venters sees Jane Withersteen’s prize horses being stolen. He kills the thieves and retrieves the horses for Jane, but unfortunately loses his horse, Wrangle.
Jane’s horses are returned to her, and are locked in the entry hall to Withersteen's house. Venters officially breaks his friendship with Jane at this time. He goes into the village and proclaimed that he was breaking his friendship and leaving. After he leaves, Jane’s other herd gets stolen.
Jane at first pretends to love Lassiter — knowing he came to Utah to avenge his sister Milly Erne — to prevent him from murdering Mormon elders she knew were guilty. The two characters grow to love each other. Then Jane's adopted daughter Fay is kidnapped and Lassiter kills Bishop Dyer while risking his own life.
The four main characters — Venters, Bess, Lassiter, and Jane — realize that they can no longer safely stay in Utah. Lassiter convinces Jane to prepare to leave with him, Lassiter determines the name of a Mormon who contributed to the ruin of Milly and Jane implicates her father in the proselytizing of Milly. In a state of shock, Jane packs.
Meanwhile, in Surprise Valley, Venters and Bess are preparing to leave as Jane and Lassiter departing, except on burros. Lassiter sets fire to Withersteen House and flees on horseback with Jane. They encounter Venters and Bess in travel. Before they part, Lassiter explains that Bess is not really Bess Oldring, but actually Elizabeth Erne, the lost daughter of Milly Erne.
Jane gives Venters her horses, Venters and Bess gallop for Venters' Illinois home, and Lassiter and Jane find refuge in Venters' valley paradise. On the way, Lassiter rescues Fay, but they are pursued to Surprise Valley. As Tull and his men begin to climb up the cliffside, Jane shouts to Lassiter to "roll the stone," which he does. The ensuing avalanche closes the outlet to Deception Pass "forever." (This is, of course, not true, as Jane, Lassiter, and Fay return in Grey's sequel, The Rainbow Trail/The Desert Crucible.)
=== Reflections ===
Unlike many Western novels, which are often straightforward and stylized morality tales, Riders of the Purple Sage is a long novel with a complex plot that develops in many threads. The story is set in the cañon country of southern Utah in 1871. Jane Withersteen, a Mormon-born spinster of 28, has inherited a valuable ranch and spring from her father, which is coveted by other Mormons in the community. When Jane refuses to marry one of the (polygamous) Mormon elders and instead befriends Venters, a young Gentile rider, the Mormons begin to persecute her openly. Meanwhile, Lassiter, a notorious gunman, arrives at the Withersteen ranch in search of the grave of his long-lost sister, and stays on as Jane's defender while Venters is on the trail of a gang of rustlers that includes a mysterious Masked Rider. Jane is intent on preventing Lassiter from doing further violence to Mormons and is eventually driven off her ranch as the persecution escalates, but she and Lassiter fall in love, Lassiter solves the mystery of his sister's death and the fate of her child, the Masked Rider is unmasked, and Venters finds his own romance. Along the way, Jane also finds time to adopt Fay Larkin, a young Gentile orphan who accompanies her and Lassiter at the end of the story
Riders of the Purple Sage was written in 1912 and is set in a remote part of Utah after the influx of Mormon settlers (1847-1857) as a backdrop for the plot (1871). The Mormons had been centered in Kirtland, Ohio in the 1830s and Zane Grey would have been aware of the Mormon sect given that he grew up in Zanesville, Ohio.
Plural marriage was only officially prohibited by the Mormons with the issuing of the First and Second Manifesto in 1890 and 1904 respectively, enacted primarily to allow the territory to attain statehood. In 1871, mainstream American society found plural marriage offensive. Even after the Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act was passed in 1862, the practice continued. Therefore, Zane Grey described the distaste of the institution through Lassiter in 1912, some 22 years after the practice had officially ended. | revenge | train | wikipedia | If you liked the movie and haven't read the book, read it..
I watched this movie out of curiosity because I have the book and have read it; five times.
That seemed like a lot for a two hour (I believe it was two hours) movie.
I wanted to see how good the movie was and what parts of the book the movie omitted.
I liked the movie despite the fact that it very understandably omitted a lot from the book.
I read through the other user comments quickly and found two that said they like the movie better than the book.
I would like to encourage those of you who have seen the movie but not read the book to get the book and read it.
Parts of the book tend to be grandiose, which might be why the two users said they liked the movie better.
To me, the book tells a great story with meaty characters that you get to know and care very much about.
Central is Jane Withersteen who is being intimidated by the top Mormon men of her community.
Good and Evil depends on ones point of view.
Good and Evil depends on ones point of view.
Just as the person before me in his review stated, if you haven't read the book, you might want to, so that you will understand the obvious points that had to be left out of the movie.
It really is important to make some understanding of the thought's that Zane Grey, one of the premiere western writers of the past.
He was ahead of his time giving psychological reasoning for his character's as well as one of the best describers of surrounding beauty that the characters are enveloped in.The evil men in this portrait of the depravity of men (even those of "religious' belief's) is portrayed vividly by the men of the Mormon church as they saw their duty.
Portrayed brilliantly by an outstanding cast.Then comes Lassiter, who is violent in his own way and yet gentle and kind.
He steps up to the plate and helps Jane Withersteen (played by Amy Madigan in one of her most impressive acting to date), while Lassiter (played in a hard as rock characterization by Ed Harris) still after those who caused his family member to commit suicide.
I believe these characters played by this particular cast very brilliantly portrayed just as those envisioned by Zane Grey in his book "Riders of the Purple Sage".The screen play is very well done by Gill Dennis from the book written by Zane Grey.
If it was not a movie made for television, it would rank up there with the best like Eastwoods "The Unforgiven" and Costner's "Open Range" with each of those carrying "star power" and Rider's unsung actors.Tough interpretation of a hard subject, still beyond it's time..
In most movies, gunslingers are cold men with hot bullets, but in this movie Ed Harris convinces the audience that no-one is beyond redemption.
Killing out of hatred has not turned Lassiter into a robot with a gun, but a human being plagued by the life he has chosen.
The most realistic, honest western I've ever seen.
Unlike the "western saga" with noise and unbelievable actions scenes, this movie is like watching the events as they happen.
You are taken back to the time Zane Grey wanted to capture with his pen, and it was well translated in this film.
Harris and Madigan bring a reality to a classic tale..
Having read the original novel after seeing the film, I was most impressed how well it adhered to the original plot line from the Zane Grey novel.
Ed Harris, an actor that I usually do not care for, was very, very impressive in this film.
As Lassiter, I loved his delivery of the line to the bad Mormons: "Where I come from, a woman's word is law." Harris conveys the right portion of menace and due respect when necessary in his role.I saw this on TV; I wish it had been on the big screenToo bad Zane Grey never saw this version; I sure he would have been very happy with this production..
I've heard/seen the title "Riders of the Purple Sage" for as long as I can remember, but never read the book, nor did I ever see any of the previous versions of this Zane Gray novel.
It wasn't until I became a big Ed Harris fan that I started looking for more of his films, and ended up buying "Riders." I knew it was going to be good, but wow!, I couldn't have imagined it would be teriffic -by far the best western, and one of the best films, period, I've ever seen.There is so much to this story.
the two love stories of course; the hypocrisy of the "righteous", and the redeeming qualities of those who on the surface may appear to be "evil" or "bad guys"; the power of love between the most unlikely couples; and the spiritual power of love and trust, just for starters.I don't know if the script was taken directly from the book, but the dialogue was magical in many scenes.
Amy Madigan and Ed Harris were magical too, partly due to their personal relationship I'm sure, but their work together in this film was unforgetable.
This is one of the films I will be watching over and over again.
See the movie and read the book - both are enjoyable.
For any fan of a good western and Zane Gray this movie is well worth the viewing time.
I had read the book several times over the years and found this movie lived up to my expectations.
The movie was as true to the book as any movie of this nature can be.
The action will draw you in, I had to go back and reread the book to see if I missed something.
The authenticity of the scenery as well as the beauty really helped make the movie.
Lassiter starts out as a somewhat questionable hero but quickly you realize that he is one of the quiet good guys.
Reminded me of some of the older western movies like "Shane" or some of the newer ones like "Tom Horn" or "The Sackets.
Read the book, see the movie, and then read the book again it will be worth your time..
Very enjoyable film...pretty true to the book as I remember it..
I was an avid Zane Grey reader as a teenager in the forties & have not re-read the book since.
However,when viewing the movie, I felt the same aura of old west romance that I remembered from many years before.
I have always felt that, in spite of his rather blatant racism, Zane Grey wove exciting and entertaining stories.
I wish there would be additional efforts to bring more of his books to either the small or large screen, and that they would be as well made as "Riders of the Purple Sage"..
Solid Western action.
I was pleasantly surprised when I watched this movie.
Ed Harris plays arough and tumble gun-slinger named Lassiter.
The romantic action between Harrisand Amy Madigan is subtle and beautifully portrayed.
Some of thesupporting cast are a bit one dimensional but the overall film issmooth paced, well-done, and has a happy ending.
If you arelooking for a good modern western film, this is it..
Does the book justice.
Trying to create a film adaptation of one of the most popular books of all time almost 100 years after the book's original publication could delight and disappoint many.
In doing so, the director must do the book justice while adapting it to a visual format that will engage modern audiences.
When director Charles Haid helmed the second film version of Zane Grey's Riders of the Purple Sage, he pulled off the task of making a film that both entertains Grey neophytes and long-time readers.
He accomplished this by sticking to what made the book tick: beautiful settings and archetypal characters.Since Haid shot his film on location in Moab, UT, he merely had to let the camera pan to accomplish half what he needed to in the film.
Many times in the film, the characters simply provide an excuse for the presentation of the canyon lands around them.
While the book describes Venters state of mind in laborious detail, Haid merely lets his shooting location tell the tale.Very little of the plot which first appears in Grey's book is changed in Haid's film version.
Other than small, necessary changes that streamline the film and make it watchable, the characters and conflict run true to the book.
While the book specifically names Mormons as the evil force out to ruin Jane, the movie opts instead to create a Unitarian-type Protestant church without picking by name on the Mormons.
Where Grey uses three men to make up Jane's stable help, the film combines all three into one.
While not the same as the book, the change works to simplify the film while not significantly changing the book's story.In terms of characterization, an older Ed Harris and Amy Madigan play the leading roles of Lassiter and Jane.
While Harris's skullet (bald with mullet) and Madigan's wrinkles may not accurately represent the young and beautiful vibrancy of the book's characters, these veteran actors more than make up in acting what they lack in appearance.
You believe Jane's ambivalence towards her church and Lassiter when you hear Madigan's earnestly delivered lines.
You find yourself taken in by Lassiter's tortured past and consuming present when Harris squints, rides, shoots, and weeps under the Utah sky.
Even little Elliot from E.T., Henry Thomas, pulls off a convincing, grown up performance as the spurned Venters.In the end, this movie will entertain any fan of the Western film genre, while at the same time satisfying even the most devoted Zane Grey fan.
With great settings from Moab, UT, a screenplay that does little to depart from the original text, and sound performances from good actors, this film works.
a v.g. as in very good western.
Mr. and Mrs. Ed Harris, like Mr. and Mrs. Paul Newman, Mr. and Mrs. Frederic March, Mr. and Mrs. Hume Cronyn, Mr. and Mrs. Ronald Colman, even Mr. and Mrs. Jack Benny work beautifully together as they help make sense out of Zane Grey's, "Riders Of the Purple Sage."Unfortunately, that wonderful all-west title was borrowed by some sort of psychedelic band calling themselves, "New Riders of the Purple Sage."I'll stick to the old riders, thank you just as the movie sticks closely to the original book.The movie is up to its eyeballs in philosophy, but it is not so deep that the residents of Dolt City would be confused.The background music is quite good, even if it does not include the Mormon Tabernacle Choir.The story will keep you interested from top to bottom.
In dialogue it is more than a tad above Gene, Roy, and Tex, etc., all of whom i deeply enjoy."Riders Of the Purple Sage" is a thinking person's western, while in no way losing the flavor of a western film.Go see it.
Gunfighter comes seeking missing sister and niece., Sub-story has 2 young adults from opposite sides meet..
This is a movie that I enjoyed so much that I have watched it every chance I have had since then.
The ending so intense that I was right there with the couple feeling like I was fighting with all my might for life and love.
If anyone else likes this movie, may I suggest Sam Elliott and his wife Katherine Ross in "Conagher" and "The Shadow Riders"?
Harris and Madigan are superb as usual.
The best version based on Zane Gray's novel, in fact it surpasses the book, Amy Madigan and real life husband Ed Harris perform well together.
A good feel of the true west and some of the religious fanatics and bigots that lived then.
A GREAT WESTERN..
A GREAT WESTERN..
Enjoyed the story, acting, photography and location (Moab, Utah).
They don't make many westerns (or movies, for that matter) like this anymore.
Ed Harris was nominated for best actor in Screen Actors Awards from best TV drama for his performance.
Best western you've never seen.
Most of the new westerns being made these days (i.e. Unforgiven, Tombstone, etc.) are exceptional, but this may be the pick of the lot - the characters are real, the plot is believable, the photography is superb.
I've never read the book, but I may now..
Excellent movie, better than book.
Harris/Madigan terrific!.
I have watched this movie countless times and shown it to all my co-workers.
It is one of the best movies I've ever seen.
The screenplay extracted the best parts from the book, and it became a fantastic western romance.
Lassiter is the baddest gunsliger I've ever seen.
Amy Madigan was wonderful as Jane Lassiter.
Lassiter and Jane's romance is so touching, the reveal-all scene on her porch during the rainstorm touches my heart every time I see it.
The final scene is so beautiful I wish I had a picture of it, a kiss in the sunset.
Mohab Utah is the real star of the film .......
I've seen a lot of Westerns, "spaghetti" and otherwise, but none better photographed than "Riders of the Purple Sage".
This is flat out one wonderful movie, greatly enhanced by the unbelievable setting and outstanding photography.
The story of Mormon brain wiring is well told, and is quite bloody and exciting.
Ed Harris as the revenge seeking gunslinger has never been better, and he works well with Amy Madigan and Henry Thomas.
The film is loaded with surprising revelations that put a different spin on the story.
This rarely seen Western should be on your "must see" list.
I have not watched or read westerns since I was about 10 years old - many years ago.
The presence of Ed Harris and Amy Madigan was also persuasive.
I'd liked Madigan in Twice in a Lifetime 15 years ago, and hadn't seen her in anything since.
And when Harris fights so hard and long to make a movie about the life of artist Jackson Pollock, he must care very much about the sort of movie and script he'll do - his presence thus becomes a sort of guaranty of a fine movie.
He and Madigan were the executive producers of this made for cable movie.I'd heard of Zane Grey of course - as I had of Louis Lamour or Bret Harte.
But that's it - I haven't read any of their books and had no particular interest.
Gee, if Zane Grey is THIS good, I've got to start reading!There is an uncompromising ferocity to this movie that is arresting - yet it all seems quite real.
It's an interesting concept that I don't think I've seen before in any kind of movie, Western or not.Madigan's hesitation to believe ill of the town is so apparent, her reluctance to break with it so real - this is what makes the movie for me - but I'm sure for some it will be more Harris's character's change which is also very moving.
The last scenes - thinking of what will happen to Madigan and Harris after the movie ends - is very powerful..
I think this a very good movie over all.
Ed Harris is on the vengeance trail after the ones that kidnapped his sister and her new born daughter.
Gee in my book that is rape.
Any way she commits suicide and her young daughter is placed with a rustler.
Amy Madigan is apparently a Mormon who will not do as the leaders want and marry Tull.
Ed Harris is Lassiter and he has killed a few men including the three Mormon's who kidnapped his sister and her daughter.
He comes to Madigan's ranch and helps her out, finds the truth behind his sister's kidnapping, goes after some of the scum who have done more than they should have.
The title of the picture hearkens back in time to a Western Gene Autry or Roy Rogers might have appeared in.
I rather surprised myself by checking the credits for this film and found that it had been made four times previous, going as far back as 1918 and prior to this version, the most recent was 1941's treatment starring George Montgomery in the Lassiter role.
A further surprise turned out to be that this was actually a made for TV film, quite shocking since the quality of the cast and cinematography compare favorably to a theatrical release.Jim Lassiter, portrayed by Ed Harris, struck me as a High Plains Drifter type, a lone gunman traveling the American West and rising to the occasion when trouble comes his way.
Here he has a mission, to find the man who drove his sister to suicide following the loss of her daughter via a kidnapping.
The portrayal of the unnamed religious sect is given harsh treatment in the story.
It was shocking to see and hear Pastor Dyer (G.D. Spradlin) lecture Jane Withersteen (Amy Madigan) from the pulpit, essentially condemning her for remaining unmarried at her age.As the story plays out, and if you've seen enough of these types of films, one handily comes to the conclusion that Oldring's rider Bess (Robin Tunney) is the missing young niece that Lassiter is searching for.
If the story by Zane Grey on which the film is based answers the question, I imagine It will be some time before I find out.If you liked this picture and Harris' portrayal of gunslinger Lassiter, I'd recommend the 2008 Western "Appaloosa" in which Harris teams with Viggo Mortensen as two hard bitten lawmen on the trail of outlaws who kidnap Renee Zellweger.
Just like Lassiter, Harris' character Virgil Cole is a man of absolutes who doesn't compromise on seeking retribution for wrongs committed against the innocent. |
tt0074703 | J.D.'s Revenge | The story centers around Isaac Hendrix (portrayed by Turman), a young college student studying law and a taxi-cab driver in New Orleans. While out on a night of fun with his friends and wife Christella, during a hypnosis act, he becomes an unwilling host for the restless spirit of J.D Walker, a hustler killed during the 1940s. Over the course of the film, "Ike" finds himself gradually being taken over by the sociopathic Walker, even eventually going so far as to adopt his hair and fashion style, mannerisms, and psychotic tendencies (including an attempted rape on his wife after she mocked his J.D. haircut). With the spirit of J.D. in complete control, he turns his attention toward wreaking vengeance against the man responsible for killing his sister, Theotis Bliss. Ike commits havoc all over town before making his way to the church where Theotis' brother works as a preacher, where he finally reveals himself and instructs Elijah to tell Theotis to meet him "on the killin' floor". Ike's wife has, meanwhile, gone to her ex-husband, a cop who is out for Ike's blood, believing him to be a simple psycho hiding behind a false persona--until he mentions to the Chief that Ike claimed his name was J.D. Walker, a man who was not only real, but also had died over 30 years ago. J.D. was a hustler who ran numbers during World War II, as well as a black-market meat plant where he was murdered by Theotis Bliss after witnessing the murder of his own sister, Betty Jo, at his hands because of her derisive chiding of him and threatening to expose the secret she held about her baby daughter. After being discovered over Betty Jo's lifeless body with her blood on his hand, Elijah Bliss (Gossett Jr.), Betty Jo's husband and the believed father of her child (and younger, submissive brother of Theotis), accused J.D of being the killer and J.D was gunned down on the spot by Theotis to cover up the event. Following Theotis to the old factory, Elijah finally learns the truth before getting into a struggle with Theotis for his gun, during which the weapon discharges and kills Theotis while Ike watches, and laughs maniacally as the event plays out. His business complete, J.D. appears to leave Ike's body and due to Elijah's testimony, he is allowed to go free to rejoin his wife and friends waiting for him outside. | revenge, murder, blaxploitation, melodrama | train | wikipedia | Some of the best scenes in this movie take place after Ike (Glynn Turman) has been totally taken over by the late hustler, J.D. Walker.
Turman does a remarkable job switching back and forth between struggling law student Ike, and J.D., the razor-toting dead hustler out to revenge the death of his younger sister.
We learn from flashbacks that Elijah Bliss (Lou Gossett, Jr.) was a hustler, and are given hints in the present story that his current job as a preacher may be a scam.
Found half-hidden in the back of my local video store, the cheesy packaging made it look like a tongue in cheek blaxploitation horror movie good for a few laughs.
Nice guy cabbie/law student Ike (Glynn Turman - 'Cooley High') becomes possessed by nasty Forties pimp J.D. Walker (David McKnight).
Not a great movie, but a good one, and worth watching for Turman's excellent double turn if nothing else.
A solid standout from most Black flicks of the middle 70's, JD's Revenge provided an early platform for Glynn Turman (Cooley High) to prove his acting prowess.
By playing essentially two characters at once, Turman's passion for the roles combines with the spookiness of the New Orleans setting for memorable results.
Accomplished, but unspectacular blaxploitation horror with a tremendously ripe lead performance by Glynn Turman in presenting two very different (from placid to extreme) personalities.
He plays a genuinely high flying and collected law student Isaac that during a hypnosis session experiences shocking visions and begins to undergo a personality change of a brutally hot-headed and jive-talking 1940's street hustler J.D. Walker.
In 1942 New Orleans gangster J.D. Walker (David McKnight) is shot to death by Elija Bliss (Lou Gossett).
Mild mannered young law student Ike (Glynn Turman) is possessed by the spirit of J.D. He immediately becomes cruel and vicious and treating his beautiful girl friend Christella (Joan Pringle) like dirt.
I was 14 then and a newspaper ad showed a drawing of a gravestone and a pretty young woman lying dead in front of it with a look of horror on her face (needless to say nothing like that appears in the film).
There's only one bloody attack scene and a shot of a dead animal being cut open (which was repeated at least 8 times).This concentrates more on Ike being possessed and trying to fight back.
A Law Student (Glynn Turman) participates in a hypnotist show, only to have the soul of a deceased gangster enter his body!J.D.'s Revenge happens to be one of my personal favorites because you can enjoy it on a campy level as well as a partial horror flick.
This is a startling movie starring Glynn Turman and Louis Gossett Jr. Here Glynn Turman is the innocent laid-back Ike who is a law student.
A docile law student (Glynn Turman) is possessed by a 1940s mobster (David McKnight) in mid-1970s New Orleans.
The mobster seeks revenge upon the people who killed him and his sister.There probably are not a lot of blaxploitation-horror-crime films out there.
First-time writer Jaison Starkes started at a second-rate film school and became friends with George Folsey, who sort of operated a mini-school out of his house.
Along with Starkes, Eric Roth was a member of Folsey's circle, and after writing B-movie scripts for twenty years, finally broke into the big time with "Forrest Gump" (1994).Starkes connected with AIP through Sidney Poitier of all people, and pitched them "Revenge", originally called "The Killing Floor" (a better title).
According to the people who made that documentary entitled "The 50 Worst Films Ever Made", this mixture between horror and blaxploitation is irredeemably awful and hopeless.
Thirty years later in present New Orleans, the young law student and part-time taxi driver Ike volunteers to be hypnotized in a sleazy nightclub and becomes possessed with the vengeful spirit of J.D. Ike first suffers from a series of visions, showing in episodes what overcome to the real J.D, and from there onwards he becomes an instrument for extracting vengeance.
With a sharp razor ready to cut anyone who crosses his path, Ike goes after Elijah Bliss – the brother who knocked up J.D's sister but nowadays pretends to be a devoted preacher.
Not exactly, no
In spite of a satisfying first half and overall very enthusiast acting performances from the ensemble cast, "J.D.'s Revenge" inexplicably turns into a boring and cowardly lame film.
In 1942 young hoodlum J D Walker is shot by Elija Bliss (Lou Gossett) who thinks Walker killed his woman, Betty Joe who is also JD's sister.
Ike (Glynn Turman) is a taxi driver and law student who during an hypnotism act gets possessed by the spirit of J.D. When he gets taken over he gets cruel and violent towards his girlfriend.
He injures a passenger in his cab.Ike starts to stalk Elija Bliss who is now a preacher and comes close to exposing the truth as he uncovers the person who really did kill his sister.It is nicely acted by Turman who gets to play a Jekyll and Hyde type character.
Gossett has a scene stealing turn as a preacher who is rather modelled on Muhammad Ali as he shadow boxes during his sermons.The film treads the path of other blaxploitation films of that era with violence.
Glynn Turman plays Isaac "Ike" Hendricks, an amiable law student in New Orleans.
However, this enables a restless spirit named J.D. Walker (David McKnight) to possess Ikes' body, all in the name of revenge.
Now the possessed Ike starts to sound and act like J.D., and indulge in various unsavoury pursuits while going about this mission of vengeance.A very engaging cast helps to make this watchable.
The movie goes a fair distance on the performances by young Turman ("Cooley High", "Gremlins", "John Dies at the End").
Naturally, he does look to be having a fine time when called upon to imitate McKnight in his portrayal of the slick and creepy J.D.Louis Gossett Jr. is very lively as the reformed criminal turned flamboyant preacher who also figures into the plot.
Unlike a number of other 1970s blaxploiation movies, the story of "J.D.'s Revenge" is a more universal one at its core; with virtually no rewriting, the characters could have been played by actors of any color.
The predominantly black cast does a very professional job, especially Lou Gossett and Glynn Turman.
The "possession by a vengeful ghost" storyline had probably gotten to be old and hokey already by 1976, yet a good movie that can make you feel the emotional drive of revenge could still have made such a story seem new and fresh.
Since I like to occasionally laugh at a bad film, I decided to get a copy of "J.D.'s Revenge".
However, the movie wasn't nearly bad enough to be in the documentary (and this could be said of many of the selected films).
Sure, it was bad (far worse than many of the IMDb reviews would indicate) but the basic concept of the film isn't really bad at all--it's just that the horrible acting by Glynn Turman as "J.D." and the writing combined for a very bad paranormal blaxploitation film.Turman plays a nice guy who is going to law school and driving a cab.
All the nudity wasn't the problem (though there was a lot), but when he rapes his wife and treats women like garbage I cringed and felt it was perhaps pandering to some that might actually enjoy seeing this sort of violence.
A man wrongly killed who returns from the dead years later to set things right is an exciting idea and how all this was worked out in the end was far more clever than I would have expected given the overall tone of the movie.
By the way, Turman playing a jive-talking 40s punk reminds me of Robert Townsend's film "Hollywood Shuffle" as the film laments that the only roles for Black men in films are pimps, drug dealers and the like (which was very true until recently)..
J.D.'s Revenge (1976) ** 1/2 (out of 4)This blaxploitation film starts off in the 1940s as a man is shot dead by some mobsters.
Fast-forward to the current times and law student Isaac (Glynn Turman) is out with his girlfriend and friends when he is hypnotized.
It doesn't take long for something to snap in Isaac and before he knows it he's got the spirit of the dead man in him and he goes seeking revenge.J.D.'s REVENGE is a pretty good blaxploitation movie that not only pay homage to the various gangster classics but it also has a touch of the Jekyll and Hyde storyline.
I'm a little surprised that this film isn't better known among fans of the genre because the picture is quite sleazy at times and features all the terrific dialogue and situations that you'd expect.I think some of the best moments happen towards the end and especially when the Isaac character begins to change and become more and more like a gangster rather than his "good" self.
You also get some nice supporting performances including Louis Gossett, Jr. as a Reverend with a few secrets of his own.The horror elements of the picture are good for what they are but I think a lot of people will be shocked to see how sleazy the movie is.
J.D.'S REVENGE might not be the most original movie out there but there are a lot of good elements that make it worth watching..
J.D's RevengeThe best way to tell if you've been possessed by an African American is if the police start arresting you for no reason.Unfortunately for the victim in this horror movie, he's already black himself.Sweet-talked into being the dupe for a hypnotist by his wife (Joan Pringle), law student Ike (Glynn Turman) instead becomes the unwitting vessel for the vengeful spirit of J.D. Walker (David McKnight), a New Orleans street hustler murdered in the 1950s.Adapting J.D's mannerisms and flamboyant attire, Ike unknowingly begins exacting revenge on Theotis Bliss (Fred Pinkard), the man who killed J.D's sister.
The only person standing in Ike/J.D's way is Theotis' brother, Reverend Elijah (Louis Gossett Jr.).An intriguing fusion of Blaxploitation stereotypes and horror movie sensibilities, this cult classic can be as gruesome and violent as it can be campy and thrilling.Incidentally, in the 1950s black ghosts weren't allowed to haunt white families.Yellow Lightvidiotreviews.blogspot.ca.
In their excellent book "The Golden Turkey Awards" the Medved brothers note that the good news was that Hollywood discovered the market for movies made for black audiences, the bad news was that most were crude, artless-and vulgar, like this one.
It starts OK with an interesting premise and some interesting shots, such as the young law student seeing the late J.D.'s face in the mirror of his cab, but it soon degenerates into another cheap sex and sadism Garde Z exploitation movie.
"J.D.'s Revenge" is a simply there possession film without a whole lot going for it either way.**SPOILERS**In the middle of New Orleans, Ike, (Glynn Turman) and his girlfriend Christella, (Joan Pringle) try not to let his celebrity status affect their fun.
Concerned nothing is wrong, he continues on with his life until he runs into Reverend Elija Bliss, (Lou Gossett) and he learns that the trouble has been caused by being possessed by a gangster who had a run-in with him years ago, and is now seeking revenge for being wrongly executed back then.
Switching between personalities as he carries on his mission, they try to stop him before he is able to complete his blood-lust through the possession.The Good News: There wasn't a whole lot to this one that really worked.
That also gives the later half of the film, with the real revenge getting carried through in real gang-land traditions is a lot of fun.
These here are the film's good points.The Bad News: There wasn't a whole lot to this one at all.
Cut to New Orleans in 1976: Sweet, likable, struggling law student Ike (frequent second banana co-star actor Glynn Turman, giving a fine, engaging performance in a rare substantial lead part) is possessed by J.D.'s malevolent, vindictive spirit, which transforms Ike from a harmless, mild-mannered college kid into a vile, lethal, womanizing, straight razor-toting cad who exacts a terrible revenge upon all those individuals responsible for J.D.'s untimely demise.One of the best, most frightening and effective entries in the short-lived 70's blaxploitation horror craze (prime examples of this nifty sub-genre include both "Blacula" movies, "Abby," and "Sugar Hill"), "J.D.'s Revenge" emphasizes mood over violence, with seasoned B-picture veteran Arthur ("Bonnie's Kids," "Bucktown") Marks' typically sturdy, stylish, self-assured direction and Jaison Starkes' craftily plotted script deftly milking the creepy, mysterious, unsettling Southern Gothic-style ambiance for all its worth.
Either the makers of that actually quite high quality list compared to today's IMDb bottom 150 fare failed to recognise the Jekyll and Hyde parallels or got too much caught up in the game and thought being repulsed by intentionally repulsive scenes was a sure sign of bad film making.
Sure it has pacing problems, but what Blaxploitation film doesn't?
Miekels atmosphere at times, especially with the ending.The most striking element of this film and why it hooks you in so is the contrast between law student Issac and the fire breathing JD.
Glynn Turman (what a voice) gives an astounding performance as two polar opposite walks of the black experience.
In conclusion, JD's Revenge is defo a case of one of these is not like the others as it's a tough, mean and surprisingly moral affair that has so many striking elements, it's almost as tough as the film itself not to give it at least one watch.
Hitting theaters near the wane of African-American themed genre films, it was released by American International Pictures, which had become perhaps the most prolific American studio to produce 'blaxploitation' movies.Glynn Turman stars as Ike Hendrix, taxi driver and law student in New Orleans, who has a live-in girlfriend, Chrisette (Joan Pringle).
During the show, Ike somehow is possessed by the spirit of J.D. Walker (john smith), a local hoodlum active during the 1940s who met a violent end at a meatpacking plant.
As played by Gossett, Reverend Bliss likes to use boxing metaphors in his sermons; his brother Cleotis apparently handles the business affairs for the church, but based on his dialogue he is not remotely the believer that Elija seemingly is.
Slightly less humorous is Ike's pal coming up with a rather reaching justification for Ike's slapping around Chrisette while possessed.Cons The climax of the film sets up a revelation that clever viewers may likely have figured out beforehand.
There are also several subplots that the movie seems to ignore: Shortly after the possession takes place, Ike visits a pimp to place a numbers bet (hinting at a possible criminal past for Ike) but this is soon forgotten; Reverend Bliss' past suggests that he was not only a former boxer but that he was involved in some sort of racketeerism, and his current career as a pastor may not be completely on the up-and-up.
A possessed Ike sexually assaults Chrisette in an overlong sequence; juxtaposed with the rather pat resolution at the end, it makes her look gleefully forgiving when she should not be—on that note, most of the women in the film are murder victims, harshly abused or sexually loose..
****SPOILERS**** Gunned down at a New Orleans meat market in 1942 by Theotis Bliss, Fred Pinkard, after he had murdered his sister Betty Jo, Alice Jubert, who was carrying his child J.D Walker, David McKnight, waited in the world beyond to come back and get his revenge not just against Theotis but his born again brother Elija, Louis Gossett.
Now some thirty years later J.D got his chance by, through an hypnosis session , occupying the body & soul of collage law student Issas "Ike" Hendrix, Glynn Truman, to avenge his sister's murder that Theotis framed him for.This turned out to be a life changing event for Isaac who turned from a sweet harmless and kindly collage boy into an cold blooded and unfeeling psychopath when ever J.D took over his body.
J.D in the end did get his long sought revenge and as for the man he used to do it Isaac Hendrix he was later exonerated of all of J.D's crimes since it was proved that he wasn't in his right mind when he committed them..
I've been a fan of Blaxploitation films for some time now.
Those films made mostly in the 70s that featured an urban setting, starred black actors in lead roles and usually ran to either heavy duty action flicks or twists on horror films.
HYDE were regular features shown in theaters that catered to fans.J.D.'S REVENGE is one among the many films of this genre that was much better than one would expect.
Isaac (Glynn Turman) is a law student who drives a cab part time.
And when he is he is prone to violent acts of rage.The story begins to flesh out when Isaac ends up in a church where ex-boxer turned preacher Rev. Elija Bliss (Louis Gossett Jr.) is preaching.
As the possessed Isaac watches he begins to plan his revenge.
Just who really killed his sister is yet unknown but will be revealed by the last portion of the film.There is plenty of story involved in this movie, enough that it needn't have been a Blaxploitation film at all.
He deserved better.The film doesn't rely on gore to tell the story and uses the abilities of Turman in the shifting role of Isaac/J.D. instead.
It is Turman's performance that makes the film work.
The end result is a movie that while part of the whole Blaxploitation genre is among the best that was offered.Arrow Video is releasing this in their usual manner, which means the best edition you will find.
The movie itself is a 2k restoration from original film elements produced exclusively for this Arrow release. |
tt0160672 | Joe the King | 14-year-old Joe Henry (Noah Fleiss) has spent his life in an abusive household. His father Bob (Val Kilmer) is a raging violent alcoholic, while his mother, Theresa (Karen Young) feels too stressed to pay attention to him and lives in fear of getting caught in the path of her husband's wrath. His brother, about a year older, is normal and friendly, but offers no affirmative guidance. He mostly ignores Joe as he doesn't want the association of Joe's natural uncoolness ruining his attempts to get into the "in" crowd. Joe is taunted by his classmates, and hassled by creditors about his father's mounting bills. To make matters worse, one night Bob goes off the deep end and smashes all of Theresa's records. In response to economic pressure, Joe takes a full-time job after school, leaving him tired and even less able to keep up with class work. Far worse, he becomes a petty thief to raise the money to pay Bob's bills and replace her records. He even does an insider job—robbing the diner where he works illegally.
Failing in school, Joe is assigned a Guidance counselor Leonard Coles (Ethan Hawke), who, though reasonably friendly, is incompetent. (For example, in their first session, when Joe starts to talk about his problems, the counselor unthinkingly shuts him off). Disaster eventually strikes, and Joe faces the rest of his seemingly doomed life in doubt. Ironically, where he winds up next seems more like hope than tragedy. Perhaps a chance to get away from his horrible childhood and family. | violence, autobiographical, romantic | train | wikipedia | by Dane YoussefFrank Whaley's "Joe The King" has been called by the filmmaker himself "semi-autobiographical." And such a story about so much misery just makes to almost want to see it just to see how this guy got where he is today.
Is there a happy ending?" Like lots of actor-helmed vehicles, this one's loaded with big name walk-ons, "Joe The King" is also chock-full of trite and truths to life--the lead that seems to be born into the hard-luck life of an abusive alcoholic father, the weak whimpering mother who doesn't care if her husband pounds on her kids as long as he doesn't pound on her, the guidance counselor who's all thumbs--aren't they all?
The knife is further pushed and twisted when she makes it personal by muttering angrily so he can hear, "Just like your father..."Whaley is clearly dealing with old wounds and knows how to use them so they feel fresh and make you cringe and relate.
It takes place in the 1970's to be sure, but this feels timeless.Noah Fleiss gives the best performances he's probably ever given, although how many movies has he really made?
Kilmer, known for playing dazzling roles and pretty-boy parts, puts on a great deal of weight and shows nastier edges that he has since "The Doors." Since Whaley and Kilmer first worked together in that film, Whaley obviously saw how powerfully Kilmer could play a violent sadist, always under narcotic influence.
Whaley seems to capture the flavor for this kind of working class life and seems to bring out the best in child actors, as well as his more distinguished adult friends and peers.
And the characters are believable without being too fresh.Writer/director Whaley does an effective job of capturing the atmosphere of this Upstate New York working-class life and bring out the best in child actors and big-name celebrity walk-throughs.
"Joe The King" is kind of an acquired taste, like many coming-of-age stories.
Featured at the 1999 Toronto Film Festival, the directorial debut from the talented actor Frank Whaley "Joe The King" was introduced by Frank's long-time friend Ethan Hawke and the film's main actor Noah Fleiss.
Frank couldn't present the film because he was only just getting into Toronto at the airport but happily agreed to a Q&A afterwards.The film portrays with stunning clarity a bleak period in the life of Joe, a fourteen year old boy from a lower class neighbourhood whose father is an alcoholic and works as a janitor in Joe's school.
Joe works in a restaurant after school and in all aspects of his life he's surrounded by people who look down on him, talk down to him and sometimes beat on him.
The world that Joe lives in is so fully constructed and detailed that it's easy to forget you're watching a film and not a documentary.What was revealed in the Q&A afterwards, was that Whaley wrote this film as a conglomerate of his brother and his own experiences growing up.
What Joe goes through on a daily basis is what this story is about, what is likely to stir you, and not the pivotal event in the later part of the film.
And as a young Joe looks into the camera at the end of the film, holding there for a moment.
He couldn't have asked for a better young lead than Noah Fleiss to play so convincingly Joe the King.
Frank Whalley is a man capable of getting a lot out of his cast, having been in that position himself.The film is a disturbing account on a family that appears to be beyond dysfunctional.
As seems to be the case with men in this situation, Bob vents his frustrations with whoever crosses him, as we watch in horror the way he beats his wife.Joe, the sensitive young son, is ridiculed in school by a teacher at a tender age, where compassion for his state in life would have worked better.
The only kindness Joe receives is from the teacher counselor in his school.The best achievement for the director is the acting quality he gets from his cast.
Noah Fleiss, who portrays Joe, is the best thing in the film.
Ethan Hawke plays the kind hearted teacher and Camryn Manheim is the horrible one."Joe the King" deserves a viewing because of the excellent direction of Frank Whalley..
This film is hauntingly realistic of those kids in school who weren't like the rest of us.
So it was that I saw the promise of Noah Fleiss, as shown in Josh and S.A.M., bloom to fruition in his mature performance in this wonderful film.Joe is a youngster living in poverty and deprived of love.
Remarkably Joe is totally unselfish and, having slaved to earn cash just to survive and to improve the lives of those close to him, he is gradually driven more and more into crime.I watched this film with two friends and the three of us were so captivated by this touching story that none of us moved or uttered a word until long after the credits had finished rolling.
Young Noah Fleiss is absolutely heart-breaking as the morally corrupt child of an abusing father, played by Val Kilmer in his most earnest dramatic role.
Whaley's movie, drawn from his own life, is a touching, moving indie that should have gotten better notice..
Joe the King is about a boy, who having been raised in a broken home with an abusive drunken dad and absent mom, heads the wrong path by stealing ever bigger things and eventually having to face the consequences for it.
His only salvation is the crack that has opened between him and his parents, and the humanistic nature to do good in him that has been so overcome by the other things in his daily life.We're shown Joe coming from a broken home, which is pretty standard in these kinds of movies.
Instances like giving away most of the ho-ho's that he just stole to a bunch of hungry kids than gathered around him, to him going out of his way to steal food from the grease spoon joint that he works in so that his brother won't go hungry, along with doing the big heist to pay off his forever in-debt father and replace all his mom's records, which were broken in one of his father's drunken rage.
He still have mountains of hurdle ahead, but the light at the end of the tunnel have gotten a bit brighter.The movie takes its time telling the story without forcing the big event to happen until the characters are fully developed.
This movie is so good it transcends your own personal tastes and glues you to your seat - you remain mesmerized until the end.The only weak link in this movie is the choice of Val Kilmer as Joe's father.
There is no you, only the characters you are watching - their lives flow past you like a melancholy melody leaving you alone as a spectator like the proverbial "fly on the wall." You disappear into the film - there is no higher praise.Young Mr. Peter Tambakis does a stellar performance who is incredibly adept at acting beyond his age.
Now, thirty years on, and I wonder what horror stories the 80's and 90's have bred and who will get the funding to tell us all about it."Joe the King" doesn't quite work, for several reasons, least of which is the fact we can't really feel for him.
Thus was the case for me with "Joe the King," a lethargic, pointless film that offers virtually nothing in the way of revelation or entertainment.
Whenever I watch a film like Frank Whaley's Joe the King, it reminds me how grateful I am to have the family I have, the opportunities I have, the privileges I have, and the love had for me.
Counting these blessings only becomes easier after witnessing a film like Joe the King.The film stars Noah Fleiss as the titular character, a fourteen-year-old who has spent his life victim to physical and emotional abuse by his violent, alcoholic father Bob (Val Kilmer) and his short-tempered mother Theresa (Karen Young), who doesn't make up for the lack of attention brought on by his father.
Joe works to buy his mother all the vinyls his father trashed in a drunken rage, while also trying to keep his criminal profile as subtle as it can be without him getting caught.The idea behind Joe the King is incredibly intriguing, focusing on a young boy who, through all the abuse and neglect, still loves and deeply cares for his parents, which is a rarity in these kinds of films.
However, Joe's desire to help his dad out personally and repay his mother for something he had no involvement in makes Joe the King unique in the department of coming of age films.Fleiss is great as Joe, clearly possessing the traits of an actor who can show no emotion or a lot of it, depending on what the scene calls for.
Even his guidance counselor (Ethan Hawke) bears a frustrating emptiness in Joe's mind, really proving to himself that he can't trust anyone and only has himself to rely on.The only issue with the writing (done by Whaley himself) is that the film spends too much time on Joe, so much so that the supporting characters in his life are subtly developed and only given vague and rather broad stereotypes to work off of.
Whaley treads a fine line between committing contemptible actions as a poor, loathsome character and having sympathy for the offender nicely, making Joe a surprisingly sympathetic soul throughout the entire film.
Consistently we recognize that he is a good soul doing bad things in order to stay moderately afloat, which is what makes the film strong and stable.With three directorial efforts under his belt, and a fourth one on the way, Whaley proves that he enjoys glaringly flawed characters, who consistently try to do good by doing bad, which immediately makes for an intriguing story.
However, Whaley handles the challenge like a true directing veteran.Starring: Noah Fleiss, Val Kilmer, Karen Young, and Ethan Hawke.
Particularly commendable performances by Peter Tambakis and Noah Fleiss as, respectively, Joe at about 9 and Joe at 14.This film captures the cycle of abuse and oppression within a troubled, fragmented family better than any that I've seen.
Maybe try something like, "this movie seemed to have some realism to the story, and yet I haven't lived a life like that young man, I do believe that this could happen."No judgment calls on movies, you liked it or you didn't.
Noah Fleiss carried this movie, doing a beautiful job as the decent, but troubled, Joe.
Noah Fleiss does a generally admirable if largely unspectacular job as Joe Henry, and Val Kilmer plods valiantly through the script as if on the edge of death, which must have been the idea.The film is commendable for trying to tell a real story about real people -- rather than spray us with Hollywood nonsense as so many first-time directors are so willing to do.
I must say that Joe the King was a pretty good movie.
I really liked the way this film displayed the story and the music score didn't give me clues how to feel.
I also liked that Val Kilmer and Ethan Hawke had beer bellys and didn't look like glamour stars.At times I felt sorry for the kid, and at times I despised him, and often I put myself in his position.I work in film production, and when I get lost in a story enough to actually watch it and forget about the technical aspect, I must give it a thumbs up!Good work guys..
This film rang true to a lot of junior high memories and should be required viewing for those in the teaching profession and for women to see what life is like for a young man.
Joe the King is not a great movie, but nor is it as mediocre as the critics described.
Joe the King is a coming of age story based loosely on writer-director Frank Whaley's life that looks like a Dickens story updated.
Noah Fleiss at 14 is a veteran and does an excellent job of bringing to life the doomed but plucky Joe while Val Kilmer portrays an insensitive slob who realizes only at the end that his son loves him despite everything.
"Joe the King" was described as a semi-autobiographical work by Frank Whaley.
I'm often a sucker for movies like "This Boy's Life" and "A Bronx Tale," about young ones growing up with troubled childhoods.
And I also must establish that it's never revealed why the character is given the nickname "Joe the King." This is not a bad film, and it is compelling to a degree, but if Whaley paid more attention to the mechanics of the narrative, it could've been a lot more powerful, like "This Boy's Life" or "A Bronx Tale." My score: 6 (out of 10).
When that door clangs shut behind him at the end of the movie, you can sense that he will walk out a strong young man.The plot is tight, the acting is excellent, the camera work is beautiful.
There is an outstanding cast, but the film is carried by young Noah Fliess as Joe.
It is amazing to me that Whaley could direct this picture with such insight without having the experiences of Joe. Great acting, directing, casting, and editing with some innovative ideas that worked.
I did not like the movie because that Val Kilmer is that terrible to Noah Fliss.
What we have here is a rather depressing story of a young boy (Fliess) living with his absentee mother, his older brother, and his drunk and abusive father (Kilmer).
For me, this subject that Whaley has chosen of childhood escapism, seems to fall into a long line of similar movies like 'The 400 Blows,' 'Igby Goes Down,' and 'The Adventures of Sebastian Cole.' I think Whaley did a good job with this movie, 'Joe the King' and it encouraged me to seek out more films, if any, that he has directed.
"Joe the King", was a king above the fools in the world.Adults have such a self centered way of the expectation of kid's motives and actions without considering the very basic situation they are coming from and this film confirms how stupid people really are.
The school admin and teachers all knew very well about Joe's father, "you're just like your father", so the kid was labeled the first day he walked into that school as a loser.
Good movie with excellent young actors.
In turn he uses the money to replace his mother's record collection which his abusive father broke.It's a pretty good movie.
If you judge a movie by the story it sets out to tell, and the acting and writing to tell it, Joe the King rates a 10 out of 10, no question.I say this admitting that I picked up this movie thinking it would likely be one that I would watch for a few minutes and then shut off.
More, we are drawn in each character, large part or small, as "real".I highly recommend Joe the King - both as a great movie, and an excellent example of the work it takes to make a great movie where all parts; writing, acting, filming and more all come together to tell a story that grabs you from the beginning, and does not let you go until the credits are rolling..
He does it either to survive (steal food) or set things right (burglarizing the restaurant he works in to replace the records that his father destroyed in a fit of drunken rage.) That his worst crime is committed out of love for his mother gives the viewer a degree of hope for his character, if he can get the support he needs and avoid anymore pitfalls.
"Joe the King" is a slice-of-miserable-life flick about a boy from a dysfunctional family who steals.
I like Frank Whaley and love Val Kilmer so I was expecting a good film.
Some might say that this reflects the boys life in its bleak outlook, but this is not what I watch movies for.
Almost every adult in the film fails Joe. There are some amusing moments in this too-long, supposedly autobiographical movie, but far too few..
SPOILERS - "Joe The King" is such a bleak story of a young boy's plight that by the time the end came, which offers some redemption, my wife had tuned out to the point that she completely missed the point, until I re=played the last scene for her.
It was never clear in the film how Joe came by the moniker "the King."The film starts when Joe is 9, doesn't mix with other school kids, is seen smoking, and later in class is reluctant to tell that his dad (Val Kilmer, in a good role) is a school janitor.
At the end, his card and note to his mom, which leads her to play the song, is a statement of his love for mom.The film ends, but we are surely to assume the 6 months Joe will spend in reform school will let him start fresh, and maybe things will be different next time.
I'm not sure it's much better now.Joe the King is not entertainment; it is the life story of someone less fortunate that many of us can relate to in some way.
But I have continually seen films like this, and often times in real life, where a kid mouths off, his parent swats him, and it's 'OH MY GOD, THEY BEAT THE POOR CHILD!'.
I've seen this film in Cinematheque - the best Cinema in Hanoi.A little boy who named Joe make me think about my neighbor. |
tt0408191 | The Sisterhood | Two girls, Christine and Reagan, find themselves paired as college roommates. Christine, a diligent student, mourns the recent loss of her parents in an automobile accident. Reagan wants to enjoy all that college has to offer. For her, college equals sex, drugs and rock and roll.
Reagan convinces Christine to come to a Beta Alpha Tau sorority party and they both find it fun and provocative. When Christine’s professor finds out that she might get accepted into the popular sorority, she urges Christine to join. The professor thinks that the sorority is a sinister force, taking souls and ruining the lives of students. If Christine can infiltrate their ranks, she might find the truth behind the sorority’s power. When she gets a bid from the beautiful and powerful president of the sorority, Devin, she accepts and is introduced into a sensuous and intoxicating lifestyle.
Christine finds herself with newfound powers and delves into new pleasures. When the final initiation ceremony arrives, the stage is set for her entry into the world of darkness. The outcome is far from clear. | paranormal | train | wikipedia | Soft-core porn without the skin.
Pretty.Pretty actresses and actors.
Pretty bad script.
Pretty frequent "let's strip to our undies" scenes.
Pretty fair F/X.
Pretty jarring location decisions (the college dorm room looks like a high-end hotel room - probably because it was shot at a hotel).
Pretty bland storyline.
Pretty awful dialog.
Pretty locations.
Pretty annoying editing, unless you like the music video flash-cut style.This one isn't a guilty pleasure - this is more an embarrassing one.
If you must watch this, pick a good dance/techno album and turn the sound off on the movie - you'll see the pretty people in their pretty black undies, and probably follow the story just fine.The cast may be able to act - I doubt that anyone could look skilled given the lines/plot that they had to deal with..
Put the DVD down and back away slowly, you have been warned.
OK if you are looking for a fun lesbian romp.
This is NOT the movie If you are looking for a fun movie with hot sociopathic characters (in the vane of 'cruel intentions' or 'wild things') This is NOT the movie if you are looking for a classic vampire lesbian seductress's movie.
This is NOT the movie.However if you are looking to wast an hour of your life, this is your movie.
It is badly written, badly directed,badly scored, badly filmed.It had bad special effects...i mean really bad special effects.
I think that you can actually generate the same special effects in imovie lol.IT REALLY IS A PRETTY BAD MOVIE.The actors were classic starlet beauties however look more like porn stars.
it is shot like a soft core porn however you never get the money shot and the actors all look bored out of their brains.
the 'girl on girl' scenes, which suck btw, were so LAME that there hardly worth mentioning.
go watch the 'almost sex scenes' on youtube cos that's the only reason you would want to watch this movie and even there not worth it.A WAST OF MONEY AND TIME!!!
don't even pick it up, go watch 'Cruel intentions 2' instead - same movie without the bad special effects, bad storyline,bad writing,bad dialog and bad acting.
actually i might go watch it now just to purge my mind.
Awful..
This was made in 2004 for gods sake, what happened to our state of the art special effects?
What happened to our rough around the edges but still good actors?
The actors in this movie were unbelievably horrible, there was one or two that weren't bad, but the rest, biggg thumbs down.
Couldn't stand listening to the badly written dialogue, I mean, who the heck wrote that script?
Please don't ever write again!
Special effects?
Don't even get me started on the special effects.
SURELY they could have come up with better then fully fake looking green balls of light in the eye sockets.
It looks so old and..lame frankly.!
Even the easiest thing to make look real..the teeth, THEY looked so fake and stupid I would almost wipe a tear from my eye in annoyance.
Come onnnn I cant believe this was even shown to the public.!.
What do you expect??.
The Sisterhood" was lame, stupid, sleazy....in a PG-13 kind of way, and poorly acted by most (not all) of the supporting cast....I will give Barbara Crampton a big break here!
What do expect from director David DeCoteau??
Like Schlock and shock King William Castle of the 1950's and 60's, David has managed to become the King of today's B grade horror films.
There is an "art" to making terribly bad movies that are actually fun, interesting, and entertaining.
David always manages to capture this on film.
On a positive note, I really liked Joe Silva's tech-no dance beat score, especially during the hot erotic opening sequence and ending credit roll.
I compare his movies to that of a train wreck......so horrible, yet it is hard to take your eyes off it!!
If you value your IQ, do not subject yourself to it..
My sister knows of my love of vampire movies and novels.
She asked me to watch "The Sisterhood".
Come to find out later, she did it as a joke.
I knew I had just lost over an hour of my life for nothing.
I've never seen a more mind numbing movie in my life.
What were they thinking?
The actors were completely atrocious.
They sounded more like they were reading cue cards(and badly) than talking from memory.
Most of the movie was girl-on-girl action and touching themselves when no one else was around.
Tasteless.
Cheap, extremely cheap, special effects.
Lame script.
No plot(was it even really about vampires?) Crappy location.
Were these people hired because they agreed to take their clothes off?
I can't help but recall a quote when I watched this.
"It just goes to show you, you don't have to have brains to make it in showbiz".
And this film proved that theory.
If I could have given this movie lower than a 0, I would've.
I can't even tell you exactly what it was about.
By watching this, I could physically feel my IQ points drop.
Fortunately, I picked up a classic novel and begin to reload my brain back to full capacity.
So, if you value your intelligence, don't even touch the case that the movie comes in.
If you do watch it and feel yourself becoming dumber, don't say I didn't warn you.
Pick up a Shakespeare novel or watch "The Gummi Bears".
At least you'll learn something..
Insultingly bad..
DeCoteau has to be one of the worst "directors" working today in any genre, and it has nothing to do with his movies usually containing homoerotism and having guys run around in their matching boxer briefs.
Remember...
anyone in tight black underwear is satanic and evil and want to suck out your blood/soul...
such deep symbolism here).
I just sat through The Sisterhood to give him his fair shakes, I try to watch every horror movie I can and this one had Barbara (FROM BEYOND, RE-ANIMATOR) Crampton in it (I had previously been sucked in to the world of DeCoteau thanks to Linnea Quigley, Adrienne Barbeau and several other actresses I like).Lemme tell you what about The Sisterhood...
Like the other reviewer pointed out, the supposed plot involves lesbian vampires on a college campus.
But never has a parade of hot young babes ("actresses" if you want) running around dressed in bras, panties and bikinis been so boring.
The movie has no plot, no gore, no nudity and the dialog is ridiculous and seems like they made it up as they go along.
Parts are put in slow-motion and repeated many times to push the running time up.
About ten minutes of this one consists of characters just walking around on campus (oh, the excitement!) that looks more like a hotel resort than any college I've ever been to.
And the acting is the absolute worst.
The only thing these girls do well is lean forward and bend over to show off their bodies.
The cast were so devoid of talent that I'd be shocked to see any of them get a one-day walk-on role on Passions in the future.
Ditto for the guys.
Yeah DeCoteau squeezed more hot guys in underwear in this one, too...
Guys who should be in some K-Mart brochure instead of trying to act.
Do these people actually have to audition or just show up in Dave's office and take their clothes off?
I think the answer is obvious.I am willing to give any movie a chance if 1.) it's intelligently written, well directed, original and competently acted (or hell, even ambitious and stylish)...
Or 2.) it is chock full of gore, nudity, assorted trashiness and/or it's unintentionally hilarious.
David DeCoteau's movies deliver NONE of that and they do it on better-than-usual production values for direct-to-video flicks.
What a waste!
So what is the appeal, especially with the advent of porn of the soft- and hard-core variety that's easily accessible to anyone with a computer?
I simply cannot answer that.DeCoteau is a gay horror director and could use his resources to put a unique spin on the genre.
Instead, he produces mind-numbing drivel without an ounce of talent or intelligence shining through.
Ironically, when you think about it, his films are anything BUT pro-gay.
They actually make homosexuality seem seedy, secretive and sinister.
The obviously gay characters in his films are always trying to corrupt, seduce and/or kill off the innocent, sexually-confused leads.
There's no shading here to make things interesting.
The protagonists are naive and seldom prove themselves to be strong, assertive or confident in who they are.
I would understand this plotting if Jerry Falwell, Fred Phelps or Dr. Laura starting making direct-to-video horror films, but from a gay director, it just goes to show that he puts almost no thought into these beefcake cheese-fests..
Lesbian vampire sorority meets psychic pledge.
I don't honestly know what legal or illegal substance they - the writers - were on when the wrote this horrid piece of tripe!The cast - sucks The plot - sucks The editing - sucks The whole premise of the movie is that a girl with psychic/telekinetic powers comes across a lesbian vampire sorority, you just have to be totally out of your head to watch even 1 minute of this.The only reason I had to watch it - it was on the here!
network as part of a two-picture purchase and the movie that came on after it was the real one that I wanted to see.
I fast forwarded through the whole thing and was just amazed how stupid this movie was in double speed!Do not rent, buy, or watch this movie....the vampires in the movie don't suck as much as the overall movie and production does!If you want a good lesbian vampire movie - The Hunger with David Bowie, Susan Sarandon & Katharine Deneuve - excellent movie to watch/own/rent in place of this piece of pure sh*t.
A highly disappointing movie.
I wasn't expecting "Citizen Kane" but I was hoping for some extreme guilty pleasure!
The script is bad, but the school exterior shots were obviously done with the same 5 extras on the same day & the dorm exterior shots were easily shot during a hurricane.The wardrobe was swapped around so much, I hoped the wardrobe mistress had some good strong soap to wash the panties.
I know the budget's time but do you think they could have bought a couple of DIFFERENT styles of underwear?
What oversexed up vampiric hot chick would wear boy-leg panties under latex trousers?
I was relieved to see one appearance of thong in the penultimate scene.Good points: the actors were all *very* attractive, and the girls had natural boobs.
Too bad they never took the bras off.The special effects were neither effective and could only be describes as special, if they rode the short bus to the edit bay.
The final scene in particular is horrifically, laughably bad.-Lizzzzzzzz.
I'm not sure.
I really do not understand how I managed to watch that whole film.I am dumbfounded over why anyone thought that this script was a good idea.The star of the show barely said anything through out the whole film, and thank god for that because she couldn't act anyways.
The special effects in this film were not good, at all.
They are only to be laughed at.
The storyline would've been good, but it was not worked on.
There was too much of the badly written script and half naked girls for anyone to notice that it would have been good.Just don't watch it, for your own sake.
If you're looking for a hot lesbian vampire movie, this film is not it..
Another filmmaker that doesn't know his audience.
Who is the movie made for?
It appears to be a soft-core erotic thriller, with young girls, bad acting, and a ridiculous story.
Except that within those parameters, the movie is so chaste and simplistic, it feels like something the Disney Channel might have done.It is about a girl who gets caught up into a world of power and deceit when she joins an exclusive sorority.
She eventually learns they are evil vampires and uses her psychic powers to destroy their leader.
One of the more ridiculous subplots involves the male lead who goes from saving his virginity for marriage to walking around campus with sunglasses and his shirt open (an outward expression of how he has been corrupted).
Like I say, it plays more like something from the original 90210 series than a movie that would play on late night cable.So the level of sophistication in the writing feels like it was targeted at preteens, but the movie includes scenes lengthy lesbian make-out scenes. |
tt2357129 | Jobs | The film opens in 2001 with a middle-aged Steve Jobs (Ashton Kutcher) introducing the iPod at an Apple Town Hall meeting.
It then flashes back to Reed College in 1974. Jobs had already dropped out due to the high expense of tuition, but was still attending classes with the approval of Dean Jack Dudman (James Woods) who took him under his wing. Jobs is particularly interested in a course on calligraphy. He meets up with his friend Daniel Kottke (Lukas Haas) who is excited to see that Jobs is holding a copy of Be Here Now by Baba Ram Dass. Influenced by this book and his experiences with LSD, Jobs and Kottke spend time in India.
Two years later, Jobs is back in Los Altos, California living at home with his adoptive parents Paul (John Getz) and Clara (Lesley Ann Warren). He is working for Atari and develops a partnership with his friend Steve Wozniak (Josh Gad) after he sees that Wozniak has built a personal computer (the Apple I). They name their new company Apple Computer, though there already is a company called Apple Records that is owned by The Beatles (Wozniak then teases Jobs that this is symbolic of his preference for Bob Dylan). Wozniak gives a demonstration of the Apple I at the Homebrew Computer Club. Jobs is later approached by Paul Terrell (Brad William Henke) who shows interest in the Apple I. Knowing that he and Wozniak will need a studio in which to build them, Jobs convinces his father Paul to allow them to use the family garage (set up as a carpentry/tool center) for his new company. Realizing that they cannot build these computers alone, Jobs also recruits Kottke, Bill Fernandez (Victor Rasuk), and Chris Espinosa (Eddie Hassell) to the Apple team.
Terrell, however, is disappointed by the Apple I, a reaction which inspires Jobs to start again with a second model. He hires Rod Holt (Ron Eldard) to reconceptualize the power supply for what would be called the Apple II. In addition, after many failed attempts, Jobs finally wins the interest of a venture capitalist, Mike Markkula (Dermot Mulroney), who also joins Apple. They release the Apple II at the 1977 West Coast Computer Faire where it is a remarkable success. Suddenly Jobs and the company are very successful.
The success also causes Jobs to distance himself from his friends and his high school girlfriend Chrisann Brennan (Ahna O'Reilly). When Brennan tells him she is pregnant with their child, he promptly ends their relationship. Brennan eventually gives birth to Lisa Brennan whom Jobs continues to deny as his daughter. He also brings in John Sculley (Matthew Modine) to become the CEO of the company. As his behavior becomes more erratic (for example firing an employee for not appreciating his investment in using fonts), Jobs is moved away from The Lisa to the Macintosh Group where he works with Bill Atkinson, Burrell Smith (Lenny Jacobson), Chris Espinosa, and Andy Hertzfeld (Elden Henson). He also forces the original team leader of the Macintosh group, Jef Raskin, out of it. Though the Macintosh is introduced with a great deal of fanfare in 1984, Jobs is forced out of the company by Sculley in 1985.
The film jumps forward to 1996. Jobs is married to Laurene Powell Jobs (Abby Brammell) and has accepted Lisa (Annika Bertea) as his daughter (she now lives with them). He has a son, Reed (Paul Baretto) and is also running the company NeXT which Apple decides to buy. He is asked by then-CEO Gil Amelio to return to Apple as a consultant. Jobs does so and soon he is named the new CEO, ultimately firing Amelio and his ex-friend Markkula (who refused to support him when he was forced out of Apple 11 years prior). Jobs becomes interested in the work of Jonathan Ive (Giles Matthey) and works to reinvent Apple. The film ends with Jobs recording the dialogue for the Think Different commercial in 1997. Before the credits, there are original photos of all the main characters paired with clips from the film of the actor playing the part, plus a dedication to Steve Jobs. | inspiring, historical | train | wikipedia | The storytelling is painfully straightforward, covering only the principal events of his professional trials and tribulations, and providing little else beyond what is already public knowledge.Developing his imagination for computer programming at Atari, Steve Jobs (Ashton Kutcher) brings in his friend Steve Wozniak (Josh Gad) to help with the hardware aspect, forming a partnership that would soon lead to the founding and development of Apple Computers, a force within the industry throughout the 1980s.
Steve is not prepared for the financial demands and the ruthless business mentality, and is eventually forced out of the company he began, only to return in the 1990s with a fresh game plan on how to bring Apple back into the public consciousness, and to dominate the industry once again."Jobs" is a biopic with a very narrow focus, and without any sense of risk or adventure.
The entire production feels rushed and slapped together simply to benefit from being the first one out of the gate.To his credit, Kutcher puts forth a good effort, and he undeniably looks the part of Steve Jobs.
And no one wants to see a movie about a man who nobody liked half of the movie...but it is how he was and you have to accept that.Ashton Kutcher's portrayal was also quite good and it seems that all the comedy movies and series that he has done have earned him a title of a bad actor, so you will hear a lot people saying this was a miss cast.
If you want a good movie about Steve jobs watch Pirates of Silicon Valley.
It just makes me so mad to think that they could get away with making something like this Spend your 14 dollars and get something to eat while you watch Pirates of Silicon Valley, a much better and much more accurate story of Steve Jobs and Apple's beginnings.
maybe a better name would have been "Apple & jobs - Some of the Years"!Wait for the movie to hit your TV and know you will still be missing more than half the story!.
Admittedly, to expect more would probably be a tall order, since the man has passed away and the others who would be familiar with these past events did not participate in the making of this film - including the real-life Woz, who in fact has been a vocal critic of the movie.
Most of all, Stern's film rarely possesses the qualities that characterised Jobs - it isn't bold enough to offer a balanced, or critical even, perspective of the man (including his more unsavoury personal aspects), nor unique enough to provide a distinctive look at the early years of his storied career.
Isn't a biopic supposed to teach us about a persons emotions, feelings about life, and his relationships with others?If you want to learn about who Steve Jobs is, read his biography.
If you want something that makes you FEEL smart like you know about the genius of a man and Apple Corporation, watch this film..
The movie is flat, no emotions whatsoever, no chemistry between the actors, most of the carachters are just "one dimension"..I am not an apple fanatic (I have some of their products but I do not change them to follow the flow every year) and I am not blind before the flaws of Jobs' personality, but I'd like to see in the movie all the aspects of the man who, like it or not, left a mark in the IT field.
What I saw it is a series of often disconnected episodes, and the few of them which were nice were a re-do of the (much better) the pirates of the Silicon Valley.Do not waste your time with this movie: if you want to learn more about apple/jobs, read a book, if you are already aware of the story, it simply won't add anything..
Moreover, important events which made Jobs what he is like the creation of NeXT, the buying of Pixar and his fight with cancer are completely missing.Ashton Kutcher has come a long way from portraying the stupid kid in That 70's show to portraying one of the geniuses of our generation.
The dialog accurately reflects whats already out there in print (re:Isaacson and Moritz books on Jobs and the history of Apple computer).Like many docudramas I've seen, the film had trouble creating the kind of underlying drama that a fictional account could do and the movie suffered a little bit from not having much of a back story.
But here we have a much more visionary person like Steve Jobs whose story we all want to see told on film and the result from Matt Whiteley's script is completely uninspiring.
You simply don't care for the Steve Jobs that's presented here.The film begins by introducing us to Steve Jobs (Ashton Kutcher) as he is presenting his latest creation, the ipod which will change the way people listen to music everywhere (as we already know).
Since I mentioned David Fincher's movie Social Network, I will start my review with the major problem in jOBS: Considering Social Network was an aptly marketed everyone's hero style of an average business-drama movie, in order to market a Steve Jobs life story appropriately, this wasn't the right choice.
Now people would come to you and ask "What did Steve Jobs do for the last 14 years of his life as a CEO in Apple?".
People not acquainted to Job's life will have the feeling they're missing something, and people who have read the book or simply know a little of Job's life will conclude the movie missed a lot.We'll see Steve bullying on everyone as a dictator running Apple, right after picturing him as some clear minded wise man with a strong meditation and spiritual background.The story would have been so strong if only the characters took their time to develop, and not just showing them to the camera, say their names and on to the next clip of Jobs and his illuminated doing.
(In addition, there was the pressure of knowing that another version of the film was being written by the highly-esteemed Aaron Sorkin.) When it comes to portraying the legend who co-founded Apple computers, Ashton Kutcher does an excellent
Jobs.
The actor uses his natural resemblance to the computer genius and adds just enough of Steve Jobs' voice, mannerisms and walk to help us (mostly) forget that we're watching Ashton Kutcher, but he doesn't overdo it by trying to do a perfect impression which could have crossed over into caricature.
This film represents some of Kutcher's best work to date, but not quite award worthy.Unfortunately, the script isn't strong enough to give us the whole picture of Steve Jobs' remarkable life.
and I'm always up to date about the company's movements but the critics here I think were a little rough.I considered it a good movie and Ashton's interpretation of the character was better than I expected, if you never have seen Pirates of Silicon Valley and never read something related to the company you may not be able to complete the missing gaps I encounter during the story telling but if you did it, you will see all these replicated in the movie.
And the movie doesn't have an ending it looks like writers pen was running out of ink "yes this script was written with the pen"All in all if you want some movie to relax after a hard work day or just an easy movie to watch with your girlfriend or a boyfriend this is a good choice just don't expect great acting or some thrilling parts of his life you can't find on wiki.
Unjustly judged by the Critics for making Ashton Kuther play the role of Steve Jobs in the movie..
This is the life story of iconic founder of Apple Steve Jobs, how he founded his company, lost it and got it back.
This was a far cry from the Steve Jobs that was so lovingly adulated after his death.I do not know if it was because Steve Jobs the man is not exactly a good movie biopic subject, or was it Ashton Kutcher's fault for not being able to bring the man out?
The sudden ending came out of nowhere such that it completely had no impact, which was a pity.In contrast, the character of Steve Wozniak, Jobs' technical genius partner, was very vividly portrayed by Josh Gad. Woz was a well- developed character even if he was not the central character.It was good to see former lead stars Dermot Mulroney and Matthew Modine on the big screen again, though the characters they played were dry corporate types, no real emotion nor action.
From the very start of the film it just felt wrong, If I didn't know anything about this man I would have no clue who these characters really are, but as a computer junkie I definitely know who these people are, but for some people without knowledge of who Steve Jobs or Steve Wozniack are or even the rest of the characters that help start Apple this film could be considered boring.Most of the film is jumbled up, like a person pressing the fast forward button, I actually read Steve Jobs' biography and it was actually very well written, but this film was terribly written with no humour and just a rushed storyline, with a runtime of 2 hours 7 mins, I was expecting more from this feature film.Without going into too much detail, I'd say stick with the biography and stay far away from this film.
I always new that Ashton Kutcher was a good actor ever since his performance in the film the "Butterfly effect" (and a few more), but must credit this film for choosing him as representing Steve Jobs.
This film could have been an epic biography, but it's all shallow and rotten - starting from the actor who not only simply touched the surface not going into any depth about the character he was playing, but also took a job right after the movie that was so contradictory that it should be prohibited - he became now product engineer for Lenovo - it's like an actress would play Mother Theresa and then went to become a $5 whore in Vegas...
It was some good material for a movie and could have been a great picture to be watched over and over again, instead it became a piece of crap with an amateur in it (liked Kutcher for Butterfly Effect and others, hated him after this one).
Movie also failed to show the successful years of Apple.The characters are resembling well to the original people but Ashton Kutcher did a terrible job trying to imitate Steve.
What I failed to glean was what drew people to him and why they would stick by him long after he had shafted them.In the inexplicably over-looked film, Me and Orson Welles, Christian McKay in his Bafta- nominated role shows the charisma and wonderful genius of Welles who could command the loyalty of his friends and associates despite having the same major character flaws displayed by Jobs.Unfortunately, Ashton Kutcher's limitations as a dramatic actor were laid bare in this film.
From the stories i read about Steve Jobs, he had a tense life and really achieves lots of things like other guy as himself.
I even imagined how could it be done and it seems perfect to me.Well after i watched this puny movie Jobs, disappointed, i realized that somebody already managed to craft a decent flick, showing both rivalries.you see, some people around the world got this lame thing; if you transmit good vibes or ask what you need from universe, it will give it to you / you'll live a "nice" life, i say this is b***t and they got it wrong.
Dialogues are filled with awkward behavior, characters talk like they seem to be inspired, in particular Steve Jobs (I know it's a dramatization, but it's a bad one at that), sometimes they talk with the volume too low, among many others.Also, if they wished to show incorrect or downright manipulated scenes (A.K.A. events or details that didn't actually happen in real-life), they could at least do it for the sake of dramatizing it, like The Social Network did really well: all of the changes in this movie from real-life events aren't of any decent value and just feel like they don't belong in either a Biographic film, where the main objective is to tell exactly what happened (or at least "mostly"), or a Biopic, which is what this is supposed to be.Overall, not a good depiction of Steve Jobs's life, and not a good movie in and of itself..
So, Please re-make or re-produce the movie with new way and more interesting,innovation,motivation, inspiration ,etc and show the all things from birth of Steve jobs,college life, foundation of the apple company to current position of the company.......and all apple products...
Nothing is learned that isn't Common Knowledge, and the Movie is without Inspiration or Heart.A Tacked On Voice Over Ending about the Limitations and Boundaries of Life's Constraints is as Hokey as the rest of this Total Misfire.Note...The Poster and Disc Art looks more like Jerry Garcia than Steve Jobs and is an indication that no one behind this Failure had a Clue..
But Ashton Kutcher was not a very good Steve Jobs when it comes to Steve Jobs as a person.The cinematography in this film was also okay.
They made Ashton Kutcher look like Steve Jobs.
i also thought the movie itself was a very good movie - going back to the beginning and then at the end in 2001 when Steve jobs brought Apple back.
anyway - i think if you want to know the real Steve Jobs - then Jobs is a great movie.
Also I thought Ashton Kutcher is doing a good acting job on this movie as well as the other actors; especially Dermot Mulroney stands out as Mike Markkula.All with all; it is a movie and not the official biography of Steve Jobs..
I've read a lot of really crappy, ill-informed reviews of this film by people who clearly don't know the subject - you should ignore them.Yes there are holes in the film; its a massive subject - a mans entire life and persona, and the history of the world's most valuable and innovative company, so that's to be expected, but in my opinion Ashton Kutchner absolutely nailed it - he was amazing and I found the film - despite my expectations to the contrary, absolutely riveting.My advice to anyone who wants to watch this film and doesn't know much about the driven, tortured, flawed visionary that was Steve Jobs, is to first read Walter Isaacson's biography - its a fantastic book that tells Jobs' story without pulling any punches and will add immensely to your enjoyment of this film..
Whether intentional or not, the makers of this film succeeded in making this a pleasant experience to watch and any Apple fan among the viewers, I'm sure, will agree it encapsulates the attitude and feel of Apple itself in the movie.The film isn't coated with gimmicks and cinematic effects to make it any more than it is, instead it is a clean, interesting and relatable biographical of Steve Jobs and his life from college up until the revealing of iPod.The actors were perfect choices in my opinion, every single character is played to perfection, most notably Ashton Kutcher who quite literally IS Steve Jobs in this film - from the accent and speech down to his very posture and slight figure - (forgive me for the unnecessary dig, but it's the very perfection Jesse Eisenberg failed to accomplish playing Mark Zuckerberg in 'the social network')The film is also honest, and from the outset we see that Jobs was by no means perfect - he had flaws, didn't always get on well with others, yet was a natural leader and knew how he would drive Apple forward as innovative world-leader in electronics.
The result is a finely-capped movie that leaves you free to base your own judgements on Steve Jobs as a person in whichever way you feel by showing you his highs, his lows, and how the choices he made in life got him to where they did.Overall a great film that I fail to find any faults in (rarity, I assure you!) and I would recommend to all interested.
Kutcher plays an extremely convincing Steve Jobs; the highlight for me was simply watching him walk about the workplace, hunched over shoulders and all.After viewing 'true story' films like this, I am immediately forced to the internet to read the real life account of the situation.
The life of Steve Jobs is massively colourful and electrifying and yet this film manages to portray him as an egotistical jerk with no redeeming qualities.At times you are not sure when or where you are and the rest of the time you will find yourself wondering when something will actually happen.So much of the best of Apples and Jobs history have been left out of this Movie that I felt like I had been cheated.It promised so much and yet failed to deliver..
Though Ashton Kutcher looks very much like Steve Jobs, this movie falls very flat.
A good telling of the Steve Jobs & Apple story.
A good telling of the Steve Jobs & Apple story.
The difference between the two is this - This film shows a great deal of Steve's' life, with a real accent on the mid to late 70s as Apple was being created.
If the movie was an attempt to bring out/reveal the life and times of Steve Jobs, this was a bad attempt.
The movie shows none of his achievements and just portrays him as a mean guy.If you really want to know Steve Jobs, better read his biography rather than watching it..
I actually enjoyed this movie a lot, Ashton Kutcher acted very well as Steve Jobs.
I think Ashton Kutcher saw that film before embarking on his portrayal of Steve Jobs. |
tt0013520 | Puss in Boots | The tale opens with the third and youngest son of a miller receiving his inheritance—a cat. At first, the youngest son laments, as the eldest brother gains the mill, and the middle brother gets the mules. The feline is no ordinary cat, however, but one who requests and receives a pair of boots. Determined to make his master's fortune, the cat bags a rabbit in the forest and presents it to the king as a gift from his master, the fictional Marquis of Carabas. The cat continues making gifts of game to the king for several months.
One day, the king decides to take a drive with his daughter. The cat persuades his master to remove his clothes and enter the river which their carriage passes. The cat disposes of his master's clothing beneath a rock. As the royal coach nears, the cat begins calling for help in great distress. When the king stops to investigate, the cat tells him that his master the Marquis has been bathing in the river and robbed of his clothing. The king has the young man brought from the river, dressed in a splendid suit of clothes, and seated in the coach with his daughter, who falls in love with him at once.
The cat hurries ahead of the coach, ordering the country folk along the road to tell the king that the land belongs to the "Marquis of Carabas", saying that if they do not he will cut them into mincemeat. The cat then happens upon a castle inhabited by an ogre who is capable of transforming himself into a number of creatures. The ogre displays his ability by changing into a lion, frightening the cat, who then tricks the ogre into changing into a mouse. The cat then pounces upon the mouse and devours it. The king arrives at the castle that formerly belonged to the ogre, and, impressed with the bogus Marquis and his estate, gives the lad the princess in marriage. Thereafter, the cat enjoys life as a great lord who runs after mice only for his own amusement.
The tale is followed immediately by two morals: "one stresses the importance of possessing industrie and savoir faire while the other extols the virtues of dress, countenance, and youth to win the heart of a princess." The Italian translation by Carlo Collodi notes that the tale gives useful advice if you happen to be a cat or a Marquis of Carabas.
This is the theme in France, but other versions of this theme exist in Asia, Africa, and South America. | fantasy | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0038238 | The Way to the Stars | Pilot Officer Peter Penrose (John Mills) is posted in the summer of 1940 as a pilot to (the fictional) No. 720 Squadron, at a new airfield, RAF Station Halfpenny Field. He is a very green "15-hour sprog" Bristol Blenheim pilot and is assigned to B Flight, under Flight Lieutenant David Archdale (Michael Redgrave).
When No. 720 Squadron's commanding officer, Squadron Leader Carter (Trevor Howard, in his second but first credited film role), is shot down, Archdale takes over. While Penrose develops into a first-class pilot, he meets Iris Winterton (Renee Asherson), a young woman living with her domineering aunt at the Golden Lion hotel in the nearby town. Archdale marries Miss Todd (Rosamund John), the popular manageress of the hotel, who is known to everyone as Toddy. The Archdales later have a son, Peter.
The action flashes forward to May 1942. The squadron is now flying Douglas Boston bombers. When Penrose shows signs of strain from extensive combat, Archdale has him posted to controller school, but is himself shot down and killed over France on Penrose's last mission. Penrose had been courting Iris, despite her aunt's disapproval, but Archdale's fate weighs heavily on his mind. Not wanting Iris to suffer if the same happened to him, he stops seeing her.
No. 720 Squadron is sent to the Middle East, but Penrose remains behind as a ground controller for a United States Army Air Forces B-17 Flying Fortress bombardment group, which takes over the airfield. He befriends USAAF Captain Johnny Hollis (Douglass Montgomery) and Lieutenant Joe Friselli (Bonar Colleano). On 17 August 1942, the American airmen participate in the first attack by the USAAF on Occupied France, later ruefully acknowledging that they underestimated the difficulties involved. Afterwards, Penrose is posted to flying duties with an RAF Avro Lancaster bomber unit.
In 1944, Penrose, now a squadron leader and pathfinder pilot, makes an emergency landing at Halfpenny Field, where he meets Iris again. Iris had decided to leave her aunt for good and join up. Toddy persuades a still-reluctant Penrose to propose to Iris, saying that she did not regret her own marriage in spite of her husband's death. Hollis, who has formed a platonic relationship with Toddy, is killed while crash-landing a damaged returning bomber rather than bail out and risk it crashing into the village. | romantic, storytelling, flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0035096 | The Mummy's Tomb | The Mummy's Tomb picks up the story thirty years after the conclusion of the previous film. It begins with Steve Banning (Dick Foran) reciting the story of Kharis to his family and evening guests in his Mapleton, Massachusetts home. Footage from The Mummy's Hand appears as Banning tells his tale. As he concludes his tale of the successful destruction of the creature, the scene switches back to the tombs of Egypt.
Surviving their supposed demise, Andoheb (George Zucco) explains the legend of Kharis (Lon Chaney, Jr.) to his follower, Mehemet Bey (Turhan Bey). After passing on the instructions for the use of the tana leaves and assigning the task of terminating the remaining members of the Banning Expedition and their descendants, Andoheb expires. Bey and Kharis leave Egypt for the journey to the United States.
Bey takes the caretaker's job at the local cemetery, sets up shop and administers the tana brew to Kharis. The monster sets out to avenge the desecration of Ananka's tomb. His first victim is Stephen Banning, whom the creature kills as the aging archaeologist prepares for bed.
As the Sheriff (Cliff Clark) and Coroner (Emmett Vogan) can't come up with a lead, newspapermen converge on Mapleton to learn more about the murder. Babe Hanson (Wallace Ford) arrives on the scene after learning of his friend's death. When Jane Banning (Mary Gordon), Steve's sister, is killed, Hanson is convinced it is the work of a mummy.
Meeting with the Sheriff and Coroner, Hanson is unable to convince them of the identity of the culprit. He tells his story to a newspaperman at the local bar, but is himself dispatched by Kharis almost immediately afterwards.
John Banning enlists the help of Professor Norman (Frank Reicher) to solve the puzzle of the "grayish mark" found on the victims. Norman's test results prove that Hanson was right, the substance was indeed mold from a mummy.
Meanwhile, Bey has plans of his own. Knowing that Banning and his girlfriend, Isobel Evans (Elyse Knox) are planning to marry, he sets out to disrupt their nuptials. Bey himself has become smitten with Isobel, and sends Kharis on a mission to bring her to him. Kharis initially balks, but finally adheres to Bey's command. In the dark of the night, the monster stealthily enters the Evans' home and abducts the fainting girl to the cemetery caretaker's hut. Bey unveils his plan to the reluctant Isobel, that she is to become his bride, as a "High Priest of Karnak", and bear him an heir to the royal line.
Banning and the rest of the townspeople have become convinced that their recent Egyptian transplant may be involved in the crimes. Arriving in force, they confront Bey outside the hut. Kharis slips away with Isobel unbeknownst to the horde, and Bey attempts to shoot Banning, but is himself gunned down by the Sheriff. The creature is observed heading toward the Banning estate, and the group begins pursuit, many bearing torches. Inside the home, Banning holds Kharis at bay with a torch while he rescues Isobel from the mummy's grasp, but inadvertently sets fire to some curtains. With the aid of the Sheriff and Coroner, John and Isobel escape via a trellis as Kharis pursues them out onto the upstairs balcony. The townspeople keep the mummy from escape by hurling additional torches at him, and the monster perishes in the flames of the thoroughly consumed house. Banning and Isobel wed in short order, as he has received his draft notice and is due to report for his tour of duty in World War II. | revenge, murder, flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0096875 | Catchfire | Conceptual artist Anne Benton (Jodie Foster) creates electronic pieces that flash evocative statements, and her work has begun to attract major media attention.
Driving home one night, Anne suffers a blowout on a deserted road and, while looking for help, witnesses a mafia hit supervised by Leo Carelli (Joe Pesci). Leo spots Anne, but she escapes and goes to the police.
They offer her a place in the federal witness protection program, but mob boss Lino Avoca (Vincent Price), Carelli's boss, sends top-of-the-line hitman Milo (Dennis Hopper) and his partner Pinella (John Turturro) to silence her. Pinella kills her boyfriend Bob (Charlie Sheen), but she escapes.
Months pass; Anne has severed all ties with her past and re-established herself in Seattle as an advertising copywriter. Milo, who never gives up, recognizes the tagline of a lipstick ad as one of Anne's catchphrases, and tracks her down.
She flees again, to New Mexico, and he finds her again. But this time he offers her a deal: he'll let her live, if she'll do anything and everything he asks.
Milo's interest in Anne, it turns out, is more than professional, but not exactly what she thinks. He doesn't want her to be his sex slave, though sex is part of the equation.
A man obsessed, Milo has fallen in love with Anne. And he has no idea how to cope with the unfamiliar emotion. Astonishingly, after a rocky start, Anne realizes that she has also fallen for him.
By failing to kill Anne as he was hired to do, Milo has marked himself for death, and the two flee together to an isolated farm that Milo owns.
Avoca's men track them there, and they realize that in order to be free, they must return and confront their pursuers. The plan that they concoct works, leaving Avoca, Carelli, and their men dead.
Anne and Milo escape together to a new life. | cult, murder | train | wikipedia | Despite the shameless overacting by almost the entire cast, and, despite the "chop shop" editing of the DVD, and, despite the two famous actors (Charlie Sheen, Joe Pesci) who yanked their names from the credits, and, despite the randomness and somewhat unbelievability of the script, and, despite the movie's tendency to vacillate wildly between genuine tension, dark humor, titillating nudity, and cartoonish situations, in spite of all these potential faults, "Backtrack" is very watchable.
Dennis Hopper's go-for-broke-on-a-slim-budget black comedy about a hit-man falling for his target, a strange but alluring young woman who makes pop art out of neon signs.
I enjoyed bits of "Backtrack" (see that, not the butchered European print entitled "Catchfire") such as the gorgeous theater in New Mexico where Jodie Foster hides out or the funny scene where she's pacing around in the bathroom, trying to decide how far she should go with her pervy kidnapper.
These two are so powerful that they make Fred Ward look like a character actor.This is a violent movie where the violence never seems to override the comedy/relationship/slice of life issues that the film portrays.
A very strange film with a sterling cast.Anne Benton (Jodie Foster) was in the wrong place at the wrong time and witnessed a murder.
On the mob side, we have the boss, Vincent Price; John Turturro (Barton Fink, "Monk"); Tony Sirico ("The Sopranos"); and Joe Pesci (Goodfellas, Raging Bull).Cameos by Bob Dylan, Charlie Sheen, and Catherine Keener added up to a great cast.
Too bad the movie wasn't as good as the people in it.Dennis Hopper (Hoosiers, Easy Rider), who also produced and directed the movie, played Milo, a hit man hired by the mob to catch the girl.
We get a good look at Jodie's Fosters not once, but twice in the most skintastic performance of her career.
Oh, filmmakers just love to make evil look good.Who better to play a twisted wacko than Dennis Hopper?
Check this out: Hopper, Foster, Joe Pecsi, Fred Ward, Dean Stockwell, Vincent Price, John Turturro and Charlie Sheen.
AND some understated humor, would-ya-believe romance and kindness to animals, and a happy ending of sorts.Dennis Hopper took his name off the cut version, which apparently omits, among others, parts of scenes featuring Jodie Foster's nudity.
This is the version I saw, and even thus cut I give the film a 7.The plot is straightforward: a hitman (Dennis Hopper) hired to kill a woman (Jodie Foster) who witnessed a mob murder gives her the option of staying alive and being "his." Then, since he defaulted on his assignment, they must flee mob reprisal.My relatively high rating is based on Hopper's direction and on the acting, principally of the two main stars.
Dennis Hopper's original cut of the film was three hours, which is more akin to a move out of Erich von Stroheim; maybe it is genius in its full form, but perhaps Hopper would have been better just taking what is a half-bitter, half-sweet neo-noir with pitch black comedy and crazy romance as a shorter feature.
To give Hopper his credit a lot of this is due to a choppy rhythm; sometimes there's a spectacular cut (i.e. when he jumps from a rooftop it cuts right away to him opening a drawer in a room), and sometimes it really does feel like a little extra detail or moment is excised in favor of keeping the plot going.It's not a bad plot either, if somewhat typical in the film noir tradition: a woman has one of those freak chance of occurrences on a road as her tires go flat on a highway, and walking along the side of the road she sees in a wasteland a mob hit.
The mobsters see her, she escapes in time, goes to the cops, and then when the mob comes by and kills her boyfriend she goes on the run - not taking into account a strange, soulful hit-man is on her trail, more as a stalker than a killer, leading to a very challenging moment halfway where the gears shift in tone.The first half is fairly fun as a chase movie and has some surprises, mostly in cameos that had me smile (Vincent Price) and shaking my head and laughing like I was having a hallucination (Bob Dylan), with Hopper creating what looks to be another in a line of classic psychos (he has the skill of a puzzle-solver following Foster's trail, and sometimes plays the saxophone to relax).
When he finally tracks her down, however, there's a possibly great scene: Hopper, with a tie around her neck and handcuffs on her hands, gives Foster a choice, either die right now or be "mine" so that she would be under his total control.
There's a sort of absurdity here that maybe echoes Bunuel; it's kind of sadistically dangerous, and at the same time starts to make less sense even as it ratchets up some memorable, baroque images (the burning figure at night right before Hopper goes into Foster's room to take her sort of hostage).
The acting isn't bad either, but again the sense of rhythm is off, and it's hard to look past that as the film is what it is and has to be seen like that.As a curiosity it's surely a must-see - it's got a who's who of stars and character actors, from Charlie Sheen to Price to Joe Pesci to Catherine Keener to Jon Tuturro to Paulie from the Sopranos - though it's hard to exactly call it a very "good" movie.
Splendid, offbeat film that blurs the line between the refined arty types (Foster's Anne Benton), and lowlifes (Hopper, Pesci).
Exceptional cinematography and editing, plus a neat script, make this film appear to be a template for Tarantino, as we sort of define the term "opposites attract" with this film!Hopper, Pesci, Price, and Turturro all give terrific performances, but Foster steals the flick in an extremely uncharacteristic performance.
With huge screen personas such as Dennis Hopper and Jodie Foster it really makes this film fun to watch.
Jodie Foster's character had potential which was left largely untouched, many times she edged on being complex, but unfortunately most avenues went unexplored.
Dennis Hopper's BACKTRACK (Catchfire) had everything going for it- good plot potential and great cast.
I bought the set- up, yet came away feeling this film was the result of Hopper making a bar bet that he could bed Jodie Foster and get paid to party with his friends in the arty enclaves of New Mexico, then throwing together this production to win the bet.The high point for me was Bob Dylan's cameo as a chain saw wielding deconstructionist (maybe a metaphor for the whole film) and his barely intelligible dialog: "(mumble, mumble), Laddy John Dill, (mumble, mumble)..."Years later I ran into Dill at an art school reunion and it provided the perfect icebreaker..."Hey man, I just saw a horrible film where Bob Dylan dropped your name.
Dennis Hopper was a major collector of modern art and it shows in this film,its worth watching for the abstract art influences.
A young woman, Jodie Foster, is witnessing a mafia murder, reports the killing to the local police, and becomes herself a hit target by the mob operatives.
Then, as a parody of the Stockholm Syndrome that defines a case when an abducted hostage begins to like and cooperate with the kidnapper, Jodie Foster falls for her abductor too, make love, and both prepare for a getaway.Denis Hopper, the actor, tries to align himself with the creative ambitions of Dennis Hopper, the director.
The result is disappointing, and fails to keep pace with the artistic level of a great performer as Dennis Hopper is.
The film is saved to some extent by the performance of Jodie Foster who is not at her best, but still shines with her talent, beauty and gift.
Of historical interest is the short appearance of Vincent Price, and, in a small act, of Charlie Sawn known from his great part in "Wall Street".If you decide to spend the 116 minutes to see the film, it is not a complete loss; this movie offers easy entertainment, but we would expect much more from the director of "Easy Rider", and the actress who gave us the character of Sarah Tobias in "The Accused"..
And then there is Jodie Foster, who I'm not usually very fond of watching and the main man himself.
I like the story and the acting is very good, but it isn't a very convincing film.
I'm still puzzled by that.Although Jodie Fosters acting is great it isn't convincing me why Anne (Foster) is falling for her own killer.
Than there are the eccentricities that ended up embarrassing to watch because Dennis Hopper can do a better job at it than he does here.
I don't know.The hostage/kidnapper relationship is not believable, even if it is a common psychological phenomenon in real life.Worst of all, this film features a scene where Hopper and Foster ride a boat under the Fremont Bridge (a bridge in Seattle) which means that traffic had to stop so that the bridge could open.
Trailed by the police, who need her testimony, and a hit-man (Hopper) hired by the Mafia, she goes to Mexico, where eventually she meets the hit man, who has become infatuated after studying her art and life to prepare for the hit.Cast of characters in walk ons can't save this horribly flawed film.
Jody Foster is way too muscular to be parading around half naked through much of the movie and she isn't really good at acting scared either.
The basic plot had great potential, and some of the film was really good.
And it's quite amusing how often and quickly these films throw the word 'love' around (about as often as they find excuses for full frontal shots...not that seeing Jodie Foster nude in the shower isn't appealing, but when nudity is unnecessary it kind of ruins the moment;)And what was with that *horrible* accent Dennis Hopper failed to pull off?
In the end, it's amusing to watch for the classic actors (not often one gets to see Vincent Price as a mob boss;), great sets (and the Anne Benton art was really cool!), gorgeous shots, not to mention Hopper's antics (and the same pleasure-filled hyper-ventilation sounds he used in the sex scenes in Blue Velvet;)Look for cameos by Charlie Sheen and Bob Dylan...and does Joe Pesci ever play anything else but a trigger happy mob goon??
Featuring some rare Jodie Foster nude scenes, this flick entertained and demonstrated a new side to Hopper.
I watched this movie recently mainly because I am a Huge fan of Jodie Foster's.
The story itself may have been somewhat believable if someone like Mel Gibson had played the role of the hit-man.
I did think that Jodie looked great throughout the movie, which was probably the only reason I watched the entire thing.
Clearly, something was badly amiss from the beginning.I'm amazed at the positive comments for the movie and for Jodie Foster's performance.
I must have been watching a different movie since Ms Foster (usually a personal favorite) seemed to be totally disinterested.In one of his first scenes with Foster, Fred Ward looks as though he, also, is distracted by her lack of energy and he struggles to deliver his own lines with any enthusiasm.
By the time he's called upon to take part in a supposedly desperate search for runaway Foster, Ward also seems to have become embarrassingly half-hearted about the project.In my opinion, Dennis Hopper has always been a uni-dimensional performer, so I wasn't expecting much from him ...
All the time you are waiting for something interesting to happen, but no, you are still watching the same dull, uninspiring and superficial cliché of a movie with a very bad soundtrack.
A hit man with his quirks, a girl who's playing hard to get, mob guys acting tough and incapable cops, yawn...I'd recommend not to watch Backtrack.
I doubt it.Jodie Foster and Dennis Hopper had no on screen chemistry what so ever.
Even Jodie Foster's nude scenes could not save this film.
With Dennis Hopper, Jodie Foster, John Turturro, and Dean Stockwell, this film should have been better.
Milo (Dennis Hopper) three "high powered" 286 processor computers, and Anne Benton (Jodie Foster) "high tech" LED signs really makes this movie seem more dated than it actually is.I don't get me wrong.
Hopper and Foster ARE good actors here, as well as some other persons.
Best thing about movie is the surprise of the uncredited cameos by Joe Pesci, Charlie Sheen and Bob Dylan.
For one I cannot fathom sitting through another 90 minutes of this eye-vomit, but on the other hand it seems that an absolutely insane editing decision renders the viewing experience incomprehensible.The upshot of that is as always no-one wins.Consider this: Anne (Jodie Foster) is an avant-garde artiste who witnesses a murder within approximately 27 seconds of entering a 'bad neighbourhood'.This moment of incredibly inopportune timing puts both mob and the FBI on her trail after she refuses to testify and shoots through to pursue a lifetime on the run in disguise.Dennis Hopper plays Milo, the elite hit-man hired by the mob to eliminate Anne and put an end to this nonsense, only Milo is apparently entranced by Anne's artwork and almost instantly changes from a cold blooded hit-man into a creepy stalker-rapist.Now. While all this is indeed mostly reprehensible it is not yet implausible.
But wait there's more
(I would ordinarily warn of Spoilers to a 20 year old film here, but they are blabbed all over the back of the DVD cover so I don't feel so bad.) After Milo kidnaps Anne, threatens her life, forces her to don sexy (a word that should never appear in the same sentence as Jodie Foster) lingerie and rapes her – her words – we cut abruptly to a scene apparently only a short while later where they are both very much in genuine love.Wait.
Unfortunately for me I didn't take that option and was still sitting glassy eyed when the credits rolled
The only other thing worth mentioning is that this stain of a film actually boasts a top-notch cast of actors punching well below their weight; Fred Ward, Joe Pesci, John Turturro, Dean Stockwell, Catherine Keener and Charlie Sheen all wasted parts of their lives appearing in it.As for the 'headliners' Jodie Foster was always miscast in a role that demanded 'sexy', and Dennis Hopper over-acts to sh*t in this film.
Jodie Foster was ever pleasant to look at but even her talent couldn't bring the stillborn dialogue and maimed story to life.
The final section of the movie, the escape from the mob in a helicopter had me looking at my watch but to be honest I'd been doing that from about ten minutes in.
It's too strange to be action, too sleazy to be romance, and just too sinister to be a comedy.It's almost as if Hopper is wanting to channel David Lynch, but doesn't have a clue.Saying that, it's never boring, Foster and Pesci are wonderful, and it's got one of the most abrupt endings ever.Not good, but worth watching..
Since Dennis Hopper died yesterday, I feel honour bound to visit his filmography.This is one of those films which left an impression, mainly because of the absolute bizarreness of the plot.A hit-man (Hopper, cast according to type), for no apparent reason, falls in love with his target (Jodie Foster, after The Accused, before Silence Of The Lambs).
So many weird and disastrous things about this movie- That Foster's character plays an artist who's work is so clearly modeled on Jenny Holzer's only to read in the credits that the art was actually created for the film...
There's also what looks like actress Jodie Foster, as artist Ann Benton, first adult nude scene in the movie that will keep the men in the audience interested.
What in fact happens is that Milo falls head over heels for Ann and in no time at all joins her on the lamb from the mob with him now targeted for execution, by Mr. Avoca, together his lover Ann Benton!***SPOILER*** The movie has a number of both car and helicopter chase scenes with both Milo and Ann making monkeys out of the slew of gangsters trying to both capture and then off them.
This goes on for so long that you have no idea when the movie is going to end and when it does with all the bad guys ending up as toast it, the ending credits, are about the most surprising scene in the film!
In them coming up so totally unexpectedly in the entire almost two hour movie that they almost knock you off your seat!Dennis Hopper who both stared and directed this turkey after seeing the finished results tried to totally disown himself from it and even had his name taken off the credits, by using a false name instead, as its director.
As for Joe Pesci who was a main character, the sadistic and mentally unstable mob boss Leo Carelli, in the film and should have been in it's top credits he somehow made sure, by giving those who made the movie an offer that they couldn't refuse, that his name would never appear in them..
I know, and it was the WORST great cast film I've ever seen.
I watched this film today, as its gonna be off Netflix soon, fortunately this is the Director's Cut, so it is titled "Backtrack"(probably a bit of irony for Direct/Star Dennis Hopper).
The cast is A-List, Jodi Forster, Dennis Hopper, Joe Pesci, Paul Sorvino, even the crazy guy from Anger Management is in this(we even get cameos by Bob Dylan and Vincent Price) and all do a fine job, the film is known for its unfortunate behind the scenes drama that occurred between Hopper and the original production company, so its nice to see him being able to have the version he wanted released. |
tt0107977 | Robin Hood: Men in Tights | Robin Hood, or Robin of Loxley (Cary Elwes), is captured during the Crusades and is imprisoned at Khalil Prison in Jerusalem. With the help of fellow inmate Asneeze (Isaac Hayes), who was arrested for jaywalking, he escapes and frees the other inmates. Robin is asked by Asneeze to find his son, Ahchoo (Dave Chappelle, in his first major professional role). Upon returning to England, he finds Ahchoo and discovers that Prince John (Richard Lewis) has assumed control while King Richard is away fighting in the Crusades. Unbeknownst to Richard, the prince is abusing his power. Robin returns to his family home, Loxley Hall, only to find it being repossessed by John's men. His family's blind servant, Blinkin (Mark Blankfield), informs Robin that his family members and pets have all died as well, and the only thing his father left him is a key which opens "the greatest treasure in all the land."
Robin recruits the large and ignorant Little John (Eric Allan Kramer), and his friend Will Scarlet O'Hara (Matthew Porretta), to help regain his father's land and oust Prince John from the throne. On his quest, Robin also attracts the attention of Maid Marian (Amy Yasbeck) of Bagelle, who wants to find the man who has the key to her heart (and Everlast chastity belt). They are also joined by Rabbi Tuckman (Mel Brooks), who shares with them his sacramental wine and bargain circumcisions. While Robin is training his band of tights-clad Merry Men, the spoonerism-spouting Sheriff of Rottingham (Roger Rees), hires the Mafioso Don Giovanni (Dom DeLuise, parodying Marlon Brando's performance of Vito Corleone in The Godfather) to assassinate Robin at the Spring Festival (with archery tournament), spoofing a similarly outlandish plot twist from the Costner movie involving Scottish mercenaries. The archer who will carry out the assassination is a parody of Clint Eastwood's Man with No Name character. Maid Marian hears of the evil plot, and sneaks out of her castle to warn Robin, accompanied by her frumpy German Lady-in-Waiting Broomhilde (Megan Cavanagh). The Sheriff and Don expect that Robin will not refuse a chance to participate in the archery tournament due to his pride, and Robin does just that.
At the archery tournament, a disguised Robin makes it to the final round, where he makes his shot but loses to his opponent. Robin calls this situation absurd, takes off his disguise and pulls out a copy of the movie's script to discover that he gets another shot. The Sheriff and Prince John then pull out their own copies and confirm this (much to their annoyance). Giovanni's assassin attempts to kill Robin by shooting at him with a scoped crossbow, but Blinkin catches the arrow in midair. Robin then takes the second shot, this time using a special "PATRIOT arrow" and hits the target. After winning the tournament, Robin is arrested. Before Robin is taken away, Marian promises to do the most disgusting thing she can think of in exchange for Robin's safety: marry the Sheriff.
Several hours later, the ceremony commences with the opening prayer in "The New Latin" (Pig Latin). The Abbot (Dick Van Patten) quickly and discreetly reveals the Sheriff's unimposing first name, Mervyn. Before Marian can say "I do", the castle is attacked by the Men in Tights, led by Little John, Ahchoo, Blinkin, and Will. They quickly free Robin and a battle ensues. Marian is carried off to the tower by the Sheriff, who wants to deflower her but cannot get around the chastity belt without some uncomfortable chafing.
Robin arrives and begins to duel the sheriff, during which Robin's key falls into the lock of Marian's chastity belt, and Robin realises it really is the key to "the greatest treasure in all the land." After winning the fight Robin spares the sheriff's life only to miss his sheath and accidentally run the sheriff through. The witch Latrine (Tracey Ullman), Prince John's full-time cook and part-time adviser, saves him by giving him a magical lifesaver in exchange for agreeing to marry her. Before Robin and Marian can "celebrate" in her bedroom, Broomhilde arrives, insisting they get married first. Rabbi Tuckman conducts the ceremony, but they are suddenly interrupted by King Richard (Patrick Stewart), recently returned from the Crusades, who insists on sanctioning the marriage with a kiss to the new bride. He orders John to be taken away to the Tower of London and made part of the tour. He also announces that, as the Prince has surrounded his given name with a foul stench, all the toilets in the kingdom are to be renamed "johns".
All being as it should be, Robin and Marian are married and Ahchoo is made the new sheriff of Rottingham. When the crowd expresses its disbelief at a black sheriff, Ahchoo reminds them that "it worked in Blazing Saddles". When the night comes, Robin and Maid Marian attempt to open the chastity belt only to realise her lock will not open with his key (to her fury and dismay). The film ends with Robin calling for a locksmith. | comedy, cult, absurd, action, humor, comic, entertaining | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0063456 | Pretty Poison | Dennis Pitt is a disturbed young man on parole from a mental institution who becomes attracted to teenager Sue Ann Stepenek. He tells her that he is a secret agent, and takes her along on a series of "missions" that eventually end in murder. While Dennis is wracked with guilt over both what he has done and what he has allowed to happen, Sue Ann is excited by the "adventure" and entreats Dennis to run away with her to Mexico. First, however, they have to get rid of her disapproving mother.
Dennis knows that the police will take Sue Ann's word over his, so he takes the blame for their crimes. Sue Ann, meanwhile, betrays him without a second thought, sending him to prison for life. Dennis is more than happy to be locked up, as it keeps him away from Sue Ann, of whom he is now quite frightened. While Dennis refuses to tell his skeptical parole officer Azenauer the truth, he asks him to "see what Sue Ann is up to" in hopes she will be exposed for what she really is. The film ends with Sue Ann meeting a young man and lamenting to him that the people who took her in after her mother's death won't let her stay out late; it is implied that she will use and destroy him just as she did Dennis. But Dennis' parole officer is indeed watching as she departs with her latest victim. | cult, comedy, murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0114808 | L'uomo delle stelle | A single human narrator from England is transported out of his body via unexplained means. He realizes he is able to explore space and other planets. After exploring a civilization on another planet in our galaxy at a level of development similar to our own that existed millions of years ago thousands of light years from Earth (the "Other Earth") in some detail, his mind merges with that of one of its inhabitants, and as they travel together, they are joined by still more minds or group-minds. This snowballing process is paralleled by the expansion of the book's scale, describing more and more planets in less and less detail.
The disembodied travelers encounter many ideas that are interesting from both science-fictional and philosophical points of view. These include the first known instance of what is now called the Dyson sphere; a reference to a scenario closely predicting the later zoo hypothesis or Star Trek's Prime Directive; many imaginative descriptions of species, civilizations and methods of warfare; descriptions of the Multiverse; and the idea that the stars and even pre-galactic nebulae are intelligent beings, operating on vast time scales. A key idea is the formation of collective minds from many telepathically linked individuals, on the level of planets, galaxies, and eventually the cosmos itself.
A symbiotic species, each individual composed of two species, both non-humanoid, is discussed in detail. Normally detached from the galaxy's turmoil, they intervene in a deus ex machina to end the threat of a civilization dedicated to the idea of total insanity trying to force its mentality onto one stellar civilization after another.
The climax of the book is the "supreme moment of the cosmos", when the cosmical mind (which includes the narrator) attains momentary contact with the Star Maker, the creator of the universe. but stands in the same relation to it as an artist to his work, and calmly assesses its quality without any feeling for the suffering of its inhabitants. This element makes the novel one of Stapledon's efforts to write "an essay in myth making".
After meeting the Star Maker, the traveler is given a "fantastic myth or dream," in which he observes the Star Maker at work. He discovers that his own cosmos is only one of a vast number, and by no means the most significant. He sees the Star Maker's early work, and he learns that the Star Maker was surprised and intensely interested when some of his early "toy" universes — for example a universe composed entirely of music with no spatial dimensions — displayed "modes of behavior that were not in accord with the canon which he had ordained for them." He sees the Star Maker experimenting with more elaborate universes, which include the traveler's own universe, and a triune universe which closely resembles "Christian orthodoxy" (the three universes respectively being hell, heaven, and reality with presence of a savior). The Star Maker goes on to create "mature" universes of extraordinary complexity, culminating in an "ultimate cosmos," through which the Star Maker fulfills his own eternal destiny as "the ground and crown of all things." Finally, the traveler returns to Earth at the place and time he left, to resume his life there. | insanity, romantic, avant garde, murder | train | wikipedia | Joe Morelli is a scam artist that loves to prey on innocent people in the poorer regions of Italy.
The movie is set after WWII in a ruined Italy that hasn't come out of its defeat and most of the population is having a hard time eking a life, mainly from the land.Morelli, pretending to be a scout for a big Rome studio is seen traveling the back ways of Sicily with his small van that opens up to a mini studio where the unsuspecting people of those towns flock for a screen test that no one will ever see.
For the price of 1,500 lire they get a chance to act for the con man and his camera, hoping they will be the next discovery, once the film is seen by the big casting directors in Rome.Giuseppe Tornatore has a love for the cinema, as he showed with "Nuovo cinema Paradiso", which chronicled, perhaps, his own childhood in a small town in Sicily.
Mr. Tornatore is a director that hasn't forgotten his roots, as he demonstrates with this tale about innocent common people being duped because their love and the allure of the cinema, that dream making medium.Sergio Castellitto, one of the best actors working today in the Italian cinema, does a wonderful job interpreting Morelli for the director.
Also, Morelli finds in Beata, the sweet and innocent girl from a convent a love he never knew he was capable of having.Beata, is played by Tiziana Lodato, a beautiful young actress who is the one that makes Morelli understand his guilt after he is beaten and young Beata is interned in an institution.
Franco Scaldatto has some good moments in the film.This is a film that will not disappoint fans of Giuseppe Tornatore because of his vision about people love for the cinema..
This attractive Italian film featured an interesting story and some pretty women.
It's a story about a man who dupes the natives (Sicilians, in this case) into thinking they could become movies stars after paying money to him to get a personal screen test.
This movie, by the director of Cinema Paradiso, "disappointed" a lot of American movie reviewers because it lacks the sentimentality and pat structure of CP.
A seemingly heartless con-man (Sergio Castellito) goes around post-World War II Sicily filming most everyone, for a price, and leads villagers to believe that he is a talent scout for a film studio.
Castellito meets up with many vivid characters, but none more so than the beautiful Tiziana Lodato (in her first screen role).
Soon the young lady is begging Castellito to take her to the land of movie-making and in the process he falls in love with her and acquires a conscience.
Apparently he may change his ways and then again maybe not, but it becomes very clear that the local authorities may catch up to Castellito before the film runs its course.
"The Star Maker" was a Best Foreign Language Film nominee at the Academy Awards in 1995.
Co-written and directed by horribly under-rated Italian film-maker Giuseppe Tornatore (who struck Foreign Language Oscar gold in 1989 with "Cinema Paradiso", one of my all-time favorite pictures), "The Star Maker" is a flawed work because of a strange tone that makes it an uneven experience at times.
The performers come and go, but Lodato's appearance about half-way through was enough to put the movie over the top.
Tornatore was able to grab everyone with "Cinema Paradiso".
Regardless of whether you liked that film or not, you should have cared for the primary characters.
The final haunting scenes are reminiscent of the emotionally-charged montage to the magic of motion pictures in "Cinema Paradiso" and thankfully by that point most everything was presented well enough to make "The Star Maker" an important and worthy addition to the Italian world of films.
Master director Tornatore returns to the same subject of his wonderful Cinema Paradiso: a movie about movies.
This time, at the end of the forties, a bad guy goes on the road of a very poor Italia pretending to be a scout for movie studios of Rome.
He steals money from these poor people full of dreams to become movie stars.
One day, a teenager takes very seriously her faith to be a movie star and goes with the bad man.
Sergio Castellito, one of the best actors of Italy, gives a very strong performance, so is the charming young Lodato (Gee!
For me, it's the third best of the kind, after Woody Allen Purple Rose of Cairo, and, of course, Cinema Paradiso.
Joe Morelli (Sergio Castellitto) is a flimflam man who is driving around the rural villages of Sicily shortly after World War II selling potential stardom for fifteen hundred lira.
As he drives through the villages he broadcasts to the people that he is from the film industry of Roma and he is giving screen tests in order to discover natural talent.He sets up his truck and tent typically in the town square.
He has discovered that people will fall for his flattery and pay him for the fake screen tests.As we watch the film we discover that people will put their hearts and souls into the experience of appearing before his camera.
He has a gift for the hustle and is blind to the real emotion that he evokes.A woman believes his teenaged daughter has the talent to make it in the movies.
He is stopped by the local police chief, but Morelli manages to flatter him into appearing before his camera and then applauds the chief's performance.
She exposes herself to the local tax man to raise the 1500 lira needed for Morelli's screen test.
I think it is this quality that director Giuseppe Tornatore has developed in his character that carries the film, and Sergio Castellitto whom I saw recently in Non ti muovere (Don't Move) (2004) really becomes the part.Tornatore, who made a splash with the critically acclaimed Cinema Paradiso (1988) wrote the original material here and worked on the script in addition to directing.
While I thought Cinema Paradiso was an excellent film, I liked this one even more.
Particularly striking are the beautiful village scenes, the faces of the people, and the photography of the Sicilian countryside and ruins.(Note: Over 500 of my movie reviews are now available in my book "Cut to the Chaise Lounge or I Can't Believe I Swallowed the Remote!" Get it at Amazon!).
The Profiles Will Linger With You. A fast-talker rolls through postwar Sicily selling the dream of movie stardom, and in the process uncovers the desires and desperation of the townspeople.
In Guiseppe Tornatore's 'The Starmaker', Dr. Morelli travels around post-war Sicily offering to turn people into movie stars.
He is, of course, a con-man, but in giving the people a space to vent their dreams, he actually performs a kind of public service.
It's a nice idea, and there are some charming details in the film, but as a whole, this movie is somewhat contrived and it runs of the risk of representing the Sicilian peasantry as little more than idiots.
Some of the same themes (the death of traditional but impoverished societies, the desire of their inhabitants to escape to a new life, the semi-racist superiority of money-making outsiders) are dealt with more obliquely, but also more cleverly and in a broader context, by Guilo Amelio's breathtaking 'Lamerica', another Italian film made at about the same time, which I would heartily recommend..
The Star Maker tells such a simple story that I was puzzled as to why its emotional impact grew long after I had seen it.
It relates a series of encounters of con man `Dottore' Joe Morelli (Sergio Castellitto) with his marks.
The contrast of the physical beauty of Sicily with its poverty alone is sufficient to grab your attention.
But the most powerful contrast is seen in the faces of the Sicilians during their screen tests.
Giuseppe Tornatore magically captures the hopes and the desperations of his would-be stars as they appear before the `Dottore's' camera.
If you see European movies like this after all the American commercial rubbish you get a glimpse of what film can give us!
Good acting and writing, beautiful locations, a lot of strong character studies and very, very impressive camera work.
"Cinema Paradiso" director Tornatore cranked out this Oscar nominated film, "The Star Maker", which tells of a traveling talent scout who buoys the hopes and dreams of the simple people of rural post-WWII Sicily with screen tests and promises of making it in the movies.
Although there's little arc to the story of the vicissitudes of wandering con man Sergio (Morelli), there's is much beauty in the picturesque Sicilian countryside and the olive visages of the many would-be stars who tell their stories to Sergio's empty camera.
Good Sex. I love reading the comments by the I assume female writers who took time to critique this film.
This film takes place a long time ago in a place that still would be considered backwards.
This film isn't any sort of great achievement, but it is sucessful in portraying rather accuratly conditions in post war Italy.
Tornatore did to me with this movie what he failed to do with "Cinema Paradiso".
I used to blame myself for being insensitive comparing to people's reactions after "Cinema Paradiso" but now after this movie I know that it's not me, but the "virgin" audience in good movies that overreacted.The Starmaker is simply Perfect.
As for the New York Times comments on the movie......
People have to understand that the old critiques of NYT that actually knew more than we do about movies are not around anymore!
Another masterpiece from the creator of Cinema Paradiso, one of the greatest films ever made.
The Star Maker isn't really any less fabulous either, but with just a different angle to the old cinema based on a deep love for classic film making.
A fantastic person gallery and a catching of scenery that some Italian film makers seem to be true masters of, and Giuseppe Tornatore is one of the very best.
Story telling and creation of characters is simply brilliant.
This movie is about the cinema and the excitement it makes between people.
Like many other Juiseppe Tornatore's movie, this deeply delighting movie is comprised of simplicity, drama, and comedy.
Cinema looks like life and keeps people away from their loneliness; people search their hopes and wishes in the screen.
It is the secret of cinema and its eternity which allures people to lay themselves bare in front of the Joe Morelli's camera.
They don't want to be star, they just want to be themselves and the camera makes them to be seen.
In front of the camera, they are more honest than any other time in their lives; the Young speak about their wishes and dreams and the older people tell story about their past and memories.
The growing emotional relation between Morelli and Beata are not as strong as it is supposed to be and it is the weak of the movie.
It might be due to Tornatore tries to bold the funny part of the movie rather than the drama..
Although the movie falls into the type of drama that one associates with Italian film, this gem lingers on the mind after having seen it.
The main character, who is out to survive post-WWII, takes advantage of his victims, who reveal themselves in ways that are comedic to engrossing.
The beauty of the setting, Sicily, serves to increase the contrast from the people who are conspired against, yet willingly give their money for a shot at greatness, but more to escape the doldrums of life, and the monotony of struggle.
This is one of those films that needs to be watched, or at least added to the movie list of those that have to be watched.
From the same director that bought us the Oscar winning Cinema Paradiso, The Star Maker is a story of a con man that travels around Sicily giving false hope to everyday folk telling them they could be the next big star of the movies for a small screen test fee.
Many critics say that Cinema Paradiso is the better film but I disagree.
This is my favourite film by Tornatore out of the three of his movies I have seen so far.
"Stanno Tutti Bene" is also worth a look as well as "Cinema Paradiso" but this is more superior to both.One of my favourite foreign films of all time...I don't know how it didn't win the Academy Award for Best Foreign film.
An Italian con man goes around all of Sicily, tricking people out of their money for a chance at stardom.
The characters who confess their sins, their hopes, their dreams, their fears, in front of the camera are interesting, often emotional.
Also, the view of women portrayed in this movie is sexist, and I'm sorry to say, one that is common in Italy and Italian cinema that I've seen.
The "daughter of the Virgin Mary" shows herself to men for money, and says it's for love when she offers to give sexual favors to the main character.
None of the sex in this movie is about love, it's all about giving sex to the main character to get something in return.I see some links to Cinema Paradiso, but overall, I can't believe this is by the same filmmaker..
After the sicilian-themed "Cinema Paradiso" and "Stanno Tutti Bene", Giuseppe Tornatore returns with another motion picture heaviliy imbued into sicilian themes and modern history.
The vehicle he uses expose the audience of what Sicily is, is by showing the daily travails of an intinerant quack who claims to be a movie talent scout that collects fees from the gullible audience for the expenses of the film trials and proofs.
And sometimes it is something that in normal circumstances they would never reveal, but here, in front of a camera and a chance to be seen by the Rossellinis and the De Sicas of Rome, in just two minutes of trial length, they literally confess their lifetime secrets and beings to the screening record.
The Man from Rome, after listening to days and days from his "clients", he concludes that the sicilian populace is an ignorant one, something that is echoed by the doctor to whom he gives a lift with his truck to a rural site where a farmer was dying.
Interestingly enough, in that film, the main character *is* a doctor, who is advised by the Priest "not to waste time with these ignorant people".
We see all the sicilian characters: the Carabiniere may be like one in "Giorno della Civetta"; the Brigand may be like one in "Salvatore Giuliano", the Dongiovanni may be like one in "I Basilischi", and the indoor cafe crowds may be like the ones seen in "L'Avventura".
So many motion pictures have tried to portray it.While the stories in "Salvatore Giuliano", "I Basilischi", and "L'Avventura" were current to when these motion pictures were made (early sixties), more recently made motion pictures about Sicily retroactively show a "how it once was" attitute by showing a nostalgic remembrance of the populace and their lifestyles.
"Cinema Paradiso" is also a retrospective of since-gone lifestyles and relationships.
And this nostalgic attitude on the past, as if the old days were better, is a trademark of Giuseppe Tornatore, exemplified in "Stanno Tutti Bene" in which a father is deceived by his children on their professional career status.
Even in "Cinema Paradiso" we get the impression that movie-going was better in the old days.
So the old days of the rural south were better because people socialized.
This motion picture shows great outdoor scenery of stone towns in Sicily.
The camera is moved around to show the dynamism of people moving about in a hill town.
Otherwise, I found the story weak, and the portrail of the characters silly, simplistic, and stupid.
While in "I Basilischi" the characters are funny but intelligent, here we encounter people that we must assume are idiotic.
With a large budget on filming a story about Sicily, I think here there was a wasted opportunity to make a potentially good movie, but lost its chance in silly portrail of its characters..
A wonderful movie that reminds you of Fellini.
Tornatore weaves a beautiful script following the path of Joe Morelli, who travels through Sicily claiming he is a talent scout for the famous film companies of Rome.
The scenery is exquisite and the stories the people divulge in his film are heart-wrenching and sincere, making the tale all the more easy to believe.
In retrospect the movie closely mirrors the filmography of Fellini (think "La Strada") and becomes slightly predictable as a result, but given that Tornatore himself is Sicilian this film might be more autobiographical than one might suppose.A great film nonetheless, and strongly recommended.
Another excellent movie by Tornatore.
Tornatore can do pretty much everything he wants with a movie.
SO far all the movies I have seen directed by him are simply excellent.
When watching the movie I will pay close attention to the long acts and way the camera moves.
Though I had a lot of problems with the sex scenes in the film.
About 30 minutes into the film, the main character has sex with a woman as payment because she cannot afford the 1,500 lira payment for her daughter's screen test.
Throughout the rest of the film I was hoping that that scene would be it however there was more.
In another scene, he hits the woman that is falling in love with him and he then takes her virginity away.
I feel that while the film is trying to set up a certain persona for this character, these scenes were not necesary and only contributes to the perpetuation that for men to feel in control they must treat women as animals. |
tt0076881 | Victor Frankenstein | In London, ambitious medical student Victor Frankenstein (James McAvoy) attends a circus performance, where he helps save an injured aerialist, Lorelei (Jessica Brown Findlay), by aid of a nameless hunchback (Daniel Radcliffe) enslaved by the circus' ringleader, and who harbors feelings for the girl. Impressed by the hunchback's vast knowledge of human anatomy, acquired from stolen books, Victor rescues him, drains the cyst on his back that causes his physical abnormality and develops a harness to improve his posture, and then names him "Igor Straussman" after a recently deceased roommate. The two then become partners in Victor's ongoing experiments to create life through artificial means, incurring the wrath of religious police inspector Roderick Turpin (Andrew Scott), who views their experiments as sinful.
After Igor suggests they use electricity to animate their creations, Victor procures parts from dead animals and creates a monstrous chimpanzee-esque creature nicknamed "Gordon". Meanwhile, Igor reunites with Lorelei, now masquerading as the mistress of a closeted homosexual baron, and the two develop an affair, upsetting Victor, who views Lorelei as a distraction. Igor invites Lorelei to a demonstration of their experiment, which goes awry when Gordon escapes and wreaks havoc through the university before being killed by Victor and Igor. Lorelei is horrified by Victor's experiments and urges Igor to dissuade him from pursuing the matter further, but Igor is reluctant to do so upon learning that Victor is driven by the need to atone for his indirect role in the death of his older brother, Henry, for which Victor's domineering father, Mr. Frankenstein (Charles Dance), blames Victor.
Victor is expelled from college for his unorthodox methods, and later approached by his wealthy, arrogant classmate Finnegan (Freddie Fox), who wants him to create an artificial humanoid creature. Victor and Igor outline a behemoth being known as "Prometheus", but Igor's deepening relationship with Lorelei soon causes a rift between them. Shortly afterwards, Turpin and his men raid Victor's laboratory, hellbent on destroying his inventions, and during an altercation with Victor, Turpin loses both a hand and one of his eyes, while Victor and Igor are extracted by Finnegan's men and taken to his family's estate in Scotland, where Finnegan provides them with the necessary funds to build Prometheus. Igor is mistrustful of Finnegan and leaves after having a falling out with Victor. Finnegan later kidnaps and binds him, revealing his plans to kill Victor once Prometheus is complete and weaponize his creation. Igor is then thrown into the River Thames to drown, but manages to escape and reunites with Lorelei, who nurses him back to health.
Once recovered, Igor returns to Finnegan's estate with Lorelei in tow in order to rescue Victor, and finds Victor on the verge of using lightning to animate Prometheus. He ignores Igor's pleas not to and activates the machine. Due to a power surge the machinery overloads however, killing Finnegan. After the ensuing chaos, Turpin unexpectedly arrives (after being fired by his superior for not having a search warrant), blaming and threatening Victor for his creation, upon which both realise the experiment was a success and Prometheus came to life. Victor shares a brief moment with Prometheus, thinking him to be his resurrected brother Henry. But he quickly realizes that the experiment is failed: Prometheus had no consciousness and couldn't talk. Shocked Turpin opens fire on Prometheus, who falls in rage and eventually kills Turpin. Disillusioned Victor joins forces with Igor to kill Prometheus by stabbing its two hearts.
After regaining consciousness the next morning, Igor reunites with Lorelei, who hands him a letter written to him by Victor, in which Victor apologizes for all the suffering he caused and recognizes Igor was his "greatest creation". Victor retreats to the Scottish countryside in search of new discoveries. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt1307873 | The Big Bang | Detectives Poley (William Fichtner), Frizer (Thomas Kretschmann), and Skeres (Delroy Lindo) are interrogating Ned Cruz (Antonio Banderas), a Los Angeles private investigator, who tells them that five years earlier, Russian mobster Skinny Faddeev gave $30 million in blood diamonds as an advance to Anton (Robert Maillet), a boxer, to intentionally lose a fight against his nephew. However, during the fight, Anton unintentionally killed the nephew. When Skinny was found dead, Anton was sentenced to life in prison. While Anton was in prison, he received over 200 letters from a woman named Lexie Persimmon.
Anton gives Ned the job of finding Lexie. Ned is skeptical about his job, since he doesn't have a photo of Lexie. As he starts investigating the various clues, people start dying mysteriously. Ned also notices that a black Lincoln is following him, which he assumes is the Russian Mafia. He finds a clue that leads him to believe that Lexie might be in San Celeritas, New Mexico.
Ned then meets a waitress named Fay Neman (Autumn Reeser)—a particle physics buff—who helps him. Ned meets Simon (Sam Elliott), his wife Julie (Sienna Guillory), and Niels Geck (Jimmi Simpson), a physicist who is conducting an experiment for Simon. Simon is interested only in finding the "God particle" and feels indifferent when Julie tries to warm up to Ned. Ned suspects that Julie might really be Lexie and decides to tell her what is happening. Meanwhile, Anton tracks down Ned to Simon's bungalow. Ned confronts Julie with his suspicions about Lexie's true identity, but Julie has no idea what he is talking about. Ned and Julie hear gunshots, causing Ned to suspect that Anton is at the house.
Realizing that he and Anton have both mistaken Julie for Lexie, Ned tries to save her. When the duo head toward the basement, Ned is astonished to find Niels dressed like a woman, and in a blonde wig. A box containing cosmetics has the phrase "Lex Parsimoniae"—a Latin phrase meaning "When all things are equal, the simplest solution is the best"—printed on it. Ned realizes that Niels had written the letters to Anton, who becomes angered when Niels tries to convince Anton to accept him. In a shootout, Ned is injured and passes out.
The story cuts back to the present day, where it is revealed that Niels and Anton killed each other while the detectives, who had followed Ned to Simon's house, held Ned and Julie hostage. Ned accuses the trio of following him and killing the people he met, also stating that Skinny was killed for diamonds, which his killer never recovered. Ned proves that Frizer killed all the people who could have known about the diamonds. Frizer admits his crimes, for which the other detectives scold him. Ned looks at a glass tank containing a gecko and realizes something; he tells the villains that he knows where Niels stored the diamonds.
The detectives take Ned and Julie to the spot where he had confronted Julie after she had shown him a hidden shoe box. While Julie and Ned are in the car, Skeres and Frizer go to get the shoe box. Meanwhile, Poley spots Julie and Ned signaling each other. He attacks them, but they overpower him and manage to drive the car towards Skeres and Frizer. Skeres and Frizer are disappointed when they discover the diamonds are not in the box. When they see the car coming towards them, they realize what is happening and start shooting. Ned shoots them both dead. Meanwhile, Simon the physicist's experiment destroys his lab and creates a giant crevasse. Ned and Julie speed away in the car, and later pick up Fay. | neo noir, flashback | train | wikipedia | Antonio Banderas is a private-I tasked with finding a woman, a typically classic theme; but mixed with a lot of modern physics.
Donnie Darko, Interstate 60, Angel Heart, The Ninth Gate, The Kovak Box -- One capable man on an adventure to solve a complex riddle whose questions and experiences become so convoluted as to begin to warrant an answer beyond the realm of known reality.If, during moments when you have no idea what could possibly be coming next, you delight in that fact, finding them beyond delicious, then this movie is for you.
If you're a fan of the detective genre, this movie is worth a watch.The use of lighting and color throughout the film was a huge boon as it really drew you further into the mystery and storyline.
The script was clever, maybe trying to be a bit too clever in linking metaphors and accurate(?) science.The acting was above par-excellent from the entire cast and it is only when the scenes rely a bit too much on the script where things seem to struggle.
I really liked the noir style of the movie, but it looses a bit in the end.
The director is playing with smoke, light and colors in such a way that the outcome is just beautiful.The movie plot and atmosphere get a 10/10, but counting and the "buts" i put a 8/10.
The direction shows a real sense of style, making bold use of color, hue, saturation, surreal environments, and dream-like sequences...
I love the story, but I loved it even better when it was a Wim Wenders movie called Until the End of the World.This movie is pure plagiarism, right down to the soundtrack (Johnny Marr, what happened?!), but it's excellently made.
Some very good acting (especially from Sam Elliot), an unusual script filled with sometimes strangely funny references to cosmological and particle physics, and a jazzy style of direction lead to an inexpensive, yet engaging "private detective" story.
Antonio Banderas' Latin, fish-out-of-water accent (the detective) initially seems odd for such an iconic American role, but in short order, it just blends-in with the many other off-center characters and events that populate the film.It's flaws are irrelevant and understandable considering its limited budget and shooting schedule; it's a refreshing hour and a half of entertaining stuff that smartly never takes itself too seriously..
Decent Film, Worth A View or Two. A private detective (Antonio Banderas) is hired to find a missing stripper.
A simple job turns complicated when everyone he questions ends up dead.I can imagine Antonio Banderas looking at this script and weighing in his mind if he wants it or not.
Then he gets to the sex scene, and he says, "I'm in." (And I have been told he helped in casting Autumn Reeser, so this makes it even more likely.) The script is interesting, sometimes a bit bizarre, but for Banderas that is the clincher, for sure.
Other than that, despite being the main character, he is actually the least interesting part of the movie.The press release compares the film to "Sin City" and "Big Lebowski".
Fizzles Out. I watched this movie for two reasons, first, I like the TV Series "The Big Bang Theory", and second, I enjoy watching most Antonio Banderas movies.
Aside from this I had no clue what to expect.The movie starts out well enough and for about the first 40 minutes or so weaves a mildly interesting plot.
Though, the ending, where the two separate paths the movie had taken are brought together is, in my opinion, quite lame.The acting is good enough.
I am really lucky, catching these movies in countries where culture has not yet being destroyed.This is classic detective story with very modern elements like atomic fusion and a sexual charge uncommon 40 years ago.Private Eye, Ned Cruz is commissioned by an ex-con to find a woman he loves, after and epistolary relationship.
He only has her picture and the letters, but the women not only disappeared, but everybody seems to have forgotten her.His research takes him to New Mexico where a billionaire is doing atomic fusion experiments.All this is told in flash back while being questioned three not very friendly policemen.As in the good detective stories; there are more information than necessary, however all the information is there.The acting is outstanding.
Banderas proves again he can carry a movie; he is totally credible in a part that does not even seems for him; but almost everybody else is also excellent or at least very good.
through the whole movie i wanted to pay attention, the mystery helps but the story was making you feel that way.Smart and enjoyable, i would suggest you spare 99 minutes for this piece.
You have the noirish detective yarn, the hard bitten postmodern crime thriller, and something unique as well: a constant running theme of physics, evident in both the snappy scientific jargon the actors get to chew on, and the dazzling, neo noirish color palette ranging from eye popping purples to smoky deep blues.
Antonio Banderas ditches the strong silent shtick to play private investigator Ned Cruz, a fast talking wiseass who gets in way over his head when a giant Russian ex boxer (Robert Maillet, priceless) hires him to find his luscious pen pal Lexie Parsimmon (Sienna Guillory).
This leads him into a dangerous web of eccentric characters including pseudo astro physicist billionaire Simon Kestral (Sam Elliott in a hairdo that would make David Bowie blush), a shady porn director (Snoop Dogg), a sexy small town waitress (Autumn Reeser, making everyone sweat in one of the hottest sex scenes I've ever seen put to celluloid), a kinky ex Hollywood star (James Van Der Beek), and more.
The film jumps around in time, as any good noir should, as Ned tells his story to three relentless detectives, burnt out Skeres (Delroy Lindo), sharp, sleazy Frizer (Thomas Kretschmann, excellent), and volatile Poley (William Fichtner steals the show as the bratty, hotshot prick of the trio).
I have to preface this by saying I am not an Antonio Banderas fan, not that I never liked him, he just never blew me away in any movie he was in.
very good acting and Sam Elliot, the guy is just great in everything he does.The screenplay was excellent, being a writer myself, I really admired the writer of this one; the beats were spot on.The director, lets you know fro the opening sequence that he is in charge and he in innovative.
Watching this movie gave me the impression that the director decided to go on some sort of drug during the whole course of the movie.There was enough to keep me hooked till the end but not enough to make it unforgettable or to qualify for repeat viewing.
All this was a vague attempt to mask a very simplistic and predictable plot.Overall, the movie gave me the impression of a very well made film school project from a guy on mind-altering drugs..
Also, if you are familiar with "Farewell, My Lovely" (or the best film version "Murder, My Sweet" with an amazing Dick Powell in a career changing role for him) then there really isn't any surprise in the plot either.
If you like people talking non-stop about neutrons (even during sex), you may enjoy it.A great cast is squandered, Banderas tries hard, but the whole film is just a total and absolute waste of everyone's time, especially the viewer's.
In the style of noir films of Chandler and others, this film brings life to an old genre with fantastic images, composition, ideas, and sound/music track.The plot if simple: private eye has to find missing person, but the execution of the idea is really modern in today's technological and philosophical astuteness.Ned Cruz PI, (Banderas) has to find a missing loved one for this bear of a Russian, Protopov.
Film Noir is one of my favourite genres and this flick looked promising and at the very least visually pleasing.
As for the plot it kept me guessing (wrong) to the very end.As far as the acting goes I thought it was good.
She and Banderas share the chattiest love scene ever and redefine physics geeks.I enjoyed this movie and I'll watch it again.
The basic plot is the same as the Raymond Chandler novel and two previous films (Murder, My Sweet with Dick Powell and a later version with Robert Mitchem).
That is just a plain, true fact, trust me...This is one of those films that add SO much style and imagination that if you are the kind of person (like me) who loves this kind of groovy stuff, then this movie will strike you as totally unique and mind- blowing.
But, take that film, drop some high quality acid (or some nice Shrooms) modernize it, and add what I personally felt were some intriguing thoughts about Science, The Big Bang Theory (thus the title) and Physics, and add some effective, tough-guy acting, a Noirish mood, excellent visuals, and you pretty much end up with this movie.So, the best I can say is that you absolutely HAVE to have a great imagination or at least appreciate really imaginative things, you CAN'T be a hard core 'Realist' who likes there films to be very concrete and believable and 'Normal', and if you can appreciate some really nice atmospheric visuals, and not to mention a truly BEAUTIFULLY rendered Blu-ray, then there is a good chance that you might like this film...This is a rare case where I have rated this film more according to how I feel, instead of more objectively as I normally do, because of the special type of film.
A fitting Rock soundtrack with a spot on sensational look make this an entertaining diversion.The shortcomings are Banderas heavy accent that makes some of the narration and dialog a little hard to decipher but after awhile it doesn't seem so intrusive and the ending with the particle accelerator is a fizzle of a finale, but, the trip there is well worth the journey..
Terrible.Tries to mix one PI story with some b o l locks of absolute nonsensical and no attachment nor logic or deeper purpose whatsoever to the story.The only moron worse than whoever wrote this crap, were the people who actually financed this.Hopeless.I love Banderas but to watch this, I recommend you are drugged down on 50 mg liquid v ilium pr e-op in hospital or something.so many forbidden words which are normal words, get a grip IMDb. Have to add some lines here to pass validation...
With Antonio Banderas being the lead role, I was looking forward to watching this movie.He was, however, the part that probably made this movie a huge failure.
You hear "mumble, mutter, accent on wrong word, pause at awkward part of the sentence, mumble" followed by the characters on screen laughing at whatever it was that he just said.At first, I would go back and rewatch with volume on high to hear what it was that he said, but after the first 30 minutes, I gave up.Don't waste your time with this movie.
In a graphic novel-esque world of neon lights and shadows the movie follows Antonio Banderas as a private investigator searching for a missing girl - finding life swallowing black holes created by a scientist looking for god.
With a premise like that you know you're in for something special.This movie has an unique visual concept, an original story and a cast that helps create a new semi-genre which can only be described as neon-noir.
Good mix of themes...Acting is not top notch, although it doesn't feel like it was supposed to be perfect, almost comic-like...Sam Elliot (great!), and Antonio Banderas (typical role, but good).
Plot sucks, the idea of it might be good, but it's attempt to become a comedy sucked.The only thing that can be rescued are the sex scenes, which were quite good (Anyone would agree with me, sadly this isn't a porn film, so I won't add any stars for it)I'm amazed that the budget was of 17 million, it was probably all spent on Antonio Banderas.I do not recommend this movie for anyone, unless they want to fall sleep..
It is a bizarre mix of film noir, sci-fi, and old fashioned crime dramas that just doesn't manage to end up with anything novel - except for the look.
'A private detective Cruz (Antonio Banderas) is hired to find a missing stripper (Sienna Guillory) but the job turns complicated when everyone he questions ends up dead.
From the mean streets of Los Angeles to the desolate desert of New Mexico, Cruz must contend with a brutal Russian Boxer, three brash LAPD detectives (Thomas Kretschman, William Fichtner, Delroy Lindo), an aged billionaire (Sam Elliott) looking for the Big Bang, and the billionaire's stunningly gorgeous wife.
Despite its weak storyline the film takes on a life of its own with flashback sequences taking us out of the initial interrogation room while Banderas tells the story - and tantalizes the cops with knowledge of diamonds.
Do I really want to totally waste 101 minutes of my life watching total garbage like "The Big Bang"?
Antonio Banderas mumbles and whispers his way through the entire movie and this can really get on one's nerves, especially as he does it even more when he's on screen.
I wish we could but movies do have plots, especially action thrillers (yes, there is action, people do move around and drive cars and stuff, but whether to thrilling effect or not is debatable), so let's just say that the plot is almost as absurd as the acting.
You know, I always check out reviews before I watch a movie to see if I'm going to like it.
The private detective from Los Angeles Ned Cruz (Antonio Banderas) is interrogated by LAPD Detectives Poley (William Fichtner), Frizer (Thomas Kretschmann) and Skeres (Delroy Lindo).
However, nothing is what seems to be and Cruz only discovers the truth when it is late."The Big Bang" is a weird and stylish detective story with a promising beginning and a good twist near the end.
Direct to Video or B movies used to mean a bad story, b or c list stars, and mediocre action/horror/effects.
Direct to DVD isn't a bad thing anymore and a quiet a few of them are as good if not better than films being release in theaters now, which leads me to The Big Bang.The Big Bang is a suspense/drama/comedy starring Antonio Banderas, William Fichtner, Sienna Guillory, Thomas Kretschmann, and Delroy Lindo.
The plot follows Ned Cruz (Antonio Banderas) waking up in a police interrogation room with three police officers Detective Poley (William Fichtner), Detective Skeres (Deloroy Lindo), and Dectective Frizer (Thomas Kretschmann).
The story starts up when private detective Ned Cruz is finishing up a case for a high profile and eccentric actor Johnny Nova played well by James Van Der Beek.
There is even Snoop Dog who plays a porn director who did a good job and as always enjoyed his scenes.The action was few and far between, but it works for this film.
I think that hurts films it takes away from the story, the actors, and characters, which makes a good film into an average one, or a bad film into an average one.
It doesn't have to, it has a great story, with good acting, and decent action.Overall this is a great film, and better than many movies that have come out into the theaters recently.
A previous reviewer says the movie is similar to Until the End of the World or time (or something like that, sorry, I can't back up to find the right phrase) -- I'm not familiar with that movie, but for sure, the basic concept of The Big Bang is drawn from the 1944 film noir classic, Murder, My Sweet, from the Raymond Chandler book Farewell, My Lovely -- Murder, My Sweet begins with Marlowe, temporarily blinded, being interrogated about some killings and he tells them the story of being hired by big Moose Malloy to find his stripper girlfriend who turns out to -- well, I won't tell what turns out because it would be a spoiler, but it's pretty much what happened in The Big Bang sans the sci-fi ending -- I also didn't pick up on half of Banderas dialog and I've always liked him -- I gave the movie 5 stars because it was an attempt to do an updated film noir detective story and I love the genre -- but I pretty much thought the movie wasn't watchable.
Blatant Rip-Off. This movie is such a blatant ripoff of Murder, My Sweet (1944) a great film based on Raymond Chandler's Farewell, My Lovely.
Initially The Big Bang struggles to make more than a momentary impact, with its assembly of vignettes featuring different sordid characters not making a huge amount of sense until about an hour later, when your mind will have moved onto questions like 'Really?', 'Why is Sam Elliott dressed as Hulk Hogan?' and 'No, but really?'So indebted to Raymond Chandler and Dashiel Hammett is it that everyone seems intent on speed-muttering their lines through a haze of smoke in a dingy room while the events of the recent past are dissected by the three policemen (William Fichtner, Delroy Lindo, and Thomas Kretschmann) interviewing bloodied, bruised, and temporarily blind Private Detective Ned Cruz (Antonio Banderas).
Certainly the finale is suitably bonkers so that, by the end, you're pretty much happy to go with it after the slow, murky start.Where The Big Bang works best is with its visuals.
I was looking forward to seeing this movie as I am am usually impressed by Banderas and Neil as actors.
Visually the film is impressive too with a fascinating twist on 'film noir' genre as the movie is shot in colour and not B&W.
It is just a bad detective film mixed with sci-fi and romance, not a good 3 way of genres! |
tt0068235 | Au Pair Girls | The film opens with four girls arriving at London Heathrow Airport. They are taken to the offices of Overseas Employment Agency which has arranged placements for them. The film then plays out the adventures of each of the four girls.
Anita Sector (Frank) is assigned to Mr and Mrs Anderson. She doesn’t prove popular with Mr Anderson as she manages to flood the house when she takes a shower and then disappears on a date with Malcolm (Briggs), a man who preyed on her at the airport. They visit a casino where Anita meets Sheik El Abab (Mayne) and disappears with him after Malcolm loses money at the roulette table. When she is taken to the Sheik’s London home she spends time with his concubines and discovers that he is very wealthy and a philanthropist in his own country. When the Sheik tries to get amorous with Anita she discovers that the time she must have returned to the Anderson’s house has passed. They return to the Anderson's house to find her suitcases on the doorstep.
Randi Lindstrom (Drake) is assigned to the Wainwright family and is collected by their son Stephen (O'Sullivan) who is intent on sleeping with her. Stephen is sexually frustrated and hallucinates that beautiful women are naked. Through a series of mishaps they end up sleeping in the car in the office car park and are discovered sleeping naked by Stephen’s father (Le Mesurier) the following morning.
Nan Lee (Lay) is assigned to the Tryke family where she is a playmate for their son Rupert (Barnes) who is being groomed as a concert pianist. Rupert’s exposure to the outside world has been limited to trips out in the car and he is immature for his age due to a lack of appropriate interaction with people of his own age. Nan agrees to play along with Rupert's desire to play children's games in the garden and continues after dinner. Later Nan reflects on Rupert's immaturity but has enjoyed the time she has spent with him. She seduces him and quietly leaves the following morning.
Christina Geisler (Wait) is from Germany and is assigned to the Fairfax family. Their daughter Carol (Yeldham) decides to take her along to see popstar Ricky Strange after she learns that Christine is a virgin. They go shopping to buy a new more revealing outfit to enable Christina to look more arousing for Ricky. Ricky and Christina sleep together after they meet following his performance but it was a trick to enable Carol to sleep with Ricky. After Christina realises that she has been used she confides in Carol's boyfriend Buster (Standing) who despite his boorish persona is very understanding. In the morning she tells Carol she is leaving and is terminating her employment with the Fairfax's as an au-pair.
All the girls end up back at the employment agency office, but, when Anita returns, she asks the other girls if they wish to join her as one of the Sheik's concubines, and they all follow her out and get into his car. | pornographic, adult comedy | train | wikipedia | Pretty average English 70s sexploitation comedy, which is worth watching for the utterly gorgeous Gabrielle Drake if nothing else..
'Au Pair Girls' is a cheesy "naughty" sexploitation comedy from the early 70s.
They mixed unsophisticated slapstick comedy, Benny Hill-like double entendres and lots of naked babes.
They are Randi (Gabrielle Drake), Astrid (Anita Sector), Nan (Me Me Lay) and Christa (Nancie Wait).
Randi ends up losing her clothes in a barn after the son of her employer (Richard O' Sullivan from the popular 70s sit-com 'Man About The House) gives her a lift and his car breaks down in the country.
Astrid, a nutty Swedish girl obsessed with colour TV, gets picked up by a Sheik (Ferdy Mayne) while on a date at a casino.
Of the four girls Gabrielle Drake, sister of legendary folk singer Nick Drake, and a cult figure in her own right from appearing as the purple wigged Lt.Gaye Ellis in the series 'UFO', is the most beautiful and shows some genuine flair for comedy.
I've had a crush on her for many, many years and her full frontal nude scenes are reason enough to watch this movie!
I didn't recognize the actresses who played Astrid or Christa, but Me Me Lay went on to become a cult figure from her appearances in the cannibal movies 'Man From Deep River', 'The Last Cannibal World' and 'Eaten Alive' as well as co-starring in Lars Von Trier's 'The Element Of Crime'!
Another interesting thing about 'Au Pair Girls' is that it was directed and co-written by none other than Val Guest, the man behind the early Hammer classics 'The Quatermass Xperiment' (aka 'The Creeping Unknown'), 'Quatermass 2' and 'The Abominable Snowman'.
I must admit that the involvement of Val Guest and Me Me Lay aside, the main attraction here is the utterly gorgeous Gabrielle Drake.
Danish Randi is stranded with the rich kid son of her employer when his car breaks down, her clothes are soaked and they end up spending the night in a parking lot.
Swedish Anita (a fun, delightful character who seems so liberated that she doesn't realize there's any alternative) shocks her employer by marching about the house nude and ends up being picked up at a casino by an amorous sheik (in the sheik's abode, a man sounds a gong every time he walks through the door).
Chinese Nan is taken to a manor house and begins a sad little affair with a sheltered pianist man-child, who seems to have the emotional maturity of a child half his age.The odd thing is that the first two plots are funny and ridiculous, but the second two are tragic, as Christa realizes she has squandered her virginity on the ungrateful rock god and Nan scarcely seems happy to be regarded as a new plaything by her new bedmate.
This stands in clear opposition to the brassy, fun nature of the other plots (and the atrocious upbeat theme song - you've got to hear it to believe it), and the ending that ties together all four girls in a riotously offhand and silly manner, as they all trot off to be the sheik's handmaidens, no questions asked.
Anita does not actually have sex at all (and she doesn't seem to mind much, either!), and though the others do, it's hardly explicit at all.All the girls are likeable, which is more than can be said for the men.
You can pick apart this film for the cheesiness of some of its scenes, the not so great acting, especially the fake accents, and general flimsy story, but somehow this all works.
The absolutely gorgeous Gabrielle Drake (sister of the late, great singer/songwriter Nick Drake) is so sexy, you forget her Scandinavian accent is pretty awful.
I especially liked the scenes with Nan (Me Me Lay) and piano prodigy Rupert, they are more sweet than overtly sexy.
My special interest in 'Au Pair Girls' is that I am a huge fan of Gabrielle Drake.
If any actress has ever looked better naked (she's slim but wonderfully curvy), or clothed, come to that (I've loved her since the original run of UFO - who else could carry off a purple wig!), I'll eat my hat..
The nudity is all part of the comedy.Gabrielle Drake manages to lose her clothes in a barn with the employer's son after they break down in the country.
The movie is actually different vignettes about four different girls who come to England from various countries.
The German girl goes out with the family daughter and loses her virginity to a REALLY bad rock star (imagine a Brit Jim Morrison minus the looks, the charisma,and any shred of talent).
Me Me meanwhile plays a Chinese girl (bet you didn't see that coming) who unaccountably falls in love with and beds her employer's lonely misfit son.
Why oh why in so many English films about sex do we have to have such inept men along side the pretty girls?
What is more this begins predictably enough as a sex farce similar in vein to the Confessions films but about a third of the way through (whilst we are beginning to enjoy the presence of the lovely Me Me Lai) the film asks us to start taking it seriously.
AU PAIR GIRLS is a pretty decent example of the British sex comedy film of the 1970s, especially when compared to other entries in the genre during the decade.
It has strong production values - thanks to being produced by the great Tigon Pictures studios - and even better direction courtesy of veteran helmer Val Guest, just before he went on to make possibly the ultimate example of the genre in 1974, CONFESSIONS OF A WINDOW CLEANER.What stands out about AU PAIR GIRLS is the unusual and highly watchable plotting.
Instead of having a single plot strand dragged out to feature length, this is a kind of anthology movie which follows the misadventures of four foreign au pairs who arrive in England and each find themselves in an unusual situation with their new-found employer.
Chances are that if you don't like one of the stories then at least one of the others will be more appealing.The arresting Gabrielle Drake stars in the most typical of the story lines about a girl who gets into various run-ins with the son of her new employer, played by Richard O'Sullivan.
Next up we get the oddest tale, an oddly touching story starring the one and only Me Me Lai (star of those Italian cannibal films) who has never looked more lovely and who falls in with a child-like man.
The last tale, by far the darkest, involves Nancie Wait's virginal young woman who ends up being introduced to the sleazy side of the music world.The supporting cast is quite good, with the ubiquitous John Le Mesurier popping up in a cameo and future CORONATION STREET actor Johnny Briggs doing his best to pick up the girls.
Pretty foreign girls take au pair jobs in England and get seduced into naughty situations by a variety of local louts.
For its genre it wasn't terrible, and the girls are pretty attractive (especially the obviously British Gabrielle Drake playing a Scandinavian, and the amusingly named Asian actress Me Me Lay), but keep expectations low..
The plot has already been described by other reviewers, so I will simply add that my reason for wanting to see this film was to see Gabrielle Drake in all her undoubted glory.Miss Drake has to be one of the sexiest, prettiest examples of "posh totty" to have been committed to celluloid.
(Nick Drake and Peter Asher) For those who like me have admired Gabrielle, her scenes in this movie will not disappoint.
Au Par Girls (1972) ** 1/2 (out of 4) British sexploitation film about four beautiful women who travel to London so that they can work as Au Pair girls.
I guess there's really not too much of a reason to go into the plot as we simply see all four of them end up nude and in various sexual situations.
The most shocking thing about AU PAIR GIRLS is the fact that it was written and director by Val Guest who is best remembered for for various Hammer productions including the wonderful THE ABOMINABLE SNOWMAN.
I was really surprised to see how well he handled the material but then again, all he really had to do is make sure the ladies got naked throughout the running time and that the film never slowed down too much.
Gabrielle Drake, Me Me Lay, Nanci Wait and Anita Sector are the four ladies and all of them are obviously beautiful but they also manage to keep a smile on your face.
AU PAR GIRLS isn't a masterpiece and it certainly can't compare to many of the German sexploitation pics of this era but it's still worth watching for fans of the genre..
I decided to check this movie out on Netflix in spite of the uninspiring description given for it, which made it sound like a typical grade B- exploitation flick, just because I wanted to see Gabrielle Drake in something other than reruns of the 1960's TV series *UFO*.
But granting that I'm an American too young to have seen much of this genre of films from this era, I found this movie much more enjoyable than I expected.
The Brits simply don't get sex, and it is always educational to compare how the English do it on film with other countries.
Hence a string of pre-internet so-called sex comedies which take the Carry On approach, but miss the point that the innuendo was what made the Carry Ons funny by taking it a step further and spelling everything out in full-frontal detail.Au Pair Girls is a case in point.
The flimsy plot is hardly worth mentioning, the script even less so (other than to point out that it's not actually very funny).However, there are worthwhile things to observe (at least several of which belong to Gabrielle Drake, har har).The first is that, so run down was the British entertainment industry (particularly in the 70s) that this film, in common with many of its ilk, boasts a decent array of relatively high profile talent, taking work where they can in order to pay their mortgages.
Talking to a family friend about the recent airing of the Comedy film Man About The House,I was surprised to find out that he had not seen a well-known Sex Comedy featuring leading Man About The House actor Richard O'Sullivan,which led to me deciding that it would be the perfect time to meet a pair of Au pair's.The plot:Arriving to the UK from a number of different European countries,4 women called Randi Lindstrom, Anita Sector, Nan Lee and Christa Geisler join an Au Pair agency.Shortly after joining the agency,each of them are sent out to assist families,with Randi Lindstrom getting greeted by a businessmen called Stephen,whilst Anita Sector is taken to a Rock concert,so that she can lose her innocence.View on the film:Despite being dismissive of the movie after it failed to be seen as 'high art' co-writer/ (along with David Adnopoz and David Grant) director Val Guest takes a rather daring approach to the flesh on display in the title,with Guest showing each of the beautiful women fully naked,instead of the 'cheeky peak' that was the traditional route taken for British Sex Comedies at the time.Whilst sadly being limited to a supportive role, Richard O'Sullivan gives a delightfully awkward performance as Stephen,whilst Me Me Lai gives the film an unexpected shot of melancholy as Nan Lee and Astrid Frank reveals a real sense of sorrow as Anita Sector.For the screenplay,the writer's initially give the movie a light & fluffy appearance,but disappointingly soon take the title into an extremely sour direction,due to the 'playful' frolics that the Au pair's find themselves involved in having a deeply uncomfortable predatory undertone,with the ending to Anita Sector's storyline,taking all the fun out of,what should have been a wonderful (Au) pair..
The story contrives to get the clothes off all of them, involve them in some Carry On-type humour and couple them with various misfits from the British film and TV culture of the time, including Man About the House star Richard O'Sullivan, future Coronation Street rogue Johnny Briggs and horror film stalwart Ferdy Mayne (playing a sheik).
There's a pretty risqué amount of female nudity on display, for those who like that kind of thing (but obviously nothing hardcore).Most of the film is pretty thin and inconsequential; the girls are stereotypes, and German Anita especially suffers from some kind of infantalising disorder - she's a moron obsessed with colour TV who acts like a kind of uninhibited child & dresses to deliberately show her private parts; in another more serious film, she would be a psychiatric case.
The most interesting section of the film involves the Swedish girl being taken to a club in London where some dodgy types are still trying to swing, being seduced by a middle-aged rocker, losing her virginity and realising that the scene is not for her.
The strangest of the stories has the Chinese girl (future cannibal film veteran Me Me Lay) getting off with her childish piano prodigy employer, falling mutually in love with and then leaving in the middle of the night for no good reason at all, except some orientalist notion that "Chinese birds are inscrutable, ain't they?!" The film is pretty demeaning to its women characters and there's a smattering of homophobia in the dialogue and one of the characterisations.
The end is striking, as Mayne's sheik for no earthly reason (except they have to end the film somehow) whisks all of the girls away to his Arab kingdom for what looks to all the world like a future in the white slave trade, which they are all delighted about.Stuff and nonsense for the most part then, but directed with a fair amount of skill by veteran Val Guest, which puts it as a piece of film-making a notch above most of the 70s Brit sexploitation flicks..
Tigon British Film Productions were best-known as rivals of Hammer as makers of horror films, but their "Au Pair Girls" is an example of that other mainstay of the British cinema during the seventies, the softcore sex comedy.
(By the end of the decade the TV industry had started to catch up with the cinema in permissiveness).During this period the figure of the au pair girl was something of a recognised sex symbol; every blue comedian's joke book contained at least one crack about lecherous husbands unable to keep their hands off the au pair, so making a sex film about their misadventures must have seemed an obvious step.
Four au pairs- Anita (Swedish), Randi (Danish), Christa (German) and Nan (Chinese)- arrive at Heathrow Airport in order to take up their positions.
"Randi" is not a common baptismal name in Denmark, but was presumably used here to give the scriptwriter a chance to make some obvious puns.The film then follows the "adventures" (euphemism for sexual couplings) of each of the four girls.
Christa starts off as a shy, innocent virgin, but is quickly converted to the cause of promiscuity by Carol, the daughter of her family, and both end up in bed with a hirsute rock star.
The weirdest plot line is the one involving Nan. Like Randi, she seduces the son of her hosts, but whereas Stephen is a fairly normal young man, Nan's lover, Rupert, is a brilliant but immature concert pianist who behaves like a spoilt child.
Although all the couplings involved are heterosexual- it would be a number of years before it became obligatory for soft core sex comedies to include a token lesbian scene- director Val Guest somehow manages to get away without showing much male flesh, something in which his target audience would have had little interest."Au Pair Girls", however, has very little to interest modern viewers, even those interested in erotica, as like most seventies softcore it is very tame by today's standards.
Gabrielle Drake, who plays Randi, was to go on to become a respected mainstream actress herself on British television and doubtless regarded this as one of the more embarrassing entries on her CV.The film recently turned up on the specialist British film channel "Talking Pictures", but I cannot think why they showed it, except perhaps as an exercise in nostalgia for the now-ageing roués who would have flocked to it in the 1970s.
"Au Pair Girls" is an above average Brit sex comedy, a cut above the rest simply by virtue of never being unbearably awful.
It is unusually generous with the full frontal nudity, and thankfully spares us the sight of hideous, balding men in their birthday suits that these movies often inexplicably include.The "plot" is something to do with four sexy "au pairs": young women from around the world staying with host families in England.
The Scandinavian is played by the gorgeous Gabrielle Drake - sister of Nick - and she looks so good you may not notice she doesn't even try an accent.As with all other British sex comedies, this is a comedy in name only.
aren't most movies in that sense exploitation either of violence, one's fears as in horror films, etc), it is surprisingly well-written and has a terrific sense of humor.
Some people say the stereotypes of the girls and the silliness of Astrid Frank who constantly asks for color TV runs dry, but keep in mind, it's a light comedy, very much in the late 60s, early 70s style.
I actually thought Anita Sector (played by Astrid Frank), B.W. Wainwright, the farm and mechanic hands Fred ("can't do nothing") and Burt, and Lord Tryke ("Port") more for some of humorous characters.
Gabrielle Drake and Nancie Wait are beautiful to watch.
One wonders if this genre is a bit healthier but again, in almost any film, nothing is real. |
tt0051301 | Peter Gunn | The title character, played by Craig Stevens, is a well-dressed private investigator whose hair is always in place and who loves cool jazz. Where other gumshoes might be coarse, Peter Gunn is a sophisticate with expensive tastes. He operates in a nameless, fictional riverfront city and can usually be found at Mother's, a smoky wharfside jazz club that he uses as his "office", often meeting clients there. Pete's standard fee is $1,000. He has a reputation of being one of the best investigators and trustworthy. He sometimes works cases out of the state and on at least one occasion out of country, with one case occurring in Mexico and another involving a tour of Western Europe. Gunn drives a 1958 two-tone DeSoto two door hardtop in the first few episodes of the first season, then a 1959 Plymouth Fury convertible with a white top and a car phone. In the third season Gunn drives a 1961 white Plymouth Fury convertible with a car phone.
Gunn's girlfriend, Edie Hart (Lola Albright), is a sultry singer employed at Mother's; she opens her own place in season 3. His pet name for Edie is "Silly". Herschel Bernardi costarred as Lieutenant Charles "Chuck" Jacoby, a somber police detective and friend of Gunn. Occasionally he refers people to Gunn as clients. Bernardi received his only Emmy nomination for the role. Hope Emerson appeared as "Mother", who had been a singer and piano player in speakeasies during Prohibition. She received an Emmy nomination for the role. For the second season, "Mother" was played by Minerva Urecal, following the death of Emerson. Associate producer Byron Kane portrayed Barney, the bartender; Kane was never credited for playing this role. Bill Chadney appeared as Emmett, the piano player at Mother's. (Chadney and Albright married in 1961.)
Both Billy Barty as pool hustler Babby and Herbert Ellis as Beat bistro owner, painter, and sculptor Wilbur appeared in several episodes as occasional "information resources", as "Mother" also often is. Capri Candela played Wilbur's girlfriend Capri. Frequent director Robert Gist appeared as an actor in different roles in three episodes.
Edie opened her own night club "Edie's" with James Lanphier as Leslie the maitre d' in Season 3. | neo noir | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0071521 | Freebie and the Bean | Freebie and Bean are a pair of maverick detectives with the SFPD Intelligence Squad. The volatile gratuity-seeking Freebie is trying to get promoted to the vice squad to garner perks for his retirement while the neurotic and fastidious Bean has ambitions to make lieutenant. Against a backdrop of Super Bowl weekend in San Francisco, the partners are trying to conclude a 14-month investigation, digging through garbage to gather evidence against well-connected racketeer Red Meyers, when they discover that a hit man from Detroit is after Meyers as well. After rejecting their pretext arrest of Meyers to protect him, the district attorney orders them to keep him alive until Monday.
After locating and shooting the primary hit man, and distracted by Bean's suspicions that his wife is having an affair with the landscaper, they continue their investigation seeking a key witness against Meyers who can explain and corroborate the evidence. In the midst of this, they foil a second hit on Meyers by a backup team, leading to a destructive vehicle and foot pursuit through the city, after which they learn that Meyers is planning to fly to Miami before Monday. Tailing him, they receive word that their witness has been located and a warrant issued for Meyers' arrest. Unbeknownst to them, the hooker he has picked up is actually a female impersonator and another hit man.
During the arrest attempt Bean is shot by the hit man, who flees with Meyers into the stadium where the Super Bowl is underway. Freebie corners the hit man in a women's restroom and despite being shot himself, rescues a hostage and kills the hit man. The D.A. arrives after the shootings and tells Freebie that the warrant is canceled because the witness was assassinated on the way to the station. Freebie goes nuts and demands to be allowed to arrest Meyers, only to find that he died of a heart attack during the fracas. Freebie is further demoralized to learn that the evidence they gathered was planted by Meyers' wife in an extra-marital conspiracy with the lieutenant in command of their squad.
Bean is not dead after all, however, and in the ambulance the two wounded partners engage in a free-for-all, blaming each other for their injuries, and causing yet another accident. | comedy, violence | train | wikipedia | Freebie(James Caan) is a hot-head and practical joker, while Bean(Alan Arkin) is calm in some ways just as the same as Freebie.
A mainstay on cable in the 70's, Freebie and the Bean is by no means "great" but it certainly is thoroughly entertaining to anyone who doesn't let political correctness stand in their way.This is no doubt a film that can offend; the two cops (especially Caan) use muscle whenever they can; a crossdresser is treated horribly and insulted; there's some racial humor.
Cann and Arkin are great in their roles, and show geniune affection and friendship for each other as they try to keep a criminal alive to break a case.Car chase fans especially like this movie, and there are some classic chases here!
The highlight chase shows the duo chasing after a blue car with some truly amazing stuntwork.All in all if you aren't the easily offended type, and like some goofy comedy mixed with action, it's worth a spin, if only to see how movies were made when not under a watchdog's microscope..
The story centres around the wacky verbal and non-verbal relationship between Alan Arkin and James Caan more than it does the fairly week plot.
This Is a classic 70's 'Buddy Buddy comedy/Actioneer, that certainly paved the way for '48hr's 'Leathal Weapon' and many more cop flick's 'Freebie And The Bean' star's James Caan, as the macho tough guy 'freebie' Alan Arkin, is the short fused and neurotic 'Bean' Freebie And The Bean have one goal together and that's to bring down the Obnoxious 'Red Myer's who is the local mafia kingpin, but whilst waiting for the Warrant to Arrest their man,They have to wait until Monday for the Important Warrant to arrive,The pair have to fight off various hit men,It's down to Freebie And The Bean, to catch the assassins's And try and get their man with hilarious and riotous result's which have some of the finest car stunt's committed to celluloid!, Freebie And The Bean Also star's Lorreta Swit, Alex(Godfather Rocco) And Valerie Harper AsArkin's wife,There is a mildly amusing subplot which has Arkin Convinced his Ethnic wife is cheating on him with equally hilarious result's!The film also excel's in the verbal Chit Chat between Arkin And Caan, The film has numerous funny moment's including the scene where Arkin/Caan, whilst in pursuit of the Assasain's Accidentally Skid off the highway and crash in to two old people's apartment wall!
That scene has got to be seen to be believed!The stunt men and women must have got paid a lot for this film, and it show's incidentally the director Richard Rush, later Directed another cult favorite 'The Stunt Man,Hopefully warner brother's will finally release this although the film like a lot of 70's classic's is overtly not PC(politically Correct) It'll be great to view it in It's 2:35 -1 Aspect Ratio, a commentary track by Arkin And Caan, would make a load of fan's happy,.
It's always a pleasure to watch Alan Arkin work, and he works so well playing off James Caan, who's fantastic in this film, too.
Be forewarned, though, if you're bothered by things politically incorrect, you may be offended by Freebie And The Bean.The story is unimportant because it's the comic skits that make this movie work.
Freebie (James Caan) is part of a detective team who thinks the major part of his benefit package is whatever he can walk away with, while Bean (Alan Arkin) plods along worrying that his wife is having an affair with the landscaper.
Freebie and the Bean crashing their car off an overpass and into the upper floor of an apartment building, Freebie giving Bean a fashion lesson about why buttons don't fall off of expensive shirts, or Bean grilling his wife, played by Valerie Harper, attempting to catch her in a lie about the suspected affair....these are worth watching the film for and are some of the funniest scenes I've ever seen.
Long before the PC crowd raised their ugly heads, there was Freebie and the Bean(1974), a very watchable and funny comedy about two San Francisco cops who nearly destroy the city in their pursuit of a gangster.
Although it's story is a letdown, Caan and Arkin' make a great teaming of "throw the book out the window cops", I'm prepared to forgive this.
This movie works, thanks to Caan, and especially Arkin, who I loved in this.
Valerie (Rhoda) Harper lends great support as Arkin's wife, while Loretta "Hot lips Hoolahan" Swit pops up as the old codger's mistress.
It's the antidote for The Laughing Policeman, that grim "police procedural" from 1973; it's Freebie and the Bean, a crude, politically incorrect, and very funny buddy movie for the sophomore in all of us.Alan Arkin and James Caan play a couple of San Francisco PD Inspectors on the hunt for .
The fun is in Arkin's neurotic and fastidious Bean (you have to forgive the racial slur right from the start) and Caan decked out in a leisure suit and looking for the next "five-finger discount" (hence, the name "Freebie").It's clearly not a movie for your mom--violent and foul-mouthed, with Arkin accusing his wife of infidelity by demanding to see if she's douched recently, and Caan performing noisy cunnilingus on his girlfriend.
It all seems so daring for the 17 year old in 1975, but now, I suspect, I would just cringe and blush at the crudity and concentrate on the hostile chemistry between Arkin and Caan.After so many serious cop-dramas from the early '70s, FATB came across as something of a breath of different air.
In the grand scheme of things, it's not a good movie or a nice one, but there is an entertainment value and a vitality that makes it worth watching.And don't miss the cop car through the side of the apartment building!.
Overlong, over the top buddy-cop action comedy stars James Caan and Alan Arkin as a thoroughly dysfunctional pair of San Francisco police detectives.
Caan plays Freebie, Arkin is the Bean.
Viewers will love the car-through-the-wall gag (and the corresponding deadpan reactions of an old couple in an apartment).Caan and Arkin are energetic as they constantly bicker and banter with each other; the problem for this viewer, though, was that the script is never really that funny; it's seriously lacking in real wit.There are some good actors in the supporting cast.
Alan Arkin turns in a first-rate performance as the "Bean", the straight guy (with a couple of kinks of his own) against James Cann's maverick "Freebie" character.There are a few surprising twists, even though a flick this funny doesn't really need much of a plot.With a strong supporting cast including Valerie Harper and Loretta Swit, I found this feature outrageously funny when I saw it in the theater in 1975, and it's still just as good today.
There is a scene with Alex Rocco as the "D.A.", at which my dad, a real-life D.A. at the time, nearly fell out of his seat laughing.If you can find this classic, by all means watch it.
This is a pretty funny movie from the 70's starring James Caan and Alan Arkin as two screwed up police detectives in San Francisco trying to bust a local numbers guy so they can get promotions.
By today's standards it's very un-pc - lots of ethnic jokes - but it's still a good laugh.James Caan and Alan Arkin are very good together.
Caan ("Freebie") is the guy who's always trying to get something for nothing, and Arkin ("The Bean") is the straight man and butt of his jokes.
Valerie Harper plays Arkin's cheating wife and she's pretty good.
The way one homosexual character is treated will be offensive to many people, especially near the end of the movie.The scene where one of the cops, confronting his wife about his suspicions of her cheating on him, is a comic highlight..
James Caan and Alan Arkin work well together as oddball cops and I can only say bring it out on DVD!.
We had such great memories of seeing it in the theatre, yet we couldn't stand it for more than about 15 minutes.I was so relieved that he wanted to turn it off, but I was so disappointed that this movie wasn't what we remembered.If you watch this today and love it I really envy you.
Great shoot out in the mens room at the old Tenderloin Bowling alley.Great acting , especially when Alan Arkin and James Caan are being chewed out by there police supervisor and they try to explain there screw up.
Two cops (well-cast buddy couple, Alan Arkin and James Caan) bust chops and wreck cars in an attempt to nab a numbers-racketeer.
Supporting cast is solid, with Valerie Harper exceptional in small role as Arkin's wife, and some of the comedy works, but much of the rest is decidedly off-putting.
James Caan and Alan Arkin are partners in this amateur hour detective work film...
James Caan and Alan Arkin play two off beat San Francisco cops trying to take down local crime boss Red Meyer who his also being targeted by a hit-man.
The film is an early example of the buddy cop film and also has high levels of gun toting violence, police brutality and zany car chases which must have inspired The Blues Brothers.I still enjoy some surreal elements of the film such as the scenes Caan and Arkin have with Alex Rocco in his office and the anarchic style is enjoyable to an extent but too often it descends into silliness at the expense of plot development.However one thing noticeable was the amount of shootings in this film.
I understand the film is of its time so certain derogatory terms are expected but did actress Valerie Harper really had to be listed as 'Beans Wife' in the title credits?
The blame for all this has to be laid at director Richard Rush to be so behind the curve.Still the film is fun, Arkin and Caan make a good team and have some good banter.
It is actually Arkin who is unpredictable even though he is more cautious compared to the gung ho Caan.However the similar themed Busting that came out at the same time, which starred Elliot Gould and Robert Blake now looks like to be the better film..
What little chemistry there was between Alan Arkin and James Caan was swamped by gross overacting, meaningless banter and over-the-top yelling.
Caan and Arkin work fairly well together, however the film does not have much to say in terms of friendships.
i would love for my son to see it, i tell him about it all the time, if any one knows where i can rent or but a copy please let me know....people my age, this is a movie to share with your kids, and it is good family fun, There is very few curse words if any, very little if any nudity, this is a move i want and am not ashamed to let my daughters watch as well as my son.
Freebie & the Bean is peerless as a cop comedy.
James Caan and Alan Arkin "disgrace" themselves by starring in this offensive turkey.
Freebie and Bean are two San Francisco cops who have been working for over a year to bring down Red Meyer, a local crime boss with his fingers in many operations.
Alan Arkin in Wait Until Dark and James Caan in the Godfather and that was it before I saw them in this movie.
Alan Arkin, "Where do you get this stuff?" I think Caan is great and charismatic (though pretty nuts) in this movie.
It was such a great scene.I have asked a lot of people over the years if they've seen this movie and no one has or does.
I've grown to respect both Arkin and Caan's work over the year and this may have been a throw away film for them both but it still ranks high on my hit parade..
A badly dated comedy police caper with Caan & Arkin as the two inept detectives trying to protect a known hood from being assassinated in order to give evidence and put some bigger hoods behind bars.This film is a complete mess from start to finish: it tries to be funny but fails miserably.
Instead of relying on intelligent humour it has to rely on cheap slapstick, repulsive gags and mundane noisy car chases.The film doesn't paint a pretty picture for the San Franciso police department (or any police authority for that matter), especially if they have dullards like these two running around beating people up like they're mad fascists on a mission to seek out and destroy.The appearance of James Caan is a huge disappointment for me, so soon after his pivotal performance in The Godfather, he then has to embarrass himself with the tacky little bauble.Alan Arkin flounces around like a robot with a charisma bypass, or a St Bernard dog looking around in need of a good script.
He is truly embarrassing here.There is nothing inventive or remotely entertaining here, with the possible exception of the wonderful little cameo from Valeria Harper as Arkin's wife.This film also shows its age in other ways apart from fashion and its dent-easy cars.
Somehow the first five minutes of the film really sums this movie up: Caan & Arkin spend time scouring trash cans for evidence.
From start to finish, F&B is a wide-open romp, send-up, spoof of police movies and, more so, a lampoon of Hollywood's love affair with car crashes.
Whatever it is, I don't like it.In any case, I have always LOVED this movie as it breaks ground by being intentionally campy, but just enough to make it seem MAYBE it is a serious film.
James Caan and Alan Arkin play two police officers assigned to protect the man they are trying to arrest.
I have never seen and know that I will never see another film quite like Freebie and the bean..
I have been laughing myself silly at this movie since I first saw it on Christmas Day, 1974.Funny, violent, loud and much like a traffic accident in that you can't look away.
Freebie and the Bean is like a truly tasteless joke; you know it is probably wrong and still you laugh so hard.Two lovably inept cops manage to keep from being suspended while they attempt to protect a local mobster from out of town hit men.
Richard Rush's comedy chase film contains the wildest car crashes this side of The Blues Brothers.With a healthy dose of sexist, racist and scatological humor, you just need to chill out and enjoy the jokes and one liners.
James Caan and Alan Arkin assume the usual buddy cop roles and run wild.
It's a great movie with awesome car chases, stunt work and some achingly funny dialogue, not to mention some terrific performances especially from Alan Arkin as Bean.
If you're a fan of 70's cop/car chase movies.
Tarantino went into great detail about how Richard Rush intended to parody Dirty Harry violent cop films, but few got the joke, even though the film was a big hit.
It's un-PC in that 70's macho way, almost as if Altman directed a buddy cop comedy...But I dig the movie for its weird tone and cool action scenes, along with the great Alan Arkin.
For what it is - a cop buddy movie - FREEBIE AND THE BEAN is the paragon.
Alan Arkin and James Caan play cops in love, an un-ironic friendship displayed with banter and charisma.
(This is even more impressive in light of Alan Arkin's public denigration of working with Richard Rush and this particular film-making experience generally.) They are aided by a Laurel & Hardy-meet-Lenny Bruce sensibility in the script and direction, which demands the extent of their abilities at the height of their powers.
Arkin and Caan are like that in this film; they're constantly shouting at and hitting felons, members of the public and each other, they crash cars, endanger lives, destroy as much property as possible, murder troublesome assassins, break into people's houses, steal things and are generally extreme sociopaths at best.
Extremely well directed by the mysterious Rush, a man who made some of the most interesting and least-seen pictures of the pre-Movie Brat generation (his next film, The Stunt Man, took six years to get made), with great location photography by Laszlo Kovacs.
The first thing I would say about this is I do not believe that this film is racist, "Freebie" (James Caan) is a racist and this is something his Mexican partner "Bean" (Alan Arkin) takes him to task for.
This film appears to deliberately go out of its way to upset every possible expectation leaving no stone unturned in its pursuit of this.The Cinematography by the great Laszlo Kovacs is excellent and there is great chemistry between James Caan and Alan Arkin as the sometimes warring partners and sometimes friends.
Outrageous, obnoxious, violent, sexist, profane, vulgar, and raw in almost all aspects of its production, this crimer-comedy from 1974 is infamous not just for its aforementioned exploitation movie-poster adjectives but the hilarious chemistry between co-bastards James Caan and Alan Arkin.
As if the immensely destructive, punctuating car chases aren't enough to earn the movie its R rating, the completely rancid dialog between its leads makes the buddy cop films of the 80s appear positively anemic.
Nonetheless, right when you think the film's poorly written--more like scribbled--female characters couldn't get any worse (or neglected), the luminous Valerie Harper appears in a knockout scene as the wife of Arkin.
Richard Rush, who, up until this point, was known primarily as the director of a bunch of biker films that WEREN'T EASY RIDER, directed this inspired lunacy that teams James Caan and Alan Arkin as cops who'll do whatever it takes to nail dapper mobster Jack Kruschen.
The chase scenes in this film are great.
Thoroughly enjoyable to watch, Alan Arkin and James Caan make a great comedy duo. |
tt0078950 | The Champ | Andy "Champ" Purcell (Wallace Beery) is the former world heavyweight champion, now down on his luck and living in squalid conditions with his eight-year-old son "Dink" in Tijuana, Mexico. Champ attempts to train and to convince promoters to set up a fight for him, but his efforts are consistently stymied by his alcoholism. Dink is repeatedly disappointed and let down by his father's irresponsible actions and frequent broken promises to quit drinking, but his utter devotion to his father nonetheless never wavers.
In addition to his drinking problem, Champ is also a compulsive gambler, another vice which he repeatedly promises Dink he will surrender (but never does). After a winning streak, he fulfills a previous promise to buy Dink a horse, whom they subsequently name "Little Champ" and decide to enter into a race. At the track, Dink happens across a woman who, unknown to either of them, is actually his mother Linda. She is now remarried to Tony, a wealthy man who owns one of the other horses in the race.
Linda and Tony observe Dink and Champ together and realize that Dink is her son. Champ allows Linda to see Dink, who accepts that she is his mother. But Dink feels no emotion toward her, as she has never been part of his life. Linda resolves to remove Dink from the negative atmosphere in which he's growing up and have him live with her family.
Catching Champ during an all-night gambling binge, Tony asks him to turn Dink over so that Tony and Linda can put Dink into school. Champ refuses. As the exhausted Dink sleeps on a nearby table, Tony bluntly observes that Champ is not a good father. The night of gambling ends with Champ having lost Little Champ, which devastates Dink. Champ asks Linda for enough money to buy the horse back, and she gives it to him. But before he can buy the horse back, he starts gambling again and loses the money Linda loaned him. He also winds up in jail, breaking Dink's heart once more.
Ashamed of his actions and with his spirit broken, Champ finally agrees to send an unwilling Dink to live with Tony and Linda. On the train ride home, Tony and Linda try their best to welcome Dink into their family. Dink does not dislike them, but he is consumed only by thoughts of his father. He runs away back to Tijuana, where he finds that Champ has a fight scheduled with the Mexican heavyweight champion. When he sees Dink, Champ immediately returns to good spirits. He trains hard for the fight and, for the first time, really does stay away from drinking and gambling. Champ is determined to win the fight, make Dink proud of him, and use his prize money to buy back Little Champ.
Tony and Linda attend the fight, bringing genuine best wishes and assurances that they will make no further efforts to separate Dink from Champ. The match is brutal, and Champ is seriously injured. Dink and the others in his corner urge him to throw in the towel, but Champ refuses to allow that. He musters a last burst of energy, and knocks out his opponent. After the fight, he triumphantly presents Little Champ to Dink. But after witnessing his son's overjoyed reaction, Champ collapses.
Champ is brought into his dressing room, where a doctor determines that his injuries are mortal. Champ urges Dink to cheer up and then dies, leaving Dink inconsolable. Despite the best efforts of all of the men and boys in the room, who one by one attempt to calm him, Dink continually wails, "I want the Champ!" Finally, Dink spots Linda enter the room. Dink looks at her, cries out, "Mother!" and runs into her arms. She picks him up and he sobs, "The Champ is dead, mama." She turns and carries him out of the room as he buries his face in her shoulder, crying. | tragedy | train | wikipedia | This is arguably Jon Voight's finest acting performance with the possible exception of The Odessa File.Jon Voight plays Billy Flynn an ex boxing champion with Ricky Shroder playing his eight year old son, T.J Flynn.
Billy Flynn is now a horse trainer bringing up his son after a divorce some seven years ago when T.J. was just a baby.
Billy loves a drink and is addicted to gambling and bringing up his son does have problems.The problems intensify when his ex-wife, now remarried, appears on the scene to see her son after seven long years.
As Billy gets further into trouble, his only way of securing a life for his son is to make one last come-back into the boxing ring.The film is very poignant, emotional and has so many sad sequences.
The Champ is a superb movie, a must see, and although over 20 years old, still has a place today.
I didn't know what I'd think since it's been so long, and was a bit surprised to find this film has lost nothing in the intervening years -- if anything, it views even better than it did when it was released.
I first watched this film in 1980 as a five year old with my gran and we managed to distort the credits through our tears and sobbing.
Last night, I watched the Champ with my girlfriend and I am happy to say that the years haven't mellowed me and we were both in floods of tears before I switched the film off.
It is the extremely emotional content and story, not the mere technicalities or flaws that makes this movie great.
I don't know who these movie critics are nor where they come from, but they certainly have much to learn from this film..
It's the story of the love between a boy and his father, and the boy trying to make it on his own when his mother and father can't.The movie starts out very big on horse-racing, showing how Jon Voight, "The Champ", is and gives brief glimpses into his past life.
Conflict between him and his wife rises and we see even deeper into what was a merely a shell of his life in the beginning of the film; he is complicated and emotionally bruised man, snapping sometimes at his son that he loves with all his heart.The film has the most believable performances I have ever seen on screen, and is a tearjerker.
The Champ is truly the quintessential example of the love between father and son, one which I can only hope to be able to show with my children..
The Champ is the most beautiful Father & Son story I have ever seen.
If you are not in tears at the end of this movie, go see the Wizard, cause you have no heart!Cute little Ricky Schroder acts his --- off in this drama, which is a tad overdone in spots, but it is so sad that if you are embarrassed to cry in front of other people, see it alone..
Once upon a time, when I was 10 years old, my father took me from playing with my friends to see this movie called "The Champ." And now, I can't wait to share it with MY children.
Jon Voight plays the role of ex-Boxing champion Billy Flynn who attempts a comeback to help his son.
Ricky Schroder is the object of affection from his down-on-his-luck father, AND his rich mother (Faye Dunaway)who deserted him many years ago.
Young Ricky Schroder gives the performance of a lifetime and is backed up by the stellar work of Jon Voight and beautiful Faye Dunaway.Its a great at home date movie to watch with a new lady friend.
I believe that the main reason is that the champ is going against the rich world of famous (like Annie the T.J. mother) and promote the poor but rich heart of t.j. father : the champ gives his entire life to win and give all the money for a home and education to his children who grew from the fist days of life.
I always felt that Rick Schroeder did a great job in this film however the true acting chops were offered by Jon Voight.
If you don't have a tear in your eye when the movie ends, then your heart is made of stone!!!The story is real good, it proves that it isn't always the mother who has all the love for their children..
Jon Voight plays an ex-boxing champion raising his young boy (played by a stellar Ricky Schroder).
I find Faye Dunaway (who plays the boy's estranged mother) slightly annoying, but I forgive her because I love the film itself so much.
Voight plays Billy Flynn, a boxer who gets to meet his son T.J.(Rick Schroder, "Silver Spoons") this kid owned a fine horse, and he made sure that horse is taken care of.
I'm not real keen on Jon Voight or Faye Dunaway, but little Ricky absolutely MAKES this movie.
I am not ashamed to say that I cried for days and still do, whenever I put on my video of this mini-masterpiece.Jon Voigt, always worth double the price of admission is wonderful, but Ricky Schroder steals every scene in which he appears.
this remake of the 1931 film of the same name,is pretty darn impressive.just like the original film is all about the love a father has for his son,and the son has for his father.Jon Voigt plays the father,a washed up former champion boxer,now an alcoholic and gambler.he also happen to be a father to an eight year boy,played by Ricky Schroder.in the original film,nine year old Jackie Cooper played the son and stole the show.the same thing happens here.Eight year old Ricky Schroder owns the film.the only complaint i have about this film,and it's minor one,is that it's maybe a bit too long.other than,i prefer it to the original.the ending packs a real wallop.for me,The Champ is an 8/10.
Jon Voight plays Billy Flynn, a former champion boxer now given to drinking, gambling, and raising his son T.J.
The ups and downs of the devoted codependent pair might be enough movie on their own, but soon enough Annie (Faye Dunaway) shows up and displays a strangely protective interest in T.J. Though the plot jumps around too much to quite hold together, The Champ is certainly affecting, and all three leads take the film so earnestly that somehow it works.
Special DVD features include audio commentary from Jon Voight and Rick Schroder and the documentary Behind the Scenes with the Champ..
Great Ending But Needed More Leading Up to It. The Champ (1979)** (out of 4)Remake of the 1931 film that got star Wallace Beery his Oscar.
This time it's Jon Voight playing the washed up boxer taking care of his young son (Ricky Schroder) who decides to try and make a comeback so that he can do something good for the kid.
It's just too bad the rest of the film didn't live up to it and the countless manipulation scenes early on just don't work and they certainly miss the emotional connection that they try for..
Little Ricky Schroeder gives one of the best child performances of all time, going step for step with the great Jon Voight in the acting department.
I have not seen this film for many years , ive not seen the dvd anywhere since i last watched it on tv years ago, the movie is a cross between kramer vs kramer and rocky the acting in this is sensational to say the least especially from a young ricky schroder who is now nearly unheard of , despite schroders fledgling career he is the only actor who has genuinely made me cry his performance in the closing scene is heart wrenching its so realistic its nearly unbearable, i will look out for this film in the future and when i see it again the tears are very likely to fall again ..
Details are a little vague (I saw this back in 1979) but here's what I remember: Story about an ex-boxer (Jon Voight) who's bringing up his son (Ricky Schroder) alone when his wife (Fay Dunaway) left them.
Jon Voight and Faye Dunaway are good actors however they seem to have been miss casted and both don't seem to be happy in their role and Rick Schroder who is now better know for his role in "NYPD Blue" gives a good lesson in overacting.All in all, a drama not worth seeing.5/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/.
Jon Voight gives a brilliantly understated performance in the title role and is well supported by the always-brilliant Faye Dunaway, but the true star of this masterpiece is Ricky Schroeder in the Jackie Cooper role as the boy.
There are success stories ;"the champ " is a "failure" one.The first version was released at a time people were not smiling because of the world crisis.In 1979,after stuff like "Rocky" ,"the champ number two" was not a blockbuster.The problem is that Jon Voigt is much too good-looking ,too healthy ,too fit to portray a wreck successfully.Wallace Beery was the champ and it's him that will be remembered .On the other hand ,although a bit too clean and too cute ,the young Ricky Schroeder's performance compares favorably with that of Jackie Cooper.
The part of the mother was fleshed out ,because it was Oscar-winner Faye Dunaway who reprised Irene Rich's role.Franco Zephirelli was more talented when he filmed "Romeo and Juliet and his Jesus remains the best of the genre.Not as "swell" as the 1931 movie,but children fond of melodrama will like it..
she's a good person.¨ The Champ has divided audiences over the world; there are those who consider this to be a masterpiece and others who believe it's just a terrible movie that tries too hard to be a tearjerker.
It has it's touching moments with a good performance from Jon Voight as the lead actor.
His love and passion for his father, the champ, is hard to believe because he seems so selfish and cruel at times.The story takes place in Hialeah where Billy Flynn (Jon Voight), a former boxing champ now in his late thirty's, is working as a race horse trainer.
The only solution Billy can think of in order to give his son a better future is returning to what he does best: boxing.The Champ relies too heavily on the dramatic effect and that is what ends up hurting the movie because many scenes seem to fit the screenplay for the convenience of the movie and it just doesn't feel real.
Audiences that enjoy heartfelt films and tearjerkers will probably love this movie, but audiences who are searching for more character depth will probably be disappointed with it.
I had a hard time with the beginning of the film, and found the last half of the movie more entertaining, but it is far from being the masterpiece some people claim it to be.http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/.
A pointless remake of a has-been 1931 film of the same name, this one pummels its audience--employing filmic techniques developed since the original--in its comeback to try to inflict even more tears than its saccharine predecessor.The 1931 version is bad, but at least the camerawork allowed some distance for the actors to develop a decent father-son bond on screen before the hokey histrionics are punched up.
The ChampThe best thing about having your kid in your corner during a boxing match is that you can use them as a shield if your opponent is too strong.And while the father of the boy in this drama would never do anything that horrendous to his son, his mother sure would.Raised on the road by his father Billy (Jon Voight), a third-rate boxer, T.J.
I want to open this review by saying that "The Champ" holds a very special place in my heart, if only because it might be the first live-action movie I remember seeing as a (6-year old) kid, and for some strange reason, of all the scenes from the film, I was more impacted by the sight of blood, a disturbing novelty for my kiddies' eyes (the sparring partner, the horse's injury and the scary sight of Billy's opponent shouting at him).
The Youtube clips many years later finally had their effect, but even then I knew I had to experience the whole film to measure up the extent of its emotionality.So I did and I can't believe someone who despises the overuse of superlatives like me would indulge himself to such a clichéd statement but this is indeed the saddest movie ever, with the climactic locker-room scene as the most defining moment.
Adapted from a 1931 movie directed by King Vidor, "The Champ", is about a father-and-son relationship, an extraordinary sacred link between Billy Flynn (Jon Voight), an ex-Heavyweight Boxing Champion who reconverted in horse-training, and his 8-year old blond-haired angel-faced son: T.J.
I can recall considering my father a true model when I was a kid, I can easily respond to the sight of a kid who admires his father the way T.J. does, especially since this adoration is the build-up that cements the final scene's emotionality.A few words about Ricky Schroeder's performance: it's absolutely refreshing to see a child acting like a real one, not too mature or annoying, Ricky Shroeder delivers in "The Champ" one of the finest pieces of child acting ever, on the same vein than Jackie Coogan in "The Kid", any kids' performance pale in comparison to little Ricky that year and I can't believe his performance was overlooked by the Academy Awards (while he was awarded a Golden Globe for Best Male Newcomer).
The film takes then the emotional start with the most simple plot premise and it only avoid cliché's annoyances thanks to the beautiful performance of Ricky Schroeder.
Indeed, every single moment work and it almost seems like the adult actors did their best to match Ricky's incredible acting, and I believe that Jon Voight deserved more accolades for his performance.The film contains some of the most emotional moments you'll ever see, reaching a first pinnacle with three powerful scenes in a row: a heart-breaking father-and-son conversation in jail, T.J. learning that Annie is not a "little angel in the sky" and his outburst of enraged cries when she can't even say that she loves 'Champ', and then the reunion with Billy, hell even the happier moments are unbelievably sad, with little T.J. and his father swimming on the beach (mirroring a previous scene with Annie).
Franco Ziffereli's directing is relatively sober and the music not too over-emotional, so if anything is manipulative, then it has to be a little 8-year old actor's performance, would you believe he'd have this intention?
To conclude, I sincerely don't think any film would have as a powerful emotional impact as "The Champ"'s final scene.
The story is one that I'm sure many can relate with, whether you're a single parent, have a great relationship with your father or can simply appreciate a film with strong acting.
It follows the story of Billy Flynn (Jon Voight) , an ex-boxer who is struggling to make a life for himself and his young son (Ricky Schroder) .
Billy is very well played by Voight; he has just the right mix of tough guy and loving father.Faye Dunaway and Jack Warden both do a good job in their roles as well, but Ricky Schroder steals the show, in one of the finest performances from a child actor ever.
At least in the original film, when Dink saw his father die, he still had his friend, half-sibling, and mother.
It was as if his father was his only friend, and he's gone...Rick Schroeder puts on a superb performance in this movie.
if music in a film is a sign of manipulation of emotions, then I must be the biggest sap because certain scores like this one remain in the soul years after hearing it on screen.
Faye Dunaway was at the top of her game as one of the top five leading ladies in film, and if indeed she was "Mommie Dearest" just two years later, here, she's playing a mother who perhaps loves far too much.The shining light of this film is Ricky Schroder, a talented little kid if there ever was one, but upstaged that year at the Academy Awards by "Kramer vs Kramer's" Justin Henry.
After just recently viewing this 1979 film "The Champ", it has a little bit in common with three more contemporary films:-Million Dollar Baby (for the gritty, real-world perspective that director Franco Zeffirelli brings to the movie)-Rocky (for the underdog story)-Over The Top (for the father/son relationship and custody battle)For a basic plot summary, "The Champ" tells the story of Billy (Jon Voight) and his son TJ (Ricky Schroder).
When the boy's mother (Faye Dunaway) comes back into the picture, Billy (once a professional boxer) decides to step back into the ring again to try and make a few more big paydays to take care of his beloved boy.There are a few things that this film doesn't quite nail, but they are so far overshadowed by what it does right:-The acting is terrific.
Schroder turns in perhaps the greatest child-star performance of all-time, while Voight and Dunaway also turn in dramatic and emotional roles.-The direction of Zeffirelli is, much like a modern-day Clint Eastwood, very realistic and down- to-earth.
The Champ is a good film that it makes you cry (I guess everybody knows that by now) but really, the inconsolable T.J.
It stretches him between his bad habit and his responsibility as a father which later led him back into boxing to improve their life.I won't say much because you have to watch it in spite of the poor rating of this amazing film.. |
tt0416315 | Wolf Creek | In Broome, Western Australia, 1999, two British tourists, Liz Hunter (Cassandra Magrath) and Kristy Earl (Kestie Morassi), are backpacking across the country with Ben Mitchell (Nathan Phillips), an Australian friend from Sydney. They constantly get drunk at wild, extravagant pool parties and camp out on the beach. Ben buys a dilapidated Ford XD Falcon for their road journey from Broome to Cairns, Queensland via the Great Northern Highway.
After stopping at Halls Creek for the night, the trio make another stop at Wolf Creek National Park, which contains a giant crater formed by a 50,000-ton meteorite.
Hours later, upon returning to their car, the group discovers that their watches have all suddenly stopped and that the car will not start. Unable to solve the problem, they prepare to sit out the night. After dark, a rural man named Mick Taylor (John Jarratt) comes across them and offers to tow them to his camp to repair the car. Initially hesitant, the group allows Mick to take them to his place, an abandoned mining site several hours south of Wolf Creek. Mick regales them with tall stories of his past while making a show of fixing their car. His manner unsettles Liz and Kristy, although Ben is less concerned. While they sit around a fire, Mick gives the tourists water which he describes as "rainwater from the top end". The water eventually causes the tourists to fall unconscious.
Liz awakens to find herself gagged and tied up in a shed. She manages to break free, but before she can escape from the mining site, she hears Mick torturing Kristy in a garage, and witnesses him sexually assault her. Liz sets the now-dismantled Falcon on fire to distract him, and goes to help Kristy while Mick is busy trying to extinguish the blaze. When he returns Liz manages to shoot Mick with his own rifle, the bullet hitting him in the neck and apparently killing him. The women attempt to flee the camp in Mick's truck. But before they can do so, Mick stumbles out of the garage, revealing the gunshot was non-fatal and that he's still alive. He proceeds to shoot at them with a double-barreled shotgun before giving chase in another car. The women evade Mick by rolling his truck off a cliff and hiding behind a bush, before returning to the mining site to get another car. Liz leaves the hysterical Kristy outside the gates, telling her to escape on foot if she does not return in five minutes.
Liz enters another garage and discovers Mick's large stock of cars as well as an organised array of travellers' possessions, including video cameras. She watches the playback on one of them and is horrified to see Mick "helping" other travellers stranded at Wolf Creek in almost identical circumstances to her own. She then picks up another camera which turns out to be Ben's, and while viewing some of Ben's footage, she notices Mick's truck in the background, indicating he'd been following them long before they got to Wolf Creek. She gets into a car and attempts to start it, but Mick shows up in the back seat and stabs her through the driver's seat with a bowie knife. After more bragging and furious about his truck getting wrecked, he hacks Liz's fingers off in one swipe, and headbutts her into near unconsciousness. He then severs her spinal cord with the knife, paralyzing her and rendering her a "head on a stick". He then proceeds to interrogate her as to Kristy's whereabouts.
By dawn, Kristy has reached a highway and is discovered by a passing motorist. He attempts to help Kristy, but is shot dead from far away by Mick, who has a sniper rifle. Mick gives chase in a Holden HQ Statesman, prompting Kristy to take off in the dead man's car. She succeeds in running Mick off the road when he catches up, but he gets out of the car and shoots out Kristy's back tire, causing the car to flip over. Kristy climbs out of the vehicle and attempts to crawl away, but is immediately shot dead by Mick. He bundles Kristy's body into the back of his car, along with the body of the dead motorist, and torches the wrecked car before driving off.
Ben, whose fate until now has not been revealed, awakens to find himself nailed to a mock crucifix in a mine shaft, with two aggressive, caged Rottweilers in front of him. He manages to extract himself from the crucifix and enters the camp in early daylight. Ben escapes into the outback, but becomes dehydrated, and eventually passes out beside a dirt road. He is discovered by a Swedish couple who take him to Kalbarri, where he is airlifted to a hospital.
A series of title cards states that despite several major police searches, no trace of Liz or Kristy has ever been found. Early investigations into the case were disorganised, hampered by confusion over the location of the crimes, a lack of physical evidence and the alleged unreliability of the only witness. After four months in police custody, Ben was later cleared of all suspicion. He currently lives in South Australia. The film ends with the silhouette of Mick walking into the sunset with his rifle in hand. | cruelty, murder, sadist, violence, cult, atmospheric, insanity, suspenseful, storytelling, home movie | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0161292 | Bleeder | The film follows the friends Leo and Lenny, who lives in Nørrebro, a working-class neighborhood in Copenhagen. Leo lives in a rundown apartment with his girlfriend Louise. Lenny is a shy and quiet film expert who works with his and Leo's mutual friend Kitjo, in a video store that rents out art films as well as a huge collection of pornographic films.
As a subplot, we follow Lenny, who is trying to build a relationship to Lea, a girl that works in a local grill bar. Lenny asks Lea out to see a movie, but he chickens out when he sees her at the theatre. Lenny spends most of his time both at home and at work watching films.
When Leo finds out that Louise is pregnant and wants to keep the baby, he becomes more and more aggressive. After witnessing a beating at a club he gets himself a gun. During a normal film night, Leo pulls a gun on Lenny and Kitjo. Leo berates Lenny for his life style, and expresses his disdain for his own life, feeling trapped in a dead end. Later Leo, in despair, hits Louise, and is threatened by her brother, Louis. When it happens again, Louise loses the baby. Louis takes a gruesome revenge by injecting HIV infected blood into Leo's body. Leo retaliates in an equally gruesome manner, shooting Louis in the stomach, then shooting off his own hand and letting the blood drip into Louis' wound. Leo then commits suicide.
Kitjo brings Lenny to Leo's funeral but Lenny can't bring himself to go. Life continues, and Lenny casually tells Kitjo that he has been offered a job in another store, but does not think he will accept as he has to change his routine. Lenny seeks up Lea again. They both seem shy towards each other, and have trouble communicating. Lenny asks Lea out a second time; the final image of the film shows them alone in the grill/bar where Lea works thus ending the film on a hopeful note. | revenge, murder, violence | train | wikipedia | 'Bleeder' is a powerful and unforgettable movie comparable to the films of Gaspar Noe. Depressing yes, but highly recommended viewing..
As much as I enjoyed the super-hyped Dogma movies 'Festen', and 'Mifune', going by 'Bleeder' the real Danish director to watch is Nicolas Refn.
The movie's bleak and depressing world view is balanced by the bittersweet sub-plot concerning video nerd Lenny (Mads Mikkelsen), and his attempt to "get a life".
The scenes showing Lenny working in a to-die-for video store will make most film buffs drool!
Lenny rattles off the stores inventory in a funny scene, and the movie is full of film talk from Lindsay Anderson to Fred Williamson, and even includes clips from William Lustig's exploitation classics 'Maniac' and 'Vigilante'.
'Bleeder' is a powerful and unforgettable movie comparable to the films of Gaspar Noe ('I Stand Alone', 'Irreversible') and Gary Oldman's 'Nil by Mouth'.
Nicolas Winding Refn, the genius behind the excellent "Pusher" sets new standards for danish movies with his new opus "Bleeder".
Leo, played by the magnificent actor Kim Bodnia, is gradually going insane as his wife gets pregnant.
He feels his life fade away and asks himself how he can put a child into a world that's raw and how they can afford to have one.The atmosphere is two parts Scorcese's "Taxi Driver" and one part Franz Kafka's "Der Prozess", not very moody in other words.
The violence feels very realistic and is sometimes even hard to watch, it's like it all is happening for real.
The realistic approach makes this movie feel fresh and not like something you've seen before.
After I saw this movie I was left with an uneasy feeling in my stomach and I knew I've seen something very rear and very good.Nicolas Winding Refn is worth the highest of praise for making a movie like this.
And boy was it good.The tempo is a little slower than Pusher, but it really suits the movie.
But I feel it has more in common with John Cassavettes, than Abel Ferrara and Martin Scorsese that I think were refn inspirations for Pusher.The actors are brilliant all around, especially Mads Mikkelsen who does a fantastic performance as a filmgeek, with major problems when it comes to talking and being around girls.
And Kim Bodnia gives a really introspective performance that proves his status as one of europe´s if not the whole worlds best actors.All in all a very powerful, and intense movie that is a must see.
Packed with substance.I was very impressed with the acting.Since then, I've become a big fan of Refn, and I absolutely love the Pusher trilogy.Its a shame gems like Bleeder never get the recognition they deserve, but plastic hollow over rated Hollywood $hit does.Top film.
The gritty realism of that movie is in part recreated in "Bleeder", but instead of just treading water and doing a Pusher remake, this is much more stylish in its theme and cinematography (e.g. the main characters´ names all start with L; Leo, Lenny, Lea etc.
The scenes in the video store remind you of Clerks, but are not as funny, and a true movie fan would never mistake blaxploitation star Fred Williamson for Fred Williams (as mentioned in a scene between Bodnia and Mikkelsen), especially considering the hilarious scene in which Mikkelsen incredibly lists the video store´s selection of 50+ schlock directors.
I admit that Bleeder has a way of staying with you afterwards, but I had expected a bit more from Refn.
The director's debut, "Pusher", was an excellent tribute to American Cinema (Abel Ferrara, Scorsese) and a portrait of the drugworld of Copenhagen but "Bleeder" is much more personal, mature and grim film.
"Bleeder" is a movie that gets under your skin for days so check out this masterpiece..
This movie is dark and real.Its about a man who has nothing to live for.And it only gets worse.This is the movie that makes you think about how good your life actually is and that there is a lot of people who have it worse.Thanks to another great performance by Kim Bodnia this movie will stick with you for days..
N. Refn's 2nd feature is cutting it pretty close when it comes to assessing life's terrible lessons.Using almost the same cast as he did in his debut (Pusher), Bleeder tells the story of how a father-to-be deals with his impending fate.
The violence is necessary as the characters emanate from the streets and one can only infer, from the several scenes, that the neighbourhood is rough and littered with gangs and racial tension.There is also a secondary story about the budding relationship between a video store clerk and a well-read waitress which is as sweet as it is subtle.
When Nicolas Winding Refn gets Zlatko Buric, Mads Mikkelsen and Kim Bodnia together a good movie is a must.
Please, disregard narrow IMDb genre classification of the film as "Horror" or "Thriller" as it is the way the movie looks to some five year old child who has not understood anything seen.
His anger and self-hatred finally erupt into violence against Louise (plot).Nicolas Winding Refn, the genius behind many good films like "Pusher" and lately the best film in 2011 "Drive" write and direct fine film and present this in tow parts First in Leo character and his problem with his wife, Scend in Lenny character and how the filmgeek turn to a normal guy with girls.The actors are brilliant all around, especially Mads Mikkelsen who does a fantastic performance as a filmgeek, with major problems when it comes to talking and being around girls.
And Kim Bodnia gives a really introspective performance that proves his status as one of europe's if not the whole worlds best actors.The film was great and worth watching, i love everything in this film the conversation between the characters was great especially when they talk about films, the bloody scene well made by the staff ..
While I watched "Bleeder", I came to think of Paul Schrader's thesis, where he compared Bresson, Dreyer and Ozu. The reason was the humility of the characters.
While Louis (Levino Jensen) is a volcano, and Leo (Kim Bodnia) is a Volcano to be - because of his feeling of entrapment by his girlfriends pregancy - they fight there inner feelings, they are hunted by them and suffer, they dismiss life itself for momentary outburts of violence.
On the other side you have Lenny (Mads Mikkelsen) and Lea (Liv Corfixen), who are so alienated by an urban society, that they withdraw themselves into escapism - Lenny trough movies, Lea trough books.
That was why I thought of Bresson, Dreyer and Ozu.When "Bleeder" began I said to the film: Impress my, kick me in the nuts; just like "Pusher" did.
Where "Pusher" was an assault, "Bleeder" is seductive, like a slow drink.
When Leo realises what has happend; the loss of both Louise and his Child, plus his death, the takes control again; but in a way I won't tell.There is also a lovestory between Lenny and Lea, two shy and private persons.What does "Bleeder" a masterpiece is the acting.
Mads alienated himself for 3 month by working in a videostore and living alone and watching movies.
Liv worked in a diner for 2 month, and Kim gave himself so much, that he became Leo; after the filming stopped he commited himself to a hospital for psychiatric treatment.
this is something altogether better, richer and wiser.It`s pure movie magic.Here`s to Lenny and Leo, Lea and Louise..
I really wanted to like 'Bleeder' – a Danish thriller with a young Mads Mikkelsen and The Bridge's Kim Bodnia.
Therefore, by the time you've got the pay-off you've been waiting for it's all over.Now, I can hear the fans of the movie claiming that I hate films with slow build up that focus on character development and that the only movies I watch involve car chases and over-used CGI.
It's just in this case I felt everything that was good (and there was a lot of good) just seemed not enough when it came to the minuscule moments of 'pay offs.' I just sat there through one long drawn out dialogue scene after the next waiting for something that, when it did finally come, seemed like too little too late.There's also a romantic sub-plot that seems to be have been crowbarred in.
When it was all over I realised that his character (despite being one quarter of the film's protagonists) could probably have been omitted all together.Bleeder is a good film.
Nicolas Winding Refn has personally invariably proved to be a hit-and-miss director.
"Bleeder" starts off with a pacey intro reminiscent of Guy Ritchie type character introduction - here Refn introduces us by presenting the shoes of our protagonists strolling down the street - featuring pulsating techno music for the chaps and more romantic drivel for the women.From then on setting is formed, which seems like a poor man's "The Clerks" - not a reference to money given Kevin Smith debut feature was a no-budget flick, but to the fact that "Bleeder" consists of fickle, impoverished diatribes about films, which take place in a labyrinth video rental, in which one of the character Lenny (Mads Mikkelsen) works.
The senseless poorly drafted cinephile bickering thankfully doesn't survive the duration, slowly sifting into darker territory and focusing attention on key protagonist Leo (Kim Bodnia), who leads a worn existence, working at a dead-end job, now further distraught by the news that his wife Loiuse (Rikke Louise Andersson) is pregnant.
Whilst Leo is struggling with his invisible leash, where his manhood pride is striped and replaced with a domestic collar, his best mate Lenny remains engulfed by the world of film, unable even to reach out and entertain a relationship with Lea (Liv Corfixen), a waitress, who he quietly admires from afar.
Neither Leo nor Lenny seem capable of escaping their prisons, instead bleeding away their lives - Leo doing so literally.Refn reuses the same actors from the now cult classic "Pusher", mostly to good effect.
The first half or so is witty and makes you giggle (dialogues resemble Tarantino's movies), then the depiction of a trivial wife-battering becomes dominant and the other story-line (Lenny's and Kitjo's world) get less attention, although Lenny is the most peculiar and distinctive character.
As for the cast, the male stars are fabulous again, especially Mads Mikkelsen (probably the most versatile living Danish actor) and Kim Bodnia (I like him most in The Bridge though); female performers are less uninviting.
Bleeder is okay, but I liked the Pusher trilogy and Drive more..
A slow burning story about an abusive boyfriend, an over protective brother and a film obsessed video store clerk.Very gritty and a lot of times pretty disturbing which made this thing rock.
Some of the cast from The Pusher films are in this making it even more enjoyable.It was neat seeing how big the video store was.
BLEEDER is the follow-up to Nicolas Winding Refn's Danish debut, PUSHER.
I think it's a better film in every respect, even if it is less well known: the story, of family dysfunction and human relationships, is brimming with power, and by turns tragic, bleak, and ultimately devastating.The story sees Leo (Kim Bodnia, of PUSHER fame), attempting to adapt to family life when he finds out his girlfriend's pregnant.
Along the way, he continues uneasy friendships with the racist Louis, his girlfriend's brother, and Lenny (Mads Mikkelsen), a loner who works at the local video shop.
Of course things eventually become very dark indeed, and more harrowing and shocking than they were in PUSHER.Refn elicits some excellent performances from his cast, not least from Bodnia, who is quietly terrifying throughout this.
A glimmer of hope and humour comes from the presence of the outstanding Mikkelsen, who is my favourite character; the video shop setting allows for plenty of cultural references for film fans.
By the end, I felt like I'd done ten rounds in the ring: BLEEDER is that kind of film, and excellent with it..
With this film coming out several years after Pusher, giving Nicolas Winding Refn plenty of time to work on it, with basically the same cast as Pusher and apparently a bigger budget, I guess I expected more than this.
The film is about Leo, who hates almost everything about his life.
The directorial style of Pusher is still there, and this is what makes the film enjoyable and watchable.
"Bleeder" following "Pusher" is the second part of a trilogy.
Leo( Kim Bodina) gives a wonderful portrait of a disturbed man at odds with life.
Lenny lives in a fantasy world of films and videos and he can recite the names of all the directors.
Like I said before "Pusher" was engaging, and you were sucked into that world.
Nicolas Winding Refn has proved me wrong with a denouement so grisly, so gruesome, so nightmarishly plausible, I began to actually feel physically sick, disbelieving what I was watching.David Thomson once complained that Claude Chabrol was always turning the messy, emotional realities of life into crime melodrama, as if this was somehow a cop-out, a refusal of reality.
The vulnerability of the domestic and increasing psychosis of the alienated individual linked with gun culture suggests that maybe crime melodrama IS the only way to deal with reality.Refn, though, does everything in his stylistic power to show how unreal reality has become, in his story of Leo, an unattractive, overweight, brooding, ordinary guy whose lack of enthusiasm for his wife's pregnancy is compounded by her telling everyone, bringing home mothers she's met at laundaries, and replacing his stuff with frog-shaped lamps.
His only social life comprising of schlock-movie nights in with his friends, he decides he needs a gun to feel a resurgence of masculine power.Yes we're in the old FIGHT CLUB/THE BEACH oh-my,-poor-men-are-irrelevant sub-genre.
Instead of creating credible characters that grow in front of us, he introduces them over the credits with a name, sometimes a social relation (e.g. Leo's wife), and an appropriate musical leitmotif (pumping metallic techno for the lads; sensitive girly music for the ladies.The film proper opens in a huge labyrinthine video store, and the first conversation is an enumeration of film directors, classic and cult, amusingly slotted into value shelves.
Refn shares Kubrick's pitiless irony, the sacred strains drowning the techno, the mock-resurrection into the light after the horrific slaughterhouse scene.It would be wrong to say this film is enjoyable, but it paints a terrifying picture of contemporary Europe cut off from its own past (American culture saturates BLEEDER), yet repeating that past's mistakes.
This movie is stunningly beautiful to look at with long, fluid moving shots allowing you to observe the characters and the world they live in.
The style is operatic displaying great emotions – over the top, constructed, with arias and acts of violence - which is what Nicholas Winding Refn is particularly good at.
The plot follows the contrasting fortunes of Leo /Louise (Kim Bodnia /Rikke Louise Andersson) and Lenny /Lea (Mads Mikkelsen /(Liv Corfixen) in their bottom of the heap Copenhagen world far removed from the niceties of Finn Juul Danish modern.
Their friends include Louis (Levino Jensen), Louise's very loving but dangerous brother (a racist, violent thug to anyone other than Louise) and Kitjo (Zlatko Buric) who works in the video store with Lenny.
The four men – Lenny, Leo, Louis and Kitjo – spend much of their time watching videos – usually of exploitation stuff - but one of the driving forces of the film is how much Lenny (and Kitjo) and the director/writer love their movies.
Both are "innocent" of the world and its failings and Lenny doesn't participate in Louis and Leo's racist antics.
Lenny baulks at going to Leo's funeral (a sunny day, the first in the film – wonderful irony/luck for Refn who it is said filmed chronologically).
Human, compassionate and a wonderful note of sweetness ending a film which deals with very hard things – but that's where Refn is at this point in time (and Pusher 2 of course but that's another story).
Not an action film then (Lea will be relieved) but a character study of hard men in Copenhagen intertwined with a romantic love story about Lenny and Lea framing that central story of iron blood and death (Leo, Louise and Louis)..
Pusher in my opinion is one of the greatest gangster films of all time, superbly shot with incredible performances, a fantastic storyline and most of all completely realistic.
So it would suffice to say that Refn's second film should be just as good if not better, how can you top Pusher?
We have Lenny the quiet video store clerk who watches 4 films a day all of which are graphically violent and thats it, his life is film, Im guessing this is a reference to a traits of Refn's own character but then we move on to how these things can affect you with Leo's character, he has no outlet, the guys meet up once a week for film night and don't talk, Leo doesn't really understand film and why things are the way that they, he is growing increasingly disappointed witn his life and decides to buy a gun, he doesn't even know why - he needs an outlet.
There are some very nice shots of the video store and the book shop, a persons collection of fiction endlessly spanning into infinity.Whilst watching i put the slow pace and intense snappy diologue down to character build up and that when we finally see the violent revenge it would make me care even more for the characters, this was not the case.
because he could.There is no explanation the only thing i can say is don't expect it to be anything like pusher..
I had very high expectations of this film and probably because of that it was a huge disappointment. |
tt1610452 | Band Baaja Baaraat | Bittoo Sharma (Ranveer Singh) is street-smart and fun-loving. He gatecrashes a wedding for the free food, and Shruti Kakkar (Anushka Sharma), an intelligent and quirky girl who is assisting the wedding coordinator, confronts him. Bittoo pretends that he is part of the film crew and makes a video of Shruti's performance when he sees her dancing at the wedding. The next day, he tries to impress Shruti with a DVD he compiled of her dance at the wedding. Shruti is not interested in flirting and reveals that her main interest is starting her own business and becoming a wedding planner.
Bittoo is under pressure from his father to come back to the village and work on the family sugarcane fields; Shruti is being coaxed into getting married as soon as possible by her relatives. After her exams are over, Shruti makes a deal with her parents that she has five years to get her business up and running before they arrange a marriage for her. When Bittoo's father comes to take him back to his village, Bittoo lies that he cannot come back because he is starting a wedding planning business. He goes to Shruti with the idea of becoming her partner in her business, but she refuses because she is worried that a partnership might lead to a romantic complication between them. She tells Bittoo that the number one rule of business is not to let love get in the way.
Shruti, with Bittoo tagging along, goes to meet Chanda Narang, a famous wedding planner, in the hopes that Chanda will hire her. Chanda shows no interest in Shruti but loses one of her male workers at that very moment and offers Bittoo the job. Bittoo accepts on the condition that he and Shruti are hired together. On the job, Shruti learns quickly that Chanda has exceptionally bad work ethics, cheats her clients with elaborate speeches but delivers nothing according to their wishes. When a client confronts Chanda, she blames Shruti. Bittoo angrily defends Shruti and the two of them quit and walk out together. They form their own company, Shruti's original idea of Shaadi Mubaarak (Congratulations on the Wedding). The begin with small, low-budget projects and gradually work their way up. They finally get their first big client by stealing them away from Chanda. The wedding is a huge success and that night they celebrate, ending up drunk and then having sex. Afterwards, Bittoo lies awake all night, worried, since Shruti had warned against this.
Bittoo starts behaving awkwardly around her, while Shruti realizes she has fallen in love with him. Shruti tries to reassure Bitto that she's not like other girls he fools around with. Bittoo is relieved, but misunderstands her words, and believes that she's telling him their night of passion didn't mean anything to her as well. He is relieved and cites her own rule that love should not get in the way of business. Shruti pretends to agree with him, but is despondent and heartbroken. She consoles herself and tries to act normally, but her resentment for Bittoo keeps increasing. This creates a tense atmosphere, eventually leading to a huge fight after the wedding of one of their clients. Shruti breaks the partnership, forcing Bittoo to leave the company. Bittoo starts his own wedding planning business called "Happy Wedding". However, they both perform terribly by themselves and both end up suffering huge losses, plunging them into debt.
They finally get a big contract, but it is contingent upon them working together. Facing debt collectors, they agree to partner up again one final time for the sake of recovering their losses. They divvy up the workload, eventually falling back into their old rhythm. The next day, Bittoo tells Shruti that they should be partners again. Shruti refuses his offer, telling him that she is getting married to her fiance, Chetan, and will move to Dubai. Bittoo is stunned and pesters her during the rest of the wedding preparations, coming up with various excuses why she shouldn't marry Chetan. As a last resort, he accuses her of her wanting to getting married to exact revenge on him. Shruti angrily answers Bittoo that she is doing it for her parents and because Chetan is right for her, and admits that she did fall in love with him, but since he didn't feel the same, she has moved on.
Bittoo realizes that he has been in love with Shruti all along, but was too scared to acknowledge the feelings he had for her. Desperate to win her back, Bittoo calls Chetan, telling him to bugger off as he loves Shruti. Hearing this, Shruti angrily confronts Bittoo. He tells Shruti that he was an idiot to have run away from her love, but also playfully chides her, asking why she couldn't have taught him true love the way she taught him the ropes of the business world. Shruti calls Chetan and calls off her engagement to Chetan and Shruti and Bittoo, together at last, share a kiss.
The film ends with Shruti and Bittoo dancing at their own wedding with all the clientele, friends and family to the tune of "Ainvayi Ainvayi". | comedy, romantic, feel-good | train | wikipedia | Maneesh Sharma's directorial debut Band Baaja Baaraat is one of the year's most refreshing and entertaining films.
The movie can be easily set apart from all the recent films made by Yash Raj Films, in that it is very simple and it actually shows the beauty of India through its two main characters of young wedding planners, who unexpectedly (for them), fall in love.
Sharma's direction is absolutely marvelous, and the film is totally benefited from the fantastic sets, props and costumes, which give the film an authentic feel, along with the characters which look more like real people rather than cinematic heroes.
And it is towards the second half when the story takes the audience by surprise and turns into a romantic drama that is quite moving and interesting.While watching the movie, it is quite inspiring to see how young people from relatively traditional middle-class families strive to make a career on their own.
The role of the male lead is played by newcomer Ranveer Singh, and he makes a confident debut, playing his character's different shades exceedingly well, at times so well that throughout the movie it is hard to believe it is his debut performance.
Director Sharma handles the scene very well, creating the right amount of romantic tension, using some really soothing music in the background, and of course the two young leads play the shy nature of the moment with conviction.
It is one of the beautiful scenes in the film (and I'm actually not one of those romantic fools).Towards the last portions of the second half, the movie gets more emotional, at times too much but thankfully unlike many bland attempts made in recent films in which everything turns into ancient melodrama, here it works.
Lead actors are debutant Ranveer Singh and Anushka Sharma , who has already had a box office hit with her debut film with SRK.The movie is fully set and shot in Delhi, and all characters speak with authentic Delhi-ite accent, it almost becomes difficult understanding after being so used to the Mumbaiya accent in all the other films.
Business goes successfully for them, and predictably, emotions come in between, causing a conflict in running the business together.The love conflict is not new, but the treatment given on the subject, and the whole execution of the movie is fresh and commendable.
However, I wish the ending would have been handled a different way, but I guess the director did not want to opt for clichéd ways.Anushka is very pleasant to watch, and she is looking very good in her simple girl-next-door getups, some scenes even with minimal makeup.
With Band Baaja Baarat, Anushka Sharma has completed her three picture deal with Yash Raj Films and in some way had gone full circle.
In her debut film Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi we first see her burst onto the screens in a pre-wedding scene - her character's, before tragedy doomed her to a hastily agreed upon marriage to Shah Rukh Khan's Surinder Singh as arranged by her father on his deathbed.
Here, she plays the wedding planner, and a number of major scenes see her both fussing around and enjoying herself in the weddings of her relatives and clients, and playing a role whose profession symbolizes some major shifts in conservative mindsets where weddings are outsourced to professionals behind the scenes rather than leaving it under the hands of relatives.And one wonders how bold the studio is in entrusting a major film to a new first time director Maneesh Sharma whose experience has come from working as an AD in other major films, and pairing the still relative newcomer Anushka opposite the complete rookie Ranveer Singh as her co-star.
This risk had paid off, as the end product is something relatively refreshing and spunky, going well with the themes, look and feel for Band Baaja Baaraat which is to break mindsets, and as teenage characters, epitomized the can-do, fearless spirit of entrepreneurship, wanting to try rather than to regret later in life.Anushka plays Shruti Kakkar, who is dead set in her ways in wanting to start her own firm Shaadi Mubarak in the wedding planning arena, and deflecting the usual route where a girl has to seek marriage after graduation and live a life that's more or less set, rote and formulaic.
At least up until the Intermission where things start to spiral a little out of control as emotions run high, and you'd come to expect the entire second half of the film to run aground with the usual fights and arguments, which in some way parallels the mood of the film where a split becomes problematic, and only when they work together as a team does the magic of the film happen.
The only spark in the second half as it plods itself to an inevitable end for a romantic film, is how sometimes we get a little callous especially in taking someone else for granted, and here we see how the female of the species is actually quite complicated when her heart is set aflutter, painting Bittoo inadvertently as the cad without feelings, and a silly boy at that when love comes knocking at his doorstep.On the characters' professional front I would have preferred it a little more if there's some poetic justice dished out in being more direct in being competitors to their brief mentor in the business, who perceived as the best turns out nothing more than a fraud when it comes to delivering quality service.
This of course gives rise to a myriad of supporting characters such as Maqsood the florist (Neeraj Sood), Rajinder Singh the caterer (Manmeet Singh) and Bittoo's friend Santy the musician (Revant Shergill) to join in as small suppliers hell bent on delivering quality as a business ethic.I've always loved Indian weddings put on screen, because that promises colour and spectacle, with lovely songs and energetic dances putting up quite a performance for an outsider like myself to witness and enjoy.
Anushka Sharma has grown from strength to strength with each film release, and Ranveer Singh is quite the discovery, with new male Bollywood heroes being quite the rare species in recent years, and his well oiled performance here doesn't betray the fact that he's into his debut.
Let's see what other films will appear over the horizon for this rookie.Band Baaja Baaraat is that spectacle that comes highly recommended, so catch it if you can as it nears the end of its run here..
I started this movie with a feeling just like I'm going to watch another regular comedy film.
It has romance, love, comedy, emotional drama(Thanks God, it didn't last long) and finally a heavenly pleasant happy ending.BBB is the movie of a college girl who is utterly ambitious about staring her own Wedding Management company and a guy, who fell for her during a wedding and situations lead both of them to become partners in their newly started venture "Shadi Mubarak".
How their relationship go through various Ups and Downs is shown as movie progress.Talking about the performances, firstly Ranveer Singh deserves huge amount of accolades for his awesome acting.
Wonderful acting by her.Though the movie overall captivate the mind of the audience, its second half has some lose moments where one can feel bored.
The moment hero heroine meet, you know that they will end up falling in love even if they are not romantically interested in each other.BAND BAAJA BARAT (B3) is also a similar tale of two youngster and it's not surprising to see that it's doing wonderfully well with its target audience.
While the slightly senior Anushka has done the best work of her short career, the film belongs to the new-comer, Ranveer Singh.
Ranveer singh who is making his debut through this film deserves an award for the best newcomer in the industry as not for a single moment he has looked like a newcomer.
This Romantic-Comedy has an interesting first hour, likable performances, soulful music & good direction working on it's advantage.'Baand Baaja Baaraat' is tale of 2 wedding planners, who later fall in love with each-other.
I went to see Band Baaja Baaraat with very low expectations, especially when 90% of Indian Rom-coms have disappointed me with subplots, un- needed comedy clichés, villains and skeletal plots, and also the fact that Hollywood gives us a lot of Rom-coms each year from High School to Dysfunctional Family, we have seen it all, so I expected nothing new here, but when the movie started rolling, the realistic script, life-like characters and flawless direction lead me till the end like a ride I enjoyed a lot.The movie has a story we have seen in many movies, but the treatment is fresh and natural.In short, its story of two middle class people who start a business as wedding planners on principle that no emotions will be involved, now as predictable as plot may seem, there are few surprises but even the predictable parts have been done with utter taste of freshness that you feel entertained.
For a romantic comedy, the balance between Romance and Comedy should blend and this movie does it perfectly.In acting department, the movie belongs to Anushka Sharma, she portrays her comic timing, dancing, emotions with perfection and dissolves in the role of Shruti, but no review is complete without mentioning the performance of débutante Ranvir Singh, whose confidence, energy and expressions held the movie together, the movie required very powerful performance from him and he delivered, in an year when star studded Anajana Anjani proved like piece of crap, Ranvir had tough task to bring people to theaters as a new-comer, but he showed the obsession towards his role.
The rest of supporting cast has nothing much to do as I mentioned before sub-plots are none here, the movie totally focuses on Ranvir and Anushka.The highest point in BBB is the treatment of the subject by director Manish Sharma, directing a first-time hero and a Genre which is very risky in India, he gave the movie a realistic touch from the word go, no un- necessary snori-cams, close-ups, beeps, its just focuses on characters and the story, Manish Sharma is a promising talent and I wish he chooses future subjects carefully and performs with the fan-base he made from this movie.The Cinematograpghy and set designs are a-class as the movie is based on wedding planners and weddings in South Asia are all fun, the movie portrays the colors, beauty and freshness with perfection, the songs are according to subject though Ainwayi Ainwai song is regular on my car stereo from days.The bottom-line is that 2010 was a great year for Hollywood as Inception, Black Swan, Social Network and Easy-A were Eye candies, but the Indian cinema suffered, 90% movies were just run-of-the-mill stinkers, apart from MY NAME IS KHAN, TERE BIN LADEN, this is the 3rd Indian movie I enjoyed, watch it with your buddies or Girl-friend, its a fun filled ride till the end...
The plus side is that the characters were more Indian mentality based as opposed to trying to act as westernized people which has been the case for quite a lot of young actors and actresses these days.Ranveer and Anushka complement each other very well, especially in the comedy scenes and the initial interaction.
This is also the first movie where her male costar actually looks more her age, unlike her pairings with Akshay and Shahrukh thus far.The initial story is fresh and good and it's interesting to see the two main characters set up their business and forge a partnership.
I liked the trio of supporting cast in the flower arranger, the cook and the music guy.Ranveer and Anushka have shown that you don't need a star father, uncle, or mother to make it in show business and that it's the ability to act rather than who's name you have that makes a big difference.
Band Baaja Baaraat directed by Maneesh Sharma is very good.The story is fresh.The screenplay is penned very well.The first half is smart and brave while the second half is bit slow paced and tends to get boring.The music is melancholic.Special mention of the dialogs and cinematography.The dialogs are smart,especially the one delivered by Ranveer Singh.The cinematography is striking.Performances-Newcomer Ranveer Singh acts very well.His comic timing is sure to be applauded.Anushka Sharma is very good,since her last two releases(Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi and Badmaash Company) she performed poorly.On the whole Band Baaja Baaraat is Fresh and Entertaining!.
I had heard lots of good reviews from people in forums or blogs that have trailers and news of this movie so I thought if it's getting a good rating from the "well-educated" and "higly-informed" internet community then it must be different from the standard bollywood fair of girl meets boy both fall in love have a bad patch and make-up in the end kind of story.
Is that all that we have learnt to do in movies in the last almost 70-80 years of cinema in bollywood which by now even a 10 yr old might come up with for a script writing homework given one.Not only have the filmmakers given less importance to the "love" between Shruti and Bittoo but made sure the intimacy between them happens so suddenly and brazenly that it leaves room for wondering whether this is going anywhere or its just another one night stand turned guilt sort of thing only.
It's not going to be a love story or performance people will keep remembering and talking abt even a year or maybe a few months from now so they have to find better projects to show their worth.In summary I'd say only go watch it if you're a die-hard bollywood movie maniac who has nothing better to do in life.
Secondly, though revolving around the same concept of opposites attract (the boy and girl first fight and then fall in love), BAND BAAJA BAARAAT comes up with a completely fresh style of narration, using the realistic ambiance of Punjabi Families and youth living in the areas of WEST DELHI.
Interestingly BBB's screenplay has also been brilliantly written by Habib Faisal, the director of DO DOONI CHAAR and his script gives its full support to the confident direction of the debutant director Muneesh Sharma.As a team they both are really capable of doing wonders in the near future and I would be eagerly waiting for their next.To be precise, BAND BAAJA BAARAAT wholeheartedly belongs to its lead pair of Anushka and the newcomer Ranveer.
In fact it was Ranveer and his remarkable portrayal of a directionless young graduate in the movie, which satisfied me a lot after a long long time and also made me feel like dancing on my seat at several instances.
And that's not all since BAND BAAJA BAARAAT also has one the most sensuous, emotional and touchy kissing scene ever filmed on the Indian Silver Screen between its leading pair.
After a long time I felt a director dealing with the issue of pre-marital sex with a more thoughtful, practical and appreciative approach in our Indian Cinema, which is a clear indication of our film-makers growing in their fearful stance towards the issue.On the music front, one starts liking the soundtrack by Salim-Sulaiman and lyrics by Amitabh Bhattacharya while he is watching the film but I still think that a big universal HIT song could surely have helped the film in a much better way.
And in the supportive performances Neeraj Sood stands out as the Flower Vendor while Manmeet Singh and Manish Chaudhari suit their roles perfectly.In all, BAND BAAJA BAARAAT is the most pleasant surprise of the year, which entertains many thousand times more than the big budget NO PROBLEM released along with it.
Finally, Yash Raj Films have a winner in their hand and they should continue doing the good work of giving chance to new kind of scripts, writers, actors and directors to come up with more movies like BAND BAAJA BAARAAT.
The debutant director Maneesh Sharma has done an excellent job in his first movie with a debutant actor Ranveer Singh and Anushka Sharma who is doing only her third movie.
The director has also captured the Delhi wedding scene in an excellent manner making this movie even more fun to watch.
Ranveer Singh has got great comic timing and surprisingly he is the one who actually makes the movie worth the watch.
Though the movie becomes a bit predictable towards the end, but still overall it turns out to be a very good watch.
Yashraj films are known for their lavish art direction which actually works very well for 'Band Baaja Baaraat' as the movie is about weddings.Maneesh Sharma's sincere storytelling has paid off.
There are slight plot holes and perhaps certain scenes didn't need to be added or shown in full extent in terms of it being a Bollywood film but nonetheless it still works because both Anushka and Ranveer have done a fab job at emoting the chemistry and dialogues.
You cannot watch this film without falling in love with Anushka Sharma first.
The film is a love story of Shruti and Bittu who keep denying to each other that they have started liking each other.
It made people take Anushka Sharma as a good actor and Ranveer Singh got his dream launch in a film that became a superhit.
In the second half all is well till it starts dragging in between but the end though typical is well handledDirection is good by Maneesh Sharma Music too was a big hit, Loot Gaya is the best song, My favourite is Aada Ishq rest too are goodRanveer Singh was very unconventional for his debut and leaves a huge impact giving a natural performance Anushka Sharma got her first solo hit in this film and did an amazing job though now such roles are become second skin to her rest all mostly unknown faces leave a mark.
Anushka Sharma plays Shruti with a die-hard conviction and Ranveer Singh slips into Bittu's character with amazing ease. |
tt0248012 | Fiza | The film is about Fiza (Karisma Kapoor), whose brother, Amaan (Hrithik Roshan), disappears during the 1993 Bombay riots. Fiza and her mother Nishatbi (Jaya Bachchan) desperately hold on to the hope that one day he will return. However, six years after his disappearance, Fiza, fed up with living with uncertainty, resolves to go in search of her brother. Driven by her mother Nishatbi's fervent hope and her own determination, Fiza decides to use whatever means she can—the law, media, even politicians—to find her brother, which brings her into contact with various characters and situations.
When she does find him, to her horror she sees that he has joined a terrorist group. She forces him to come home, and he finally re-unites with their mother. However his allegiance and thoughts make him want to return to the terrorist network, led by Murad Khan (Manoj Bajpayee) who apparently is a Muslim but is a bad human with no religion in reality. A confrontation with two men who harass Fiza leads to Aman revealing his involvement with the terrorist network in front of his sister, mother and the police. His mother's grief and disappointment eventually lead her to commit suicide.
Fiza tries once more to find her brother, with the help of Aniruddh (Bikram Saluja). Amaan has been sent on a mission to kill two powerful politicians; when he does succeed in assassinating them, his own terrorist group tries to kill him. He escapes and Fiza follows him. They confront each other and with the police closing in on him, he asks her to kill him. As a last resort to give him an honourable end, Fiza kills her brother. | brainwashing, violence, murder, romantic | train | wikipedia | A realistic, brilliant, powerful and poignant film with an all-time great performance by Karisma Kapoor.
This film is about Fiza, a smart, intelligent and strong young woman who lost her brother Aman seven years ago during the 1993 Mumbai riots.
She meets different people in her way and finally meets her brother, just to find out that he is not the simple young man he used to be.The film is so brilliantly narrated, so greatly pictured, so authentically and naturally portrayed and acted that you can feel a real relation to the story, to the characters and to the different situations.
Karisma Kapoor delivers one of the finest performances the Hindi screen has seen.
One particular scene that must be noted is the one in which Fiza breaks down and starts mourning post a very tragic incident (see the film to understand).
It is an extremely powerful and heart-rending moment of real pain and despair.Jaya Bachchan, in one of her best performances, is amazingly compelling and moving as the hurt yet vivacious and lively Nishatbi.
"Aaja Mahiya" and "Tu Fiza Hai" are very melodious and romantic.Khalid Mohammed, a well-known film critic, apparently was fed up of all the crap around and decided to show filmmakers how to make a real and artistic film.
A powerful movie with superb acting from all the actors and actresses.
Hrithik Roshan is a brilliant actor as the role he played was very demanding.Karisma Kapoor was also outstanding and the special appearance by Sushmita Sen was in a class of its own !
This is the best film I have seen in a LONG time.
First time director Khalid Mohammed, who is a respected film critic, dons on a new cap and displays to Indian cinema what can be achieved visually in a film, and how a plot can take its audience to high expectations.
This newly developed plot, with characteristics and representations that is very much three dimensional and anti-stereotype, commends the director for his skills as a film-maker.Its very rare to find an woman, displayed on the moving canvas, as independent, strong and intelligent.
Films like Mother India (1965), Bandit Queen (1996), Roja (1993), Hazzar Churasi Ki Maa (1998) and The Terrorist (1998/1999) are examples and the movie Fiza (2000) joins such list.
Here the main character called Fiza, played wonderfully by Karishma Kapoor, is seen as such.
Fiza, which means seasons, goes out in a dangerous world to find her brother, who is in contrast to Fiza as we soon learn.Amman, played convincingly by the talented Hrithik Roshan, is seen as rather weak willed, easy to command over and psychologically unbalanced while finding his own identity.
It also shows that man is not as perfect as they think to be and really brings out a new representation of them in this Indian film.The characteristic of the mother, played by the wonderful theatrical actor Jaya Bachchan, is also similar to Fiza which has been fully developed making audiences emotionally bonded with her.
This adds another reason why Fiza needs to find her brother, to make sure that her mother remains strong like her and that her believes that her son is still alive is true.Yet when she sees the real colors of her son, she is dismayed and admits defeat.
Clearly the director has thought-out the characters past, present and future rather wonderfully and intelligent audience who capture this understand engage in the film more deeply then what the film offers us on the surface.There are moments when the film does play on stereotypes with the ministers, leaders, hit men and media, and this could have been improved upon.
Other minor disappointments with the movie is the way songs come into the narrative structure making this film seem more apt-able for commercial cinema audiences.
Dances, glamor and overly high modern songs seen in this film don't agree with the overall narrative jarring the viewing senses and prolonging time.
Cinematography by Santosh Sivan is excellent throughout capturing the images and light effects with perfection, while art design work is also very realistic and helps with the overall look of the film.
Editing is also rather good and manages to blend the scenes rather well never deviating from the core matter, just wish those useless songs were edited out.The film is an interesting concept from the new director and displays that his future work will be something all audiences will view with high expectations.
But the director must move away from the 20 year old conventions we have seen in all of Indian films, in order to achieve something properly intellectual.
Still Fiza is a good movie with brilliant characters, acting and technical credits..
Fiza is the best Indian Movie I ever saw..
I love everything of that movie, especially the song Baba Haji Ali and Mehboob Mere with Susmita Sen, she was wonderful.
Karisma and Jaya Bachan did also a great job she was so fantastic, the role of Fiza suite Karisme Kapoor very well.
Having not really watched Bollywood films, since the days of the action movies of the 70's & 80's, I wasn't really interested in watching the more recent offerings from Bollywood, since I assumed they were mostly love stories and were full of songs which had no reason for being there.But, having watched a few (subtitled) films shown as part of an Indian season over here in the UK, I've started to change my mind.I watched Fiza last night and even though it was full of songs and was let down slightly by the second half, I was amazed to find a film dealing with the Bombay Hindu/Muslim riots of 1993 and it's consequences on a Muslim family.It starts with the 1993.
Amaan (Hrithik Roshan) lives with his mother (Jaya Bachchan) and sister Fiza (Karishma Kapoor).
We then jump to 1999 and the first half of the film then deals with the consequences, as Fiza determines to find her brother.Through flashback we find out what happened, as Amaan finds himself a outsider in his own country, but the real reasons for his disappearance are only discovered when Fiza discovers her brother hiding out with terrorists.I won't reveal the rest of the story, but I will say, it was refreshing to see a film from the Indian-Muslim viewpoint and having central characters who were Muslim.
Being British and of Indian-Hindu descent, I hadn't really thought about it before.I know the film isn't an in-depth look at the problem or even that it represents Indian-Muslims in general, but it did open my eyes slightly to the problems facing India today, especially since the recent (2002) Hindu/Muslim riots in Gujarat showed how bad the violence could be and how much politics played it's part in them.One last point, the performances from the three main leads is excellent.
Hrithik Roshan was much better than I expected, but Jaya Bachchan and Karishma Kapoor were really outstanding.Although, not a perfect film and still very Bollywood in it's style, I still found it much better then the standard Bollywood fare and I would highly recommend it..
Fiza is definitely one of the better movies churned out by Bollywood in recent times.
Since the past 50 years, every time India has got back on its feet a new politician created calamity has dragged it back down preventing it from being a power to reckon with and doing away with national problems like poverty and illiteracy which prevents people from leading a normal existence.
The film has good music and both Karisma & Hrithik have rendered superb award winning performances.
Some people may feel that Hrithik's character is not very strong but looking at it from a perspective of what he is subjected to and circumstances which he cannot control make him the person portrayed in the movie.
Having recently seen FIZA in Bombay, I certainly understood what all the fuss about the movie is about.
Addressing the highly controversial Indo-Pak issue in a fashion which may be viewed as anti-Indian, the controversy goes well beyond the Muslim-Hindu conflicts, the 1993 Bombay Riots, and India/Pakistan themes.
Hrithik Roshan, the lead actor (though FIZA is his well-meaning sister's name) has been crowned as the undisputed heart throb of the Indian sub continent after this film.
On the other side, the movie continues to be Number 1 at the Box Office, and its songs are constantly played on Indian MTV, and indeed in Pakistan, as well.......The film is high drama, Bollywood-style, with good action and great songs, with plenty of eye candy for males and females alike: the gorgeous Sushmita Sena and Karisma Kapur for males, and Hrithik Roshan leading the handsome men for the female audience.
Perhaps not unexpectedly, but nevertheless bizarre, the lead stars are very fair, very non-Indian looking actors, with light eyes to boot (surely contact lenses in most cases, but nevertheless confirming a disturbing "Michael Jackson trend" in the Indian subcontinent to admire beauty as "Western beauty.") If you see only one Bollywood movie this year, or indeed, if you have never seen one, this is the one to see..
Hrithik Roshan's second and film critic Khalid Mohamed's first movie is an art house film with commercial interludes, obviously deemed necessary for box office performance and integrated with various degrees of success.
The film suffers and profits at the same time from the 6 song/dance numbers and one prayer.
While the prayer is wonderful and convincingly marries the plot with musical and visual elements, providing an esthetic and also emotional highlight of the film, the dance number by Sushmita Sen and the disco number by Karishma Kapoor, although solid and attractive per se, look forced in the context and have little connection to the film's central themes.
This is less the case with the Hrithik-Neha sequence which looks and sounds great and adds some desperately needed happiness to an otherwise rather sad sequence of events.
The reason "Fiza" is nonetheless a quite impressive debut film is due to the three leads, two seasoned performers and a newcomer, but all three giving wonderful performances, and an uncompromising look at a subject that is controversial but anything but irrelevant, the Mumbai riots of the early 90s, the ethnic and religious hatred behind it and the unscrupulous forces causing and exploiting it to further their dubious causes.
This is clearly Karishma Kapoor's best performance so far and likely to fetch awards.
As Fiza she shows great strength, resolution and the courage to lay bare emotional depths unseen from her so far.
Hrithik Roshan, finally, puts to rest all worries that he might be a one film wonder and no real talent.
His performance is simply amazing considering this is only his second film.
He's probably the most charismatic new actor working in films these days, and I'm not talking about India alone.
Although still had a taste of Indian commercial films, Fiza was a different kind of movie.
The story line and direction were good and the actings were super.Herithik is obviously made for films.
His look and talent is all what is needed to become a movie star.
It's amazing that despite being his second film, he perform so powerfully.
A lot of things are unclear, it still has unneeded scenes and songs.It also had flaws like most indian flims.
Before I watched this film, I haven't heard of anyone who had seen it.
The music was horrible, but this is a film to watch for the great acting.Aside from the great performances by the three main characters, I thought the plot was clever.
Karishma plays a devoted sister, looking for her brother after he disappears during the riots.
good movie with strong message.
This film portrays a sensitive issue for the Indian community.An issue that has seen many horrible faces in the past,The religious clashes destroys the mind of an youth,in order to survive, in order to seek answers, in order to find the people responsible for the major change in his life he slowly falls a prey to politics and corrupted religious warmongers.
Another side of the story is a fight of a sister for her brother, a strong woman who wants back the happiness that was taken away.
This film is for mature audience who can view it with open mind rather than debating on whose fault it is ( ie Hindu or Muslim ).The acting is very good, and most of the actors did a very good performance.The music lightens the heavy topic at times and very well composed by A.R Rehman.
This movie was really good and a powerful movie.The first half was terrific.It was about a girl who lost her brother in th 1993 riots she asks every body.Then later see shes her brother he is a terrorist.The story line was really strong.Khalid Mohammeds story telling is superb for no doubt.Dialogs are good.The visuals are breath taking.Cinematography is good.I liked the theme as well and liked how it was presented.It had a gripping story line.It was a very realistic and almost an heart warming movieActing is first rate.Hrithik Roshan has done a good job in an interesting role.Having like him from this to Koi Mil Gaya he is surely a treat.Why not his looks.He proves that he can look good and act dramatically at the same time too.Jaya also performed good too.Her expressions feeling thoughts were amazing especially when she finds her sons true colors.Manoj Bajpai is Good too in a brief role.The life of this movie is Karishma Kapoor she has given a marvelous performance in a power packed role a well deserved award.She bring life into her character.She is able to portray her emotions convincingly.Isha Koppikar gets no scope.Songs are good especially Piya Haiji Ali which is beautifully composed.And not to forget the visuals were stunning.Direction is really good.Dialogs are all powerful and emotional.Characetrisations are powerful.Ending was sad through.It was a very different movie.Although the second half was not as good as the first one but was still great.All,i can say is this was the best movie of 2000.Highjly recommended.
The music is great, and the story was really really good.
I think this was a great way to introduce us to Hindi movies since the story was so compelling and included a look at Hindu/Muslim relations that Americans don't really know or understand.
Some of the poignant scenes and music in the movie are etched in my mind.
Being the grand daughter of the greatest Indian Film Maker-Raj Kapoor, she has certainly inhertited the genes.
Now the much ballyhood actor of recent times- Hrithik Roshan, This guy is so chisseled and handsome that he almost looks like a funny looking kid.
The looks draw the audience initially but to sustain thereon you need a talent like Anil Kapoor or Amitab Bachchan.
I loved the music including the prayer song, the duet, and the very aesthetic and sexy number by Sushmita Sen so much so she made it to the cover of a Hollywood Film Magazine.
Suffice to say that I have seen the above movies just for the Song and dance numbers and if done well they could be highly entertaining..
If you are looking a movie around this theme, please stay away from Fiza, even if it is aired for free on telly.After watching this movie, Khalid Mohammed will remain in my memory as one of the worst movie makers in Indian cinema.
It takes great ineptness to even mess the things like Johny Lever's comedy in a movie.
Being a Muslim living in Britain I didn't want my religious tendencies to affect my view of this film.
However, time and again 'Muslim' films made either in England, Hollywood or Bollywood constantly and deliberately show aspects of the religion that are incorrect and mislead the non-Muslim public about the religion.
Karishma turned in another fine performance but Jaya Bachan was the best of the lot.
Her humour and style of acting will never age, even though she appears to have.Half way through I was thinking, inaccuracies aside, this film is quite good.
However, that is when the director must have reached a cul de sac as his message was becoming blurred and the film took on too many angles at once:****SPOILERS BEGINWhy the mother had to commit suicide after seeing her son shoot the two ghundas no one could understand.
By the way, try to watch this film on DVD for the songs alone..
Karisma's one of best performances but Khalid Mohammad's confusion.
Fiza was his second film after KNPH naturally people were overexcited but the film let people down.
It had Hrithik paired with Karisma but she playing his elder sisterThis was Khalid's debut as a director, Khalid Mohammed was a film critic and he turned director with this film.
The film starts off well, Karisma's search for her brother is well handled, the flashback portions too are well handled but in the second half after Hrithik comes home, the plot stagnates.
There are several flaws in the second half, Manoj Bajpai's character seems sketchy, Also towards the end the script gets lose and the climax which seems straight from VAASTAV doesn't seem satisfying.Direction is mixed bag, good in several portions of the first half but weak in parts Music by Anu Malik was good, Mehboob Mere by Sunidhi Chauhan became a rage, Aaja Mahiya too is a good number, Tu Hawa Hai is superb but seems forced in the screenplay.Hrithik Roshan showed that he was capable to carry off an authorbacked role and does a good job in this role as well, In just his second film he proved he was here to stay.
Karisma who normally played the bimbette in Govinda films suddenly shifted to strong roles, here she proves she has more then just her screeching annoying weeping, she plays her role perfectly Bikram Saluja has a small role and is okay Jaya Bachchan is good, Neha is okay Manoj Bajpai who is her husband in real life does well but his role could be better, rest are okay |
tt2180571 | Stranger Within | Ann Collins (Eden), a painter, and her husband, David Collins (Grizzard), are expecting a baby. What confuses the couple is that David has had a vasectomy, and Ann is not supposed to be pregnant. Even though David suspects that Ann has been unfaithful to him, he stays with her. Because Ann had pregnancy troubles in the past that put her health at risk, David wants Ann to get an abortion, but every time the two try to go to get the procedure done, Ann experiences extreme labor pains and is unable to go through with the procedure.
Throughout the course of her pregnancy, Ann has strange cravings for black coffee, raw meat and massive amounts of salt. She also exhibits personality and physical changes, including wanting to read books constantly, enduring freezing temperatures, developing acutely sensitive hearing, taking long and strenuous walks in the mountains, an inability to listen to other people, and healing her injuries within minutes.
David wants Bob (David Doyle), a hypnotist, to see if he can obtain any information about why Ann is acting so strangely. Ann does not say a word, even when she is hypnotized. One day when Ann comes home from one of her walks in the mountains, she finds David, Bob, and Ann's friend Phyllis (Joyce Van Patten) waiting for her. She quickly drinks boiling hot coffee to catch her breath, and David notices that the coffee makes her drunk. Bob tries hypnotizing Ann again, and an extraterrestrial being starts speaking through her. The being says that his father banished him to this warm planet (Earth) and that he wants to go back to his home where it is "cool". He says that Ann was impregnated while she was painting in the mountains. After the alien stops talking through Ann, she finally falls asleep.
During the night, Ann sneaks out to an abandoned house in the woods, where she gives birth. She walks into the woods, where many other women are also walking with their alien babies. David looks at one of Ann's paintings, depicting the alien being's home planet. The painting starts to smoke. David looks out the window and screams Ann's name, as he watches a spacecraft take Ann to the alien's home planet. | psychological | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0028683 | Camille | The plot follows the two characters who have recently married and are going to Niagara Falls on their honeymoon. Silas Parker (Franco) is a thief who marries Camille Foster (Miller), his parole officer's niece, in hopes it will be his chance to escape to Canada. Silas cannot stand Camille and she is blind to how he really feels, believing that everything will be all right once they get to the falls. After their wedding Camille frets about there being no rice thrown and how that is bad luck.
On the way to Niagara Falls they crash their honeymoon bike and Camille dies in the accident. Thinking that he killed Camille, Silas runs away, breaking into a nearby house to call the police but hanging up before he reports the accident. When he returns to the scene of the accident he finds Camille up and washing in a nearby river. Over the course of the trip Silas realizes that Camille really did die in the accident as she starts to decay. While taking care of her, Silas shows a kinder side due to his guilt over having accidentally caused her death.
Meanwhile, the police believe that Silas actually killed his wife and begin to hunt him down. The couple have to evade capture several times and end up traveling with an old rodeo cowboy (Carradine) with colored horses. One of the horses, Maggie, is old and should have died years ago but is still sticking around for some reason. As Camille physically deteriorates she and Silas grow closer, eventually dancing and kissing in the rain. Silas says that while he never believed in anything, Camille believed in him when no one else ever had.
The couple travels with the cowboy until he has a breakdown and sets free all his horses. Seeing that the old Maggie will not leave his side even at gunpoint, the cowboy mounts the horse and they ride into the dawn.
The couple finally reach Niagara Falls and take the boat tour together. As Silas smiles down on Camille, happy to be with her, she tells him that she is ready now. He turns to ask someone to take their picture, and when he turns back she has vanished. He gets off the boat and heads towards the Canada–US border, but stops and goes back looking for Camille. He is then spotted by the police and chased to the edge of the Niagara Falls viewing point. He screams out for Camille – not believing her to be truly dead and gone – and the police, thinking he is still evading arrest, shoot him. Camille suddenly appears, riding toward him on the horse, Maggie. She asked why he did not go on without her and he said he could not. He mounts up behind her and says "I love you" for the first time. They kiss and then turn toward the falls. Camille says "I had a great honeymoon" and Silas answers "Me too."
Then Maggie gallops forward and jumps over the edge into the Niagara Falls with Camille and Silas on her back, all three disappearing into the mist. After they jump, rice starts to fall from the sky. | tragedy, melodrama, historical fiction | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0070130 | La grande bouffe | The film tells the story of four friends who gather in a villa for the weekend with the express purpose of eating themselves to death. Bouffer is French slang for "eating" (the Italian abbuffata means "great eating").
The first protagonist, Ugo, owner and chef of a restaurant, "The Biscuit Soup", decides to commit suicide, probably because of misunderstandings with his wife. The second is Philippe, a somewhat important magistrate who still lives with his childhood nanny, Nicole, who is overprotective of him to the point of trying to prevent him from having relationships with other women, and who fulfills her own sexual needs with the judge. The third character is Marcello, an Alitalia pilot and womaniser, who is devastated by the fact that he has become impotent. In the first scenes in which he appears, he is intent on making one of his air-hostesses carry off the plane an entire Parmigiano for the villa where he will meet up with the other three protagonists. The fourth and final main character is Michel, who is an effeminate television producer, divorced and tired of his monotonous life. The four come together by car to the beautifully furnished but unused villa owned by Philippe. There they find the old caretaker, Hector, who has innocently prepared everything for the great feast, and a Chinese visitor who is there to offer a job to the magistrate in faraway China, which Philippe politely rejects with the phrase "Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes", quoting Virgil.
Once alone, the four begin their binge. In one scene Marcello and Ugo race each other to see who can eat oysters faster. They discuss organizing a little "feminine presence" and decide to invite three prostitutes (not four because Philippe does not want to participate) to come to the house the following evening. Their breakfast next day is interrupted by the arrival of a school class who would like to visit the garden of the villa to see the famous "lime-tree of Boileau", a tree under which the French poet used to sit while looking for inspiration. The four willingly invite the class not only into the garden but also to view the old Bugatti in the garage and to a magnificent lunch in the kitchen. Above all, they get to know Andrea, the young and buxom teacher, whom they spontaneously invite to dinner that evening. Philippe is dismayed at the notion of the school teacher being in the same company as three prostitutes; he warns her but she appears not to be perturbed. The prostitutes arrive in due course and the atmosphere becomes frivolous and sexually charged. Andrea arrives and embraces the spirit of the party. She is attracted to Philippe, who proposes to marry her.
The eating continues unabated. Ugo is responsible for the preparation of the food. Michel, who seems to have been brought up strictly not to fart, suffers from indigestion. His friends encourage him to let go and fart.
Frightened by the turn of events, the prostitutes flee at dawn and leave only Andrea. She seems to sense the purpose of the protagonists and decides to help them in their efforts, establishing a tacit agreement and remaining with them until the death of all four.
The first to die is Marcello, after being enraged with his own impotence; he goes to the toilet and causes the sanitary pipes to explode. The house is flooded with excrement. He becomes exasperated and realizing the futility of the farce, decides to leave the house at night during a snow storm in the old Bugatti that he had repaired earlier in the day with great delight. His friends find him the next morning, frozen in the driving seat. The first suggestion is to bury Marcello in the garden, but on the advice of Philippe (who, being a judge, warns that there is a severe penalty for the illegal burying of a corpse) they place the body in the villa's cold room, where it remains seated and clearly visible from the kitchen.
After Marcello comes Michel, who already suffering from indigestion and crammed to capacity with food (he cannot even lift his legs practising dance, his favourite pastime) suffers an attack of bowel movements while playing the piano. Amid flatulence and worse he collapses on the terrace. His friends place him in the cold room next to Marcello.
Shortly afterwards, Ugo prepares an enormous dish made from three different types of liver pâté in the shape of the Dome of St. Peter, which he serves to the remaining diners, Philippe and Andrea, in the kitchen in view of the two dead friends. Philippe and Andrea cannot bring themselves to eat it however. Philippe goes off to bed leaving Andrea to keep Ugo company during his determined effort to eat the entire pâté. Some time later she later calls Philippe back downstairs to help her stop his friend from stuffing himself to death. They cannot dissuade Ugo however, and end up attending to him on the kitchen table, the one feeding him, the other masturbating him until he dies. On the advice of Andrea, his body is left on the kitchen table, in his "domain."
Last to die is the diabetic Philippe on the bench under the lime-tree of Boileau and into the arms of Andrea after eating a cake she has made shaped like a pair of breasts. He dies just as another delivery of meat arrives. The delivery men react with incomprehension when Andrea instructs them to leave the meat - whole animals and sides of pork and beef - in the garden (the cold room being full). The film ends bizarrely with a scene of the garden filled with neighbourhood dogs, geese and poultry, and meat carcasses. | psychedelic, satire | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0036793 | English Without Tears | The English aristocrat Lady Christabel Beauclerk (Margaret Rutherford) is not only a British delegate at the League of Nations in Geneva but also a fanatical bird fancier. She takes a trip there with her nephew Sir Cosmo Brandon (Roland Culver), her niece Joan Heseltine (Penelope Dudley-Ward) and their faithful butler Tom Gilbey (Michael Wilding), who is reluctant to go abroad but is convinced to go by his father and grandfather, who are also former butlers. At the League the party meet the Polish cartoonist Felix Dembowski (Albert Lieven) and the French romantic novelist François de Freycinet (Claude Dauphin), both of whom try to romance Joan - unsuccessfully, as she has a longstanding but unspoken crush on Gilbey.
Lady Christabel almost causes a diplomatic incident when other delegates misunderstand her request for bird sanctuaries as an attempt at British imperial expansion. As a result, one of the other delegates tries to get information out of Gilbey by having a Norwegian interpreter Brigid Knudsen (Lilli Palmer) seduce him. Gilbey awkwardly refuses her but is too polite to refuse taking her for a row on the lake. They suffer an accident and he brings her back to the hotel, causing Joan to become jealous. Once they are back in Britain she manages to admit her infatuation to Gilbey just before he goes to join the Territorial Army on the outbreak of World War Two, but he is unable to return it. He rapidly becomes a second lieutenant in the Royal Army Service Corps and goes back to visit the Beauclerk home in uniform - Lady Christabel has converted it into a club for Allied officers. There he finds a confident Joan teaching a large English class. He admits that he is now in love with her, but she replies that she is no longer in love with him - it had only lasted whilst he was out of reach but this no longer applies now he is an officer and a gentleman.
Two of Joan's language pupils are De Freycinet and Dembowski, who vie for her affections by trying to be her top pupil. Knudsen is also in London, giving extra lessons to De Freycinet. He also goes to the Foreign Office to meet Brandon to iron out problems with Knudsen's passport and her request to join the Free Norwegian Forces. Brandon agrees to assist but heavily implies that De Freycinet is having a romantic relationship with Knudsen - De Freycinet protests that it is merely platonic and resents being portrayed as the stereotypical amorous Frenchman. After seeking advice on seduction from some other officers at the club, Gilbey makes an unsuccessful pass at Joan. Brandon and Lady Christabel hope for a wedding between De Freycinet and Joan and send Gilbey to check on rumours that De Freycinet is having an affair - instead Gilbey finds him at his language lessons with Knudsen. Dembowski arrives to take up lessons and confront De Freycinet, closely followed by Joan, who is under the misapprehension that Gilbey has begun an affair with Knudsen.
Joan leaves Knudsen's flat in outrage. De Freycinet, Dembowski and Gilbey later go to the club together, intending jointly to confront Joan with the truth. However, cowardice prevails and instead they go to the club bar, drunkenly make up their differences and swear off women. Joan overhears this, gives up on both De Freycinet and Gilbey and decides to run away to join the Auxiliary Territorial Service, where she becomes a shorthand typist. In 1942 she is given a new posting to a major in the RASC - this turns out to be Gilbey, who is now brusque, rude, demanding and de-humanized by Joan's refusal of him. He rapidly dismisses her, but the pair meet again at the club, where he apologises for his recent rudeness and she admits that she is back in love with him, now he is once again dominant and out of reach. He tries to contradict this but the pair end up kissing and she then drives him away in his army car. | romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0090865 | Combat High | Best friends Max Mendelsson (Keith Gordon) and Perry Barnett (Wally Ward) are a pair of misfit high school teenagers who always cause trouble at school. After starting the first day by setting a large amount of destructive pranks, the duo are suspended from school. They later get themselves into more trouble when they intentionally misdirect several construction workers into drilling on the wrong area, ultimately causing roadside damage and getting themselves arrested by the police. For their mischief, the judge sentences them to serve a year in Kirkland Military School to teach them discipline.
Upon arriving in military school, the duo meets Cadet Major Biff Woods (George Clooney), Cadet Captain Kevin, and Cadet Sergeant Andrea Pritchett (Dana Hill) who constantly punish Max for his bad conduct and behavior. Max finds the time in military school unbearable and vows to find a way to get himself out. During a war game, Perry meets a fellow cadet named Mary-Beth (Tina Caspary) and falls in love with her. Meanwhile, Max again sets up another series of destructive pranks in the military school, hoping to get himself removed from the school. However, the principal and Biff's father, General Ed Woods (Robert Culp), refuses to expel them, instead giving the two of them more punishments. Although Max is still unrepentant, Perry decides that he wants to straighten up his life, and breaks off his friendship with Max.
Max eventually wins the friendship of other cadets by saving a drowning cadets and defending him from Biff, while Perry begin a budding romance with Mary-Beth. Meanwhile, a Soviet Union military school visits Kirkland, and challenges them to a mock war game as part of their tour. During the welcome party, Biff steals a pocket watch from the Soviet Union guest. Max notices this and confronts Biff for his actions, but the two are caught by the General in front of everyone. Although Max tries to take the blame, Biff confesses to General Woods that he was the thief. He announces that he did this in revenge for his father, always praising him as a fine soldier, but never regarding him as a son. Saddened by this, the General relieves him of his command for the upcoming mock war. Biff tries to drown him sorrows by drinking, but Max, who has reconciled with Perry, decides to set another plan to help Biff make up with his father.
The war game begins with Captain Kevin leading, and before he departs, Max gave him a stolen battle plan of the Soviet cadets. However, the Kirkland cadets were led into a trap and starts losing, and Kevin realizes Max tricked him. He resorts to cheating (continuing to fight despite being shot in-game) in order win by any means necessary. The other cadets, led by Max, bring a sleeping Biff to the battle, and asks him for leadership. Biff was initially reluctant to command this war, but Max encourages him to, and the group manage to successfully capture a group of Soviet cadets. Andrea meets up and joins them, then she and Max kiss. Elsewhere, Kevin manage to defeat the Soviet, who accuse them of cheating and a fight breaks out. Max intervenes to stop the fight, telling all of them that this is not a real war, and this mutual hostility between them is pointless. The two countries should not be seeing each other enemies, and neither should they. Max's actions win the friendship and respect of the Soviets, and General Woods is happy at how Biff completed this mock war with a peaceful end, acknowledging him as his son.
The film ends with Perry leaving with Mary-Beth for Thanksgiving holiday; Max claims that he has changed his old ways, and asks Perry to burn a box with his old prank notebook. However, the box is actually full of fireworks, which gets set off when the workers burn it in front of the school gate. Max laughs at his final prank while the fellow cadets cheer and applaud him. | prank | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0259416 | Malliswari | Malliswari (Katrina Kaif) is the heiress of Raja of Mirzapur (M. Balaiah). Her deceased father wrote in his will that she would inherit the property worth 750 crores after she becomes major at the age of 21. The entire property is under the control of Bhavani Shankar (Kota Srinivasa Rao), who wants to inherit the entire property by killing her. As he hatches the plans to eliminate Malliswari, she is sent to her uncle's (Tanikella Bharani)in Visakhapatnam as a normal girl so that she can live with anonymity. Prasad (Venkatesh) works as a bank accountant in Andhra Bank there. He is a bachelor who has been desperately seeking for marriage alliance for the past seven years. He would be looking at every unmarried girl with dreams in his eyes. He accidentally meets Malliswari and falls deeply in love with her. Malliswari is traced by the goons there and they start running after her. Prasad escorts her and drops her safely in Hyderabad. The rest of the story describes what happens next and the eventual conclusion of the plot. | romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0280486 | Bad Company | When a mission to retrieve a stolen suitcase bomb goes bad, Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) agent Kevin Pope (Rock) is killed. Pope was working undercover as an antiquities dealer under the name Michael Turner. The CIA, which is desperate to complete the mission, discovers that Agent Pope had a twin brother, Jake Hayes (also Rock), from whom he was separated at birth; their mother died giving birth and Hayes suffered from a severe lung infection that prompted the doctors to separate them because they felt that Hayes was unlikely to live for very long. Hayes hustles chess games, scalps tickets and works at small clubs in Jersey City, New Jersey to make ends meet. Meanwhile, Hayes's girlfriend, Julie (Kerry Washington) grows tired of waiting for him to grow up and decides to move to Seattle, Washington.
After the CIA successfully persuades Hayes to participate and begins to train Hayes for a mission that is to take place in Prague, Czech Republic, they are initially dismayed by his lack of refinement. Agent Oakes (Hopkins) confronts Hayes, telling him he doesn't trust him. When Hayes begins paying attention, the CIA sets him up in his brother's old apartment in Manhattan to test him and try to bait the men who killed his brother. Hayes is attacked, but escapes unharmed. Looking for a way out, Hayes goes to his foster mother only to be found by Oakes, who persuades him to finish the mission.
After arriving in Prague, Hayes - posing as his dead brother - meets with the men selling the suitcase bomb. The seller, Adrik Vas, is an ex-Russian Army Colonel with ties to the Russian Mafia. When they return to their hotel, Hayes is greeted by his brother's ex-girlfriend Nicole (Garcelle Beauvais). Believing Hayes is his brother, she dines with him and returns to his hotel, where the couple is ambushed by rival buyers. Nicole figures out that Hayes isn't his brother and returns to her assignment covering the Balkans for CNN.
Moving forward with the plans, Hayes and Oakes meet up with Vas and are able to steal the arming codes. Just as they close the deal, Vas' men double cross them with the rival buyer. When the rival dealers, who are part of a multi-national terrorist organization, learn they can't detonate the bomb because of the missing codes, they kidnap Julie. Hayes gives himself up trying to save his girlfriend, and the terrorists get the codes back and arm the bomb.
Now the race begins to find Hayes and the bomb. After interrogating one of the captured terrorists, they track the bomb to Grand Central Station. With the clock ticking, they locate the bomb and the terrorist leader Dragan Adjanic (Matthew Marsh), who has started the countdown. Oakes rescues Hayes by killing two terrorists. As Hayes starts to enter the codes to disarm the bomb, Adjanic holds Julie hostage. In order to distract Adjanic, Hayes pretends to shoot Oakes, and they kill Adjanic by shooting him repeatedly. Hayes is able to disarm the bomb just prior to detonation.
At the ending of the film, Hayes visits the memorial for deceased secret agents to visit his brother's grave. Later on, Oakes comes up to Hayes at Hayes's wedding and warns him that a dangerous criminal has escaped from prison and is seeking revenge upon Kevin Pope, but since Kevin is dead and Hayes was impersonating him, the criminal thinks Hayes is Kevin. Hayes begins to panic and demand that Oakes has to protect him, but Oakes starts laughing as he reveals that it was just a joke and he really just came for the wedding and also giving him a honey moon trip as a wedding gift. | murder | train | wikipedia | Some of it is funny, but to be honest, if you dislike Chris Rock then there will be practically nothing for you.The plot brings the bomb back to the US towards the end in an effort to inject tension and urgency into the action, but it doesn't really work.
Chris Rock also played his role as it should have been played and restrained himself from his usual antics, as in "Lethal Weapon 4." Not a great movie but much better than the awful "The Sum Of All Fears.".
I think Chris Rock gave a great performance and Anthony Hopkins is always wonderful.
When he acts benightedly in a cliched spy thriller that is a virtual textbook of Hollywood expectations, right down to the scruffy mid-eastern terrorists and the oversized red digital readout on a nuclear bomb.Anthony Hopkins plays a CIA veteran who must train a streetwise kid, played by Chris Rock, how to act like a real agent in 9 days.
The bad side of `Bad Company' is the bug-eyed, monotone, hysterical Chris Rock, who may have been medicated for this role because I didn't have to cover my ears this time-I just bore up under his boring delivery.Brooke Smith, who was the captured girl in `Silence of the Lambs', plays Hopkins' partner.
It's like he polished of his cameo character from Mission Impossible 2 and set it to work for a whole film.The movie is supposed to be an action comedy but the action scenes are limited to a few machine gun firefights conducted by people who can't hit targets 10 feet away, and a single car chase.The comedy is limited to hearing Hopkins use the phrase "get in the car, b*tch" and some Chris Rock moments.
In Prague, the CIA secret agent Kevin Pope (Chris Rock) is killed in a mission with Oakes (Anthony Hopkins).
When the more successful brother, Kevin (ironically the one who got his act together and made a life for himself, yet also the one who got himself killed) is shot escaping a touchy sting operation in which he and his team try to buy a stolen nuclear weapon with cyber money that doesn't exist in real life, the CIA are faced with abandoning a 2 year project and risking themselves because their new enemies are going to want to know what happened to their deal or seeking out Kevin's twin brother Jake, who makes a living whipping the crap out of unsuspecting chess players in Central Park and selling scalped tickets to just about any event you can imagine.At this point in the film, it's clear that the premise is a remarkably strong one for an action comedy - the irony of having a street hustler suddenly thrown into a top secret CIA operation.
Unfortunately, the movie seems to lose track of the fact that it is a comedy, and in more ways that just forgetting to throw in some good one-liners.Bad Company was made and scheduled to be released before September 11th, but was then delayed for obvious reasons (similar to the obvious reasons that delayed the release of the much more incendiary Collateral Damage, given its subject matter).
When are we going to see some good action movies that are about something other than one guy who has to save a whole city from terrorists with big bombs?There are points in the movie where it seems that the writers stopped and said, `Oh wait, this is supposed to be a comedy,' and threw in a few completely unamusing jokes here and there, mostly in the form of totally inappropriate one-liners from Rock that almost invariably fall completely flat.
Then at the end of the movie, just as the bad guy is about to get killed, he says something about how we Americans think we're so great but we just sit here while people all over the world suffer and die, and we just watch it on our televisions and grab another burger.
If you like either actor and want some light action entertainment for 2 hours, Bad Company will not disappoint.
Now people complaining need to realize1) Chris Rock is a commedian 2) Anthony Hopkins is the "straight man" 3) Chris Rock's main character (the bookie / scalper) is a realistic cynic who has no "faith" in the system (much of the humor is derived from this)One person gives the sarcastic remark where he goes on about how Chris Rock said "big deal" when he was told he had an identical twin brother.Yeah, this is on par, because he doesn't believe them (after all, identical twins seperated at birth is pretty cliche') this not only shows realistic attitude on the main role but pokes fun at the movie (and thus lends the plot a little more credit)In my humble opinion, this is typical Chris Rock humor (which IS over the top for him if you've ever watched him)Chris Rock is on par for his usual style.
Hopkins brings the refinement and grace you expect of him (think Hannibal in Silence and Red Dragon)The spy v/s spy - cloak and dagger theme is on par for Hollywood...What you get is a good Chris Rock comedy with the spy theme...
I saw this film the other day, I thought after reading reviews here it was going to be one of the worst movies I ever saw, I was mistaken, I found the film very entertaining, Hopkins and Rock worked well together, the general idea of the movie was sound and I thourougly enjoyed every minute of the film, maybe it was saved by the actors for me but I really did enjoy it worth seeing so you can judge for yourself..
Why do people like Chris Rock feel the need to play in movies.
It's not only a "Bad Company", it's also a very bad movie.I didn't know what to expect, but I feared it would be like it actually was - a bad movie.The acting was done alright by Hopkins and was as you expected from Chris Rock.
Anthony Hopkins, the poor man, sleepwalks through this movie often looking tired and bored as he is forced to perform these drawn out tired monologues and terrible stunts while acting alongside Rock who can barely act.
I don't like Chris Rock usually, but in this movie he really impressed me with his ability to be serious and at the same time funny.
This movie was believable, even the bad guy at the end who made a strong statement about "why" there is terror in the world.But Chris Rock and Anthony Hopkins really were the heroes here because what movie really was about was people and what was really important about living.
Commendations go to the Director, Chris Rock, and Anthony Hopkins for making a movie, getting out of the box and pushing the envelope by making something real, not superficially dumb.
This is an entertaining movie, Chris Rock delivers on the comedy aspect with some funny one-liners, and he can also pull off the serious acting, the rest of the cast are also good in their roles.
Professional Critics criticised Anthony Hopkins' performance by saying he seemed "bored" and that his character is "bland", but this could be how Director Joel Schumacher wanted this character, plus Hopkins' character is a good match with Rock's character, one lively character and one chilled character - a perfect match.There's some decent action scenes, and the thriller aspect is clearly there.
Bad Company lives up to it's genre of being an Action Comedy Thriller.As a Christian, there is something that I dislike about this flick and that is a disrespectful statue of Jesus in a few scenes, they could have edited those scenes out as well as some of the trashy clips of Chris Rock and the glamorous woman "Nicole"..
The first thing to know about "Bad Company" is that the producer is Jerry Bruckheimer (who produced a couple of Michael Bay's explosion-laden movies) and the director is Joel Schumacher (who brought the Batman franchise to its nadir in the late 1990s).
That, plus the casting of Chris Rock in his usual sort of role, tells you pretty much everything that there is to know about this movie.
I will say that I liked the interactions between Chris Rock's and Anthony Hopkins's characters, and also when Rock BSes the villain.Basically, it's not any sort of movie to take seriously.
Cheesy lines from funny man Chris Rock make this a hard film to take seriously.Chris Rock should not have been cast if they were trying to make a serious thriller, and although I like Anthony Hopkins, the guy has got to learn to say no.Say no to scripts that involve running, fighting or anything physical.
The fight scene in the car is simply ridiculous, as is seeing Hopkins with a gun or trying to look cool chewing gum.If you want to watch a comedy, don't watch this movie.If you want to watch a thriller, don't watch this movie.If you want to watch a suspenseful, intelligent and cleverly scripted action movie, don't watch it.It's not Bad Company it's just bad!.
The other his unknown twin brother who is a ticket scalper and part time DJ growing up in the wrong side of the city without the breaks and money that the other brother had.He is approached by Anthony Hopkins to be trained by the CIA quickly to finish the deal his brother started as they have nine days to buy a nuclear bomb in the black market in Europe.
Take a talented comic, put him in an old plot, and you've got "Bad Company," a 2002 film also starring Anthony Hopkins, Chris Rock, Peter Stormare, and Gabriel Macht.
This film was scheduled for release in late 2001, and because some of it was filled at the World Trade Center, the release was delayed until June of 2002.Officer Oakes (Hopkins) of the CIA is involved in an undercover job dealing with the purchase of nuclear arms when his partner (Rock), who was the man inside, is killed.
In either case, it didn't look too good.Chris Rock, who, by all means, is a great comic actor, feels out of place or at least miscast and misdirected.
Anthony Hopkins plays the FBI agent who used to work with the first and now has to hire the latter.One problem with the movie is that it introduces us to the training process of the hired kid, with some good scenes, but none of it is used later on.Schumacher's direction in tone and color is nice but doesn't compensate the lack of focus on character's direction and storyline.In the end, I was left with the feeling Will Smith would have been better instead, being able to project more subtlety..
It ain't no bad film, but, it ain't no good film either.When a mission to retrieve a stolen suitcase bomb goes bad, CIA agent Kevin Pope played by Chris Rock is killed.
Ive read the people's comments before my own here and I have to say I dont agree with all of them.The story is very close to real life: russia has fallen apart and the russian mafia is selling out including weapons that are very much wanted by all sorts of terrorist organisations that have the money to now simply buy these devices on the black market.Even though the basic outline of the story may be a tad standard you can still create an enjoyable movie but putting in details that make the film more unique.I think that Anthony Hopkins played his role very well except for a few small places where he didnt send out the correct emotion (like when Chris Rock and the girlfriend of his brother are being chased down the hall and Anthony Hopkins very calmly says "Ok lets join the party" or the scene where he shoots a badguy in the back and then very calmly looks down the laundrychute while Chris Rock is falling down to a possible death).
Apart from these 2 or 3 total scenes in all he does a good job portraying an elder operative who has the experience and starts to question the way things are a done.Chris Rock plays his role of streetpunk convincingly.
I thought Anthony Hopkins and Chris Rock did a great job of acting which carried the movie.
He has the Chris Tucker type of humour but he is far less successful.Bottom line is: the movie's plot is a stretch, it is not a comedy (not a good one, at least), but it is far from drama or even action, too.
Under the watchful eye of C.I.A. agent Gaylord Oakes (Anthony Hopkins), Jake Hayes is soon transformed in true Pygmalion-style from a hip-hop loving petty criminal to an urbane super-spy, whose responsibility it is to save New York City from nuclear annihilation.The ever-so predictable antics that ensue, make Bad Company an excruciatingly tedious 116 minutes.
And I have such respect for the actor Anthony Hopkins; but I believe he'd be better off with serious roles in a small movie or tiny but important roles in a big-budget one just like he did in "MI:2" with Tom Cruise..
Some of the other actors dialogue is a bit weak, but Chris rock has a lot of funny lines, and as long as You dont go expecting A serious Film you will be surprised.
Anthony Hopkins and Chris Rock delivers an okay performance in this movie even though it is not as funny as one would have hoped.
Chris Rock is very funny as his streetwise lifestyle in this movie makes him a very nice character which you immediately like.
well i sat down to watch this film the other night not really expecting much from it but to my surprise it was actually very good i am not a fan of chris rock at all, but he played a good role in this film along with Anthony hopkins who once again shows what a great actor he is.all in all this is a good film which is easy to watch, dont have to think to much when watching it :) a fair amount of action and some good laughs in it, i didn't get bored watching this movie at alli gave it 7/10.
I went to see this movie primarily because I have been a fan of Anthony Hopkins and Jerry Bruckheimer for a while, but, having never been a fan of Chris Rock it was a little hard to watch the movie without wondering when he was going to make me wish I hadn't come.
Although Chris Rock ain't a great actor I think he did a good job in this movie.
I think if critics would have viewed this movie for what it was...and not what they expect of Anthony Hopkins...it would have been a more favorable review.I thought the pairing of these two actors was a brilliant move!!
This is a forgettable and boring movie, a film you will forget by the time the end of June comes around.This film stars Anthony Hopkins as a old and withered CIA agent, on a mission to buy a Nuculear bomb off a terriost named Adrik Vas(Peter Stormare), until after the first meeting, Hopkins and Chris Rock now in the CIA brother, gets chased and ends up getting killed because he saved Hopkins life.
The other preformance that is nice to watch is Gabriel Macht(Agent Seal), he is a straight arrow and is smooth, he looks and acts like he should be in the CIA, makes it fun to watch him in action.The movie just falls apart, I saw this movie two weeks before it came out(a screening) and then saw it again few nights ago with some friends, but as I watched it again, i got bored very easily with the film, and couldn't wait until the credits began to roll.
BAD COMPANY +___ Action Anthony Hopkins, Chris Rock, Gabriel MachtThe CIA attempts to purchase a Nuclear bomb to prevent it being detonated on US soil (see the subtle difference?).
There is virtually no story line, but lots of machine-gun fire and explosions.Hard to believe Anthony Hopkins or Chris Rock would have become involved in a turkey like this.
Then, when I saw the preview for "Bad Company," starring Chris Rock and Sir Anthony Hopkins, I thought to myself, "This is gonna be a big hit!
To all who like smart, witty, brilliant movies, Bad Company is your film..
Chris Rock as Kevin Pope was very believable, and as Jake Hayes, the streetwise ticket seller, even more so.I would (and have!) recommend this movie to anyone looking for a great laugh!
moving on, anthony hopkins was good in this flick and this is the first film i've seen with him were he is an action hero.
Overall: Bad Company is pure Energy, plenty of action and humor to keep you from walking out of this movie.Acting: These two mismatched actors (Hopkins - Rock) are perfect for this kind of movie.
Chris Rock gives some unbelievably bad lines in this movie, and poor Anthony Hopkins is half asleep the entire film.
Chris Rock gives some unbelievably bad lines in this movie, and poor Anthony Hopkins is half asleep the entire film.
Bad Company is certainly not the same kind of movie, but worth checking out in it's own right.Chris Rock and Anthony Hopkins perform well as counter-points to each other, although Hopkins' character is rather understated.
I like Anthony Hopkins and I'm not so crazy about Chris Rock as an actor.
It looked like another bad buddy movie, and I hated to see Anthony Hopkins, one of my favorite actors, make a fool of himself in such a film.
Chris Rock (playing duel roles) and Anthony Hopkins are perfect as the two leads.
I just wonder why sir Anthony Hopkins will go into trash like this..This was the first film I saw where Chris Rock is acting and I don't think I will ever want to see another one. |
tt0105179 | Prom Night IV: Deliver Us from Evil | At Hamilton High School's 1957 prom party goers Lisa and Brad leave the festivities to have sex in Brad's car. Before the two can undress, they are distracted by a noise, revealed to be someone putting candles on the hood of the car. After spotting the candles, Lisa has her throat slashed by a metal crucifix wielded by psychotic religious fanatic Father Jonas who also stabs Brad in the chest, afterward disposing of the teens' bodies by blowing up Brad's car. After committing this double homicide, Father Jonas, revealed to have stigmata, is transported from St. Basil Seminary to the St. George Church by a group of fellow priests led by Father Jaeger, who refers to the rambling Father Jonas as an abomination and believes him possessed by dark forces.
In 1991 at St. George Church young Father Colin is informed by the now elderly Father Jaeger that his trip to Africa for missionary work has been put off and that he has been charged by the church with watching over Father Jonas, who has been captive in the church basement for thirty-three years in a drug-induced stupor; shortly after showing Colin the catatonic Jonas, Jaeger passes away, officially leaving Colin as Jonas’s new guardian. Jonas reveals that he had suffered sexual abuse from priests in the church. Believing he can help Jonas, Colin neglects drugging him, an act which allows Jonas to regain consciousness, escape his bonds and kill Colin by garroting him before taking off to St. Basil Seminary, hitching a ride with a trucker named Dave, who he kills afterward. Discovering Colin's death and Jonas's escape, Cardinal Tourette makes Colin's murder look like a suicide before going off in search of Jonas.
At the St. Basil Seminary, which has long since been abandoned and converted into a summer home, two young couples - consisting of the summer home owner's son Mark, his good girlfriend Meagan, the mischievous Laura and her boyfriend Jeff - arrive planning to celebrate their graduation privately instead of going to prom, but find most of the electronics and appliances in the house have been stolen. Deciding to stay and still party, the group is stalked by Jonas, who acquires his old metal crucifix and uses it to kill Mark's younger brother Jonathan, who had followed the group to the house and was in the midst of secretly filming Jeff and Laura having sex before being murdered.
After injuring herself in the wine cellar, Meagan receives an obscene phone call from Jonas while Mark is away getting the first aid kit to tend to her wounds. After calling Meagan, Jonas enters the house through his old lair and kills Laura, subsequently moving her body. While looking for the missing Laura, Mark and Meagan find Jonas's lair, while Jeff searches the attic. Finding what looks like Laura, Jeff approaches the figure, only to find it is Jonas wearing Laura’s scalp; Jonas proceeds to kill Jeff by crushing the boy's skull with his bare hands.
Going outside to look around, Mark and Meagan rush back inside when they find Laura and Jeff's bodies crucified and ablaze. As Meagan tries to call the police Mark arms himself with a gun and has Meagan flee outside when Jonas appears. Rushing to the roof of the house, Mark is stabbed in the foot through the roof by Jonas, causing him to fall to the ground below. After Jonas finishes off Mark by hurling his crucifix into the boy's chest, Meagan is stalked through the house by the fanatic, who she manages to briefly incapacitate by spraying him in the face with bug spray. Going outside and getting Mark's earlier dropped gun, Meagan gets bullets from inside and, after being phoned by the police (a call which is interrupted by Jonas) goes to the wood shed outside. After missing several times Meagan manages to shoot Jonas and, believing him dead, begins praying for forgiveness, only to be attacked mid-prayer by the still living Jonas, who begins setting the barn on fire. Grabbing a shovel, Meagan beats Jonas with it and rushes outside and locks the door, leaving Jonas to burn and subsequently be blown up when the shed explodes.
In the morning Meagan is loaded into an ambulance, while the charred and seemingly dead Jonas is placed in another, which is manned by Cardinal Tourette and his followers. While in the back of the ambulance, Jonas opens his eyes, while elsewhere Meagan does the same simultaneously. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0137201 | Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer: The Movie | One night, the Sprites of the Northern Lights- a group of singing, colorfully garbed sprites who fly around the North Pole, are seen putting on a remarkable light show in front of Santa Claus' workshop, where Santa and his wife, Mrs. Claus witness the whole thing, to celebrate a very special occasion. It is revealed that a baby reindeer which his parents, Blitzen and his wife, Mitzi name Rudolph is born with an unusual red, shiny nose (a birth which the Sprites joyfully witness as well). Blitzen starts to worry that Rudolph will be made fun of because of this, while Mitzi is more optimistic. Later in the morning, they meet up with Rudolph's three uncles- Dasher, Comet, and Cupid -and introduce Rudolph to them. Cupid tickles Rudolph's chin and tummy until his nose starts glowing, which draws attention. Blitzen's worst fears are confirmed with the secret of their son's nose now revealed to Comet, Cupid, Dasher, and the rest of the residents of the North Pole.
Meanwhile, two of Santa's elves Doggle and Boone cross the bridge of the wicked Ice Queen, Stormella, to deliver mail and accidentally crash into and destroy several ice statues that belong to her. When Stormella finds out, she closes her ice bridge to the public as punishment, and if anybody dares to cross it, she threatens to create a blizzard so strong it will stop Santa from delivering presents to children around the world.
A year later, Rudolph is grown a little bit older and is sent to school, where he is ridiculed for wanting to be a Flyer (the name for Santa's reindeer) despite his nose by his mean and arrogant cousin, Arrow, and the other students with the exception of their teacher, Mrs. Prancer and Zoey, a kind young doe whom Rudolph has a crush on. Rudolph eventually runs away from school because of all the teasing and meets Santa, who accepts him despite his nose and treats him with kindness, saying that everyone is different on the outside, but it is what's inside that counts. Shortly after, on Christmas Eve, after Santa has flown away for his annual travel around the world with the Flyers, Rudolph winds up running into Zoey who says that she wants to be friends with him, but Arrow, who is also in love with Zoey, disrupts their romantic moment beneath the mistletoe and has Zoey leave with him instead, which she reluctantly does. But as she leaves, she smiles over at Rudolph, making him realize that she likes him.
Years later, Rudolph is now a teenager and is about to take part in the Junior Reindeer Games. Zoey gives her pendant to Rudolph to bring him good fortune, much to the chagrin of Arrow, who is now in a relationship with Zoey. During the event known as The Sleigh Race, Arrow cheats so he may be chosen to become a Flyer, so he crashes into the other competitors and then trash talks Rudolph, making his nose gleam and blind Arrow. Rudolph wins the race, but is disqualified by the referee because his glowing nose is considered cheating and makes Arrow winner by default. Rudolph's disqualification infuriates both Blitzen and Zoey, who confronts Arrow for cheating and ends their relationship. Rudolph overhears his father arguing with the referee that his son's nose was an "accident", attempting to persuade him that Rudolph couldn't have controlled his nose's glow and avoided blinding Arrow. But Rudolph misinterprets it to believe that his father is ashamed of him, and decides to run away from home.
At night, unknowingly with the help and guidance of the Sprites of the Northern Lights, Rudolph finds an empty cave where he decides to sleep in. However, his rest is interrupted when an Arctic fox named Slyly comes in and tries to fight Rudolph for possession of the cave but after a few misunderstandings, Rudolph and Slyly become friends. Later at night, Blitzen and Mitzi find a farewell note from Rudolph in their home. Zoey comes by to see Rudolph but his parents tell her the shocking news. Devastated upon learning that Rudolph ran away from home, Zoey runs off in search of him and even deliberately crosses the forbidden bridge of Stormella the next morning, who imprisons her in an icy prison cell. Upon learning about Rudolph and Zoey's disappearances from their parents, Santa assigns and sends Boone and Doggle to search for them.
Meanwhile, Rudolph and Slyly abandon their cave when an avalanche occurs and seals off the entrance, so, they decide to look for another cave. At night, Rudolph and Slyly come across a cave which is inhibited by a polar bear named Leonard, who lets out a certain growl and snarl because of their intrusion. At first, Slyly and a regretful Rudolph trick the polar bear into thinking his cave will collapse and make him run away. However, the jig is up when an angry Leonard quickly returns and realizes he's been tricked. Slyly runs away scared but Rudolph stays and kindly apologizes to Leonard for their trickery, which he admits was wrong, and explains their situation. Having been told the truth, Leonard sympathizes and welcomes Rudolph and Slyly to his cave. Once everyone's asleep, Rudolph starts having a nightmare which includes bad memories from his childhood about how he was ridiculed for his red nose, which causes him to wake up and walk outside a little. There, he meets the Sprites, who tell Rudolph that he must rescue the kidnapped Zoey. They instruct him on how to properly use his nose, and Rudolph, Leonard, and Slyly journey to Stormella's castle to free Zoey. However, Slyly stays behind while Rudolph and Leonard enter the forbidden castle.
Rudolph and Leonard make it inside her castle, but soon find themselves locked up in ice prison cells of their own by Stormella. Zoey tells Rudolph that she ruined everything, but Rudolph says it's his fault since he ran away. Zoey then says to him that he means the world to her, to which Rudolph replies to her that she makes his heart glow. Then, Stormella fulfills her vow and unleashes a humongous blizzard upon the North Pole using her magical powers. After the Ice Queen goes to sleep, Slyly sneaks into her bedroom and retrieves the key around her neck to his friends' prison cells after inadvertently telling her the truth (something he learned from Rudolph when they first met Leonard) to make her go back to sleep when she catches him in her room. However, Stormella wakes up and sends her pack of wolves after Rudolph and his friends, cornering them on a cliff. When she threatens to freeze Zoey first, Rudolph uses his nose to blind Stormella, sending her toppling off of the cliff, hanging on for dear life. Rudolph saves Stormella's life by allowing her to grab on to his budding antlers and pulls her back up on the cliff with the help of his friends and Stormella's minions, and the grateful Stormella offers to grant him a wish. Much to the Ice Queen's dismay, Rudolph wishes that Stormella would turn from evil to kindhearted rather than to have a normal nose like he always wanted instead.
Stormella does indeed have a change of heart after fulfilling Rudolph's wish but the snowstorm that she created is unstoppable. Boone and Doggle finally find and bring the entire group back to Santa's Village. However, because of the blizzard, Santa is unable to carry out his flight this year but, when he catches a glimpse of Rudolph's glowing nose, Santa asks him to lead his team and once Rudolph agrees, he is given a Medal of Valor (which all Flyers wear) and his father tells him that he is proud of him. Rudolph guides Santa's sleigh through the storm, and receives a hero's welcome when he returns and it turns out to be a merry Christmas after all. | psychedelic, fantasy, flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0057212 | Jûsan-nin no shikaku | In 1844 in Japan as the Tokugawa Shogunate faces extinction, Lord Matsudaira Naritsugu of Akashi rapes, tortures, and murders his own citizens at will. He is protected because the Shogun is his half-brother. Sir Doi Toshitsura, the Shogun's Justice, realizes the situation will become more dangerous after Naritsugu ascends to a higher political position. After a wronged party publicly commits seppuku as a way of showing disdain for Lord Naritsugu, Sir Doi seeks out a trusted older samurai, Shimada Shinzaemon, who served under the former shogun. Sir Doi secretly hires him to assassinate Naritsugu. However, Naritsugu's loyal retainers – led by Hanbei, an old contemporary of Shinzaemon – learn of the plot by spying on Doi's meetings.
Shinzaemon gathers eleven more samurai, whom Sir Doi knows can be trusted including Shinzaemon's nephew, Shinrokurō. The twelve plan to ambush Naritsugu on his official journey from Edo back to his lands in Akashi. However just before they leave, Hanbei arrives and warns his old colleague that he will suffer grave consequences if he tries to kill Naritsugu.
The group, with the legal authority and financial assistance of Sir Doi, buy the help of town Ochiai in order to create a trap. They also enlist the help of a minor lord whose daughter-in-law was raped and son murdered by Naritsugu. With troops, he blocks the official highway forcing Naritsugu to head for the town and the trap. During the assassins own journey to the town, they are attacked by ronin paid off by Hanbei to kill the plotters. The group decides to head through the mountains but end up getting lost. In the process they encounter a hunter named Kiga Koyata who becomes their guide; Shinzaemon eventually recruits him as the thirteenth assassin.
The town is converted into a elaborate maze of booby traps and camouflaged fortifications. However, when Naritsugu and his retinue arrive their numbers have been swelled with additional troops. The thirteen assassins are no longer facing seventy men-at-arms; now, there are two hundred. A lengthy battle follows with Naritsugu and his guards trapped inside the village and attacked on all sides by arrows, explosives, knives, and swords—with the exception of Koyata who fights with rocks in slings. Against this carnage, the deranged noble Naritsugu, is elated by the violence. He tells Hanbei that when he ascends to the Shogun's counsel he will bring back the wars of the Sengoku period.
Slowly the assassins are killed but not before they inflict heavy damage on the Akashi forces. Eventually, Naritsugu and Hanbei are cornered by Shizaemon and Shinrokurō. After Shizaemon kills Hanbei, Naritsugu kicks his loyal retainers head away insulting the elder samurai. Contemptuously, Naritsugu announces that both the people and samurai have only one purpose and that is to serve their lords. But Shizaemon counters by telling Naritsugu that lords can't live without the support of the people, and that if a lord abuses his power the people will always rise against them. Naritsugu and Shinzaemon both mortally wound each other. As the lord crawls away in mud crying and experiencing fear and pain for the first time, he thanks Shinzaemon for showing him excitement before Shinzaemon chops his head off.
After Shinzaemon dies, Shinrokurō wanders through the carnage. He meets the hunter Koyata who has made a miraculous recovery after being stabbed in the neck by Naritsugu. The pair then make their own ways out of the town. An epilogue states that the Shogun and his government covered up what really occurred announcing that Naritsugu died of illness on the journey back to his lands. In twenty-three years, the Tokugawa Shogunate would be overthrown with the Meiji Restoration. | violence | train | wikipedia | Samurai assassins. The story of Thirteen Assassins begins with a vassal of the Akashi clan committing seppuku in front of a daimyo's house. As it turns out, it's in protest to his lord raping and killing a girl and her samurai husband. This scandal is quickly covered up as the Akashi lord happens to be the Shogun's younger brother. What makes matters worse is that this reckless scoundrel will be soon appointed to a higher political position which could prove to be detrimental for the entire Shogunate. In response to that, a plot is hatched: 13 assassins will undertake the suicide mission to murder him on his way back from Edo.The movie can be roughly split in two parts. The first hour is purely character-driven, in a anti-establishment style that resembles Masaki Kobayashi and his masterful work in Seppuku and Samurai Rebellion. The last half hour is totally action-oriented as we see the Akashi clan entourage being trapped in a village and fighting to protect their lord, at which point the film channels heavily the corresponding part of Seven Samurai.Very good, obscure, jidai-geki from the 60's done in stark monochrome, the genre's proper palette. Kudo is a moderate talent who draws heavily from the tradition of filmmaking he belongs to, but competently executes his material. We find here familiar jidai-geki themes; oppression of the weak by those in authority, old friends that have to face off, a vassal that sees how villainous his lord is yet he doesn't hesitate to sacrifice his life for him. It's not quite as elaborate and tragic as Kobayashi's work and is pretty much abandoned after the first half hour where the emphasis shifts to the planning of the assassination, but it still provides a solid dramatic backdrop. The final battle could have been better though, not bad by any means but it won't make any best-final-fights lists either.Overall a very solid and commendable effort, beautiful to look at with a nice story and some action to go with it. Fans of the genre will want to take a look.. A very good samurai movie. A provincial lord kills and rapes with impunity, but no-one can touch him because he's the Shogun's younger brother. After one of the wronged parties publicly commits hara-kiri, a minister decides enough is enough and, though his hands are officially tied, drops big hints to a trusted samurai before telling him the Japanese equivalent of 'this conversation never took place'.The samurai gathers eleven others (the twelfth will join them later), tells them it's a suicide mission (naturally they're all up for it) and they hatch a plan to ambush the evil lord on the long journey from Edo (the ancient name for Tokyo) to his home province. But the would-be assassins are outnumbered four to one by the lord's crack team of bodyguards, whose leader is a resourceful man...This is the first of Eiichi Kudo's films I've seen, and now I can't wait to watch the others. Like Masaki Kobayashi's Hara-Kiri and Rebellion, it's in fabulous widescreen black and white. The sprawling cast of characters is a little confusing at first, but gradually some of the individual samurai begin to stand out from the crowd - the cool swordsman, the cynical wastrel, the joker with gambling debts.There aren't really any memorable duels like the one in Hara-Kiri, but the final battle is terrific. The samurai take over a village, convert it into one big labyrinthine mousetrap, and close off alternative routes to ensure their target and his men will end up there. It's a superbly choreographed and sustained set-piece, and unbelievably tense. There are several similarities with The Seven Samurai; Kudo provides us in advance with a map of the area in which the showdown will take place, and ensures the two sides can be easily distinguished from one another by the hue of their costumes, so even though the action is chaotic, we don't get lost.Highly recommended for fans of The Seven Samurai and Jidaigeki in general. If you can read French subtitles, it's available on a beautifully restored Region 2 DVD in a boxed set from the French company Wild Side. If British or American DVD distributors have any sense, they'll get it subtitled into English as well.. Often Overlooked, Genre-Defiant Gem. Outstanding jidai-geki, first of Kudo's trilogy which reflects its time of production while elaborating and exceeding the genre tropes. The characters, protagonist and antagonist alike, are typically shown to be motivated by bushido. However the late Tokugawa setting establishes these not as typical giri/ninjo conflicts of the genre, but as largely outdated ethics that turn their proponents into victims of historical and social forces beyond their control or full comprehension.Often overlooked abroad, 13 Assassins is clearly on the same level of excellence as Masaki Kobayashi's Seppuku or Hiroshi Inagaki's Chushingura/Loyal 47 Ronin of the year before. It shares the revolutionary spirit and critical sensibility of Hideo Gosha, Kihachi Okamoto and Kenji Misumi. And the climactic village death trap might even be interestingly contrasted to the finale of Seven Samurai.******************SPOILER*AHEAD************************This sentiment is even voiced more explicitly by the assassins leader, played by Chiezo Kataoka during his final duel with the villain's otherwise noble chamberlain, Ryuhei Uchida. They are not killing one another out of personal malice, but necessity, and it is the anti-climactic fashion of Kataoka's end that defies the cliché of genre expectations.So too does the subsequent death of his loyal vassal, played by Ko Nishimura. The dying Kataoka tells his men to call a halt to the now even more senseless killing, as their historic objective has been reached. However, word does not reach the desperate and unarmed Nishimura in time. Instead of the noble death we might expect for a character of his type, he is brutally killed after a series of dodges and attempts to escape.Much of the dialogue throughout makes a point of how many koku of land/rice each main character's title encompasses. This serves to drive home the point of human life's precise monetary value, even more so does the film's final shot.I was a little disappointed after having seen Tetsuro Tanba and Junko Fuji in the opening credits to find that they are not featured that prominently. However, the film certainly does not suffer as a result. Akira Ifukube's score is typically great, and the art direction of Tokumichi Igawa, (Makai tensho, Iga ninpocho) is spectacular. The 13 assassins' conversion of the village into a series of death traps provides an excellent backdrop which supports the theme by providing countless opportunities for strategic retreat and indirect combat. |
tt0240402 | The Center of the World | A couple checks into a suite in Las Vegas. In flashbacks we see that he's a computer whiz on the verge of becoming a dot.com millionaire (Peter Sarsgaard), she's a lap dancer at a club (Molly Parker). He's depressed, withdrawing from work, missing meetings with investors. He wants a connection, so he offers her $10,000 to spend three nights with him in Vegas, and she accepts with conditions: four hours per night of erotic play, and no penetration. During the days in Vegas, they get to know each other, have fun, meet a friend of hers, casino dealer Jerri (Carla Gugino); at night, at least after the first night, things seem to get complicated. When the three days are over, the stripper makes it clear that she was only there for the money and that the man she spent the time with was just a client. Upset that the feelings he had weren't mutual he then rapes her, which she makes no attempt to stop. She then masturbates for him, achieving orgasm, after saying "you want to see real? I'll show you real." The next day he returns home heartbroken. The movie ends with his return to the strip club to see the woman he fell in love with again. She greets him fondly but interacts with him the way she did when they first met, as a stripper and a client ordering a lap dance. | sadist, violence, pornographic, storytelling, flashback | train | wikipedia | A digital camera does not a movie make but Wayne Wang didn't rely on avant-garde technique alone when he decided to revisit the basic boy-meets-girl story.
The man is a socially inept but financially successful engineer so typical of our times and his character is developed and portrayed very realistically by Peter Saarsgard in a role very different from what he played in Boys Don't Cry. He's got it down even to the careless dressing and awkward laugh.
Molly Parker is equally convincing as the drummer-by-day-stripper-by-night career woman who has such a cool and invincible air about her that it makes quite an impact in the few occasions when she does let her armor down.It almost seems as if Wang has taken the Hollywood classic Pretty Woman and has decided to deHollywoodize it.
Although they go into into the deal for purely selfish reasons - he desiring an escape from Internet porn and she looking for some extra cash - their encounter, like all good stories, becomes something of a journey of self-discovery.Mention must be made of the attention to detail which makes the setting very believable.
Although Florence and Richard in theory could change the terms of their relationship, their inner feelings and biases restrict them to what is possible within their own way of thinking.
If you are a horny person looking for naked woman with big boobs I think the film will leave you, well, kind of flat.In short, an interesting film for a young guy involved in high-tech and likes to think....
fake) themes of his superb dot-com romantic tragedy much past the opening credits.Wang's use of hand-held camera, grainy 8mm, incandescent lighting color wash, high-definition close ups, and assorted traditional noir and verite style cinematography and direction is a breakthough exploration of digital media.Vegas visitors brave enough to leave their Strip casino/hotel cocoons during daylight hours will surely be struck by the almost surreal difference between how ugly and unglamorous the city is by day and how other-worldly beautiful after dark.
At least in the hands of Wayne Wang, Florence glows with or without the lipstick and latex...I mean neon.Richard's visit to the Venetian Casino/Hotel near the end of the movie completes the tragic romantic (city) metaphor.
The brilliance of this movie lies in the fact that despite he is given what he wanted( at least what he bargained for), he still feels incomplete and we as viewers experience this by ourselves,and that goes for one scene and the actors life as a whole too.
"Center of the World" is a very well photographed drama and is highly worth a viewing, but has several flaws."Center of the World", an almost mirror image of "Leaving Las Vegas" (better film), is about a computer whiz named Richard's (Peter Sarsgaard) three day escape from his everyday life to Las Vegas with a stripper named Florence (the lovely Molly Parker), who he pays to go with him under the conditions they won't have sex.But Richard's promise eventually gets the best of him and he begins to obsess about having the best sex of his life with Florence.
With each tease, the characters' chemistry builds up and we begin to wonder if Richard and Florence are actually falling in love."Center of the World" has beautiful cinematography.
The entire film was shot on tape and a few scenes are in one of the best shades of black and white I've ever scene.Peter Sarsgaard is very good as the naive but extremely polite computer whiz and Molly Parker (although very better in "Pure") pours herself into the tough role of Florence almost as good as Jennifer Connely portrayed Marion in "Requiem for a Dream".The film does have several flaws though.
It has far too many sex scenes (often gratuitous), the chemistry between the two characters blooms and dies at any given time and the surprise ending is almost ruined by two scenes directly after the surprise (you'll have to see for yourself)."Center of the World" is a good film worth watching once..
This time the protagonist is a rich internet geek (Peter Sarsgaard) who literally contracts with a rock and roll drummer and part-time stripper (Molly (Parker) for a sexual get-away in Las Vegas.
Director Wayne Wang has either dated a dancer or fell in love with one because he displays the power of women, they make the rules, end of story.
I found the movie to be well made and the story pretty good, and holding it all together was a constant feeling of "I can believe this."There was very little in the movie that seems unreal to me.As the first comment says, more movies should be made like this - an intelligent exploration of how we feel about sex, love, feelings, desire, etc..
He didn't shoot on digital video to save money; he did it for the look, which is somewhat pixilated, distancing, with a sort of tv-like unreality.Is the movie perfect?
In the end it feels safer to keep themselves emotionally disconnected, to keep relationships on the level of internet porn or chat rooms, or in the form of a financial transaction or lap dance.If you can't see beyond the sex in the movie, whether you're offended or titillated by it, you almost certainly won't like the film.
The movie deals with the question how real these relations can be and where the real world and real emotions fit into this artificiality.This aspect is enhanced by the use of different ways of filming.
At other times the makers switch to a style of filming whose hand-held camera footage is reminiscent of documentaries and reality shows and whose graininess reminds us of home movies.
I would also shed a tear if she ever got married, unlike others, who probably get married every year to spend the big money they get.Center of The World (rented with the vastly different Bill And Ted's Excellent Adventures) is about Richard (Peter Sarsgaard), a dot-com millionaire who has spent the last two years as a recluse in front of a computer, trying to shake off the pain of a dissolved relationship.
So they go to the greatest city in the world, get the best room at New York New York, and the viewer sees these two in a "Who's Afraid Of Virginia Woolf?" style movie, where they let out their secrets and sexual fantasies for everyone to see.We see the two of them slowly falling into love, but there seems to be a barrier that prevents them from being together, and that barrier comes into play during their three days together.Wayne Wang and his writers deliver a superb script, and Parker and Sarsgaard deliver awesome performances.
It was wonderful to view an intelligent take on the dynamics of the liaison between Richard (the dot com millionaire - Peter Sarsgaard) and Florence (the lap dancer - Molly Parker).
The fluctuating emotions and overwrought hidden passion between this pairing is what truly captivates the audience in a way so rarely done in a film where sex is concerned.We saw this movie at a midnight showing in NY.
Unfortunately the group of 20 friends seemed to revert enmasse to a group of juvenile school children as they giggled during two of the most powerful moments of the film - Richard when he describes having sex and when Florence masturbates herself as a demonstration of her re- asserting her power.Sarsgaard and Parker deserve extra kudos for taking the risk and accepting these roles and then for rising to the challenge and totally immersing the audience into these three days of their lives.
The audience will probably split three ways: Those that are going to be disappointed because it isn't `Pretty Woman', those that will be disappointed that it isn't `sexier', and those careful viewers that will realize the film is neither Hollywood romance nor full-on pornography.The Center of the World is about human contact as commerce.
Richard through the internet company he works for, and Florence at Pandora's Box, the strip club where she sells carefully controlled human contact for `$60.00 for two songs.' Ironically, both characters are cut off from what most people would consider normal contact by the fact that they `sell' a specialized form of it.
Florence by the rules of her job and Richard by the multiple computers screens he cannot seem to get away from.The characters are somewhat comfortable in their respective situations until they leave the controlled environments with which they have set up for themselves and with which they are familiar.
Florence certainly doesn't want it from someone who pays to see her naked body and Richard seems ill equipped to handle even a normal relationship, let alone one that starts with $10,000.00 cash changing hands.Viewers looking for a fairytale will be just as disappointed as those looking for hardcore porn.
The "film" revolves around two of the most vacuous characters I have ever had the displeasure of watching on screen: Richard, a socially retarded software millionaire who pays Florence, an empty headed but street-wise stripper, ten thousand dollars to accompany him to Las Vegas for a weekend.
It is easy enough I suppose to be cynical of a movie like The Center of the World, a movie about gratuitous sex with no plot to go along, but it would be the wrong way to approach this particular example.
The end result is a surprisingly mature feature, which is definitely not for a shallow minded viewerPorter invites his new friend Florence (a stripper) to come to Vegas with him for short vacation where they can have a few nights of uninterrupted sex.
I haven't seen Las Vegas portrayed this way since the Godfather.Molly Parker maintains a very good screen presence, and in fact she is not simply a body like Sharon Stone in Basic Instict, or Holly Hunter in Crash (David's Cronenbergs film, not the Paul Haggis movie).
The elements are there to make a good movie, but Wayne Wang seems to be unable to put the magic touch to it.Molly Parker and Peter Sarsgaard are doing a fine job as Flo and Richard.You can easily skip this one.Out of 100, I gave it 73.
He meets Florence (Molly Parker, incredibly beautiful and sexy I watched many movies where she performed secondary roles and I never noticed how gorgeous she is!), a stripper in profession who plays drums as a hobby.
I found this movie great: the two characters are very well explained and the viewer can understand the situation: a lonely guy like Richard certainly would fall with Florence after a close contact like they have.
Fortunately Wayne Wang did not use the alternative ends showed on DVD, where Florence returns to Richard the money he spent with her and her girlfriend Jerry .
For those who LIKE the slow dramas and don't mind nudity and implied sex, this is a decent idea of putting a computer geek looking for love and a below-average stripper looking for money together.
It really feels good to see a great movie and last night I saw the Best Film of the Year (so far).
The film doesn't go the usual route, feelings are not allowed, this movie is about the Battle of the Sexes.
The film was done very boldly, it was shot on DV and until now I didn't like the results but this movie once again, changes my mind about some topics.
Shot with a malfunctioning hand-held digital camera.Okay, the producers and director will insist this was a study in color, with mood-enhancing black-and-white, blah, blah, blah, ad infinitum through the drudgery of the commentary I just waded through, ooh horrors why do I do these things to myself?You shoot a picture Man Loves Woman, and you feel the need to go extremely artistic and we have to sit and watch as the color spectrum goes slightly haywire like on a broken TV set and you think it's high art?The joke is on the reviewers who are simply wowed by this.
go look for yourself: so, much like the website for 'center of the world', I was left wanting more; then again perhaps that is the point of it all, where the viewer is made to feel like the male character in the film - there is a limit to what he can get.
if it's a sex/art film you are looking for, you won't find it in 'the center of the world'.
canadian directors are masters at this, so try atom egoyan's 'exotica' (with similar themes of man's fixation with a stripper), 'kissed' by lynne stopkewich (also with molly parker) or david cronenberg's 'crash' (a fantastic and very misunderstood film about the possible future of sex in a society where every pleasure has been over-exploited) instead.
The film structure is full of flashbacks in black and white that reconstruct the first meeting of the characters in a sort of convoluted manner, becoming tiresome as the movie advances.There are few strong moments, like the almost cameo by Carla Gugino as a damaged woman that end up not paying off.
While I would have never thought it possible that a film could scrape the depths of horrible movie-making to the degree that Showgirls did, this film surpasses even that little masterpiece in every facet.Do yourself a favor and rent some soft-porn instead: at least you'll be spared the agony of expecting a plot - any plot - and having to witness two of the most contrived and ridiculous acting performances to date.I read a few past user reviews, and am frankly just flabbergastedthat this could make anyone's "Best 5 Films of the Year List." I can pick 5 better Stallone films...and I'm no "Rocky" fan.Save the $8 or whatever it is and spend it on gas (3 gallons these days?) to go see a real film, "Memento." I understand it's not playing everywhere, but you'll be happy you took the ride..
This movie (excuse me, film) strives to be "edgy" with lots of "intense" sex scenes.
Whoever wrote those dialogues and plot is a loser who never had a meaningful relationship with anyone, or hopefully had one but absolutely no writing talent whatsoever.The camera work is a pathetic attempt at presenting the movie as an 'art film', 'independent' or whatever is supposed to give it some value.
Wang made these beautiful enough people look really really bad, and to me, this movie is the "A #1" example for why a film should not be shot in digital, at least not this way.
I thought The Center of the World was well-acted; I felt empathy for the two main characters, Richard and Florence.
First, I had a really hard time believing that the characters of Richard and Florence, who are portrayed as very emotionally literate people, would ever get involved in such a vacuous and emotionally unsatisfying situation.
Perhaps Wayne Wang, Miranda July, and the other writers of this film's script knew people involved in a similar "relationship" as Richard and Florence.
As I see it, a great many people involved in these activities are doing so because of terribly painful childhood wounds (i.e. sexual abuse, huge abandonment issues, family shaming)and to portray, nay, to glorify Richard and Florence's characters in such a "clean erotic" way misrepresents to the reality of the strip/porn world.
Having taught high school for three years and knowing how films such as this distort teenagers' perceptions of reality, I can just hear my fifteen, sixteen, seventeen, eighteen year old students talking about how "cool" this film is, how like "real life" Richard and Florence are.
Make sure it plays at respected theaters (I mean "theatres") like the Angelica in NY -- that way Roger Ebert will think it is an art film and give it Two Thumbs UpStep 6: Steal the basic plot for another, better made movie...
Not for the straight-to-video look, and not for the sex scenes (during which Wang mostly focuses on the characters' faces rather than bodies).
In the end, she makes the only choice she understands.The last few scenes--Richard's pointless, (somewhat stereotypically masculine) act of rage, and Florence's cool expression of her sexual independence--reveal how damaged these characters are.
The center of the film is Parkers performance as Florence.
At one point in the film Florence is masturbating and I think the scene shows that whatever sexual pleasure she receives will be on her terms, when she allows it.
The irony of the film is that Richard is a very successful man with a computer company making lots of money but when it comes to relationships, he's a failure.
"I've noticed how sharply the word money resembles the word violence." – Antjie Krog An underrated erotic drama by director Wayne Wang, "The Centre of the World" stars Peter Sarsgaard as Richard, a dot-com millionaire who runs into Florence (Molly Parker), an attractive drummer/stripper."The Centre of the World" initially seems to be indulging in familiar prince-meets-hooker clichés (eg "Pretty Woman").
Like most films of this ilk, Richard misreads Florence's "performances" and "simulations" as "real affection"; she genuinely likes him, he thinks.
The film then cuts to a strip-club, in which Florence and Richard meet once again.
Even in the movies that deal with sex as one of their main subjects, still most of the deeper messages are just plainly given by actors in their dialogs or other (non-sexual) scenes.Center Of The World is not like that.
I hope for a chance that people who make movies will start giving more attention to what is actually happening in the sex scenes they film, and more importantly HOW it happens.
While in the end Richard and Florence actually have sex, at the same time the movie goes out of its way to make sure the viewer sees how indifferent Florence actually is and basically hates the whole thing.
that can never end well.There is more entertainment to be found in reading the name "Wayne Wang" over and over than watching this film.. |
tt0221073 | Chopper | In and out of jail since he was 16, Melbourne standover man Mark Brandon "Chopper" Read (Eric Bana) is serving a 16-year sentence for kidnapping a supreme court judge to get his childhood friend, Jimmy Loughnan (Simon Lyndon), out of the notorious H Division of maximum security Pentridge Prison. To become leader of the division, he ignites a power struggle which gains him more enemies than admirers. Eventually, even his gang turn their backs on him and Loughnan stabs him several times in a failed assassination attempt. Chopper voluntarily has his ears cut off by a fellow inmate in order to be transferred out of the H Division; this also gains him recognition in and out of the prison.
He is released in 1986, revisiting enemies and friends whom he cannot differentiate anymore. He reunites with his former girlfriend Tanya (Kate Beahan), but suspects that she is involved with one of his old victims, Neville Bartos (Vince Colosimo). He tracks Bartos down, shoots him and takes him to the hospital, unabashedly claiming that he has a "green light" courtesy of the Police "to exterminate scum". When Chopper learns that he is now the target of a death-contract, he goes after his old friend Jimmy, only to find him worn out and poverty stricken by drugs with a daughter and a junkie fiancée who is pregnant with another child.
He kills a criminal known as Siam "Sammy the Turk" Ozerkam at a bar, but gets away with it by claiming it was self-defence. He eventually ends up back in prison where he writes a book about his experiences in the Melbourne underworld. The book becomes a best-seller and Chopper becomes a criminal legend.
The film ends with Chopper in his prison cell in 1992, watching himself being interviewed on television. He is proud of the interview among those watching with him, but when they leave he goes quiet and the film ends with him sitting in his cell alone. | cult, comedy, cruelty, murder, violence | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0103369 | Bishôjo senshi Sêrâ Mûn | In Minato, Tokyo, a middle-school student named Usagi Tsukino befriends Luna, a talking black cat that gives her a magical brooch enabling her to become Sailor Moon: a soldier destined to save Earth from the forces of evil. Luna and Usagi assemble a team of fellow Sailor Soldiers to find their princess and the Silver Crystal. They encounter the studious Ami Mizuno, who awakens as Sailor Mercury; Rei Hino, a local shrine maiden who awakens as Sailor Mars; Makoto Kino, a tall transfer student who awakens as Sailor Jupiter; and Minako Aino, a young aspiring idol who awakens as Sailor Venus, accompanied by her talking feline companion Artemis. Additionally, they encounter Mamoru Chiba, a high-school student who assists them on occasion as Tuxedo Mask.
In the first arc, the group battles the Dark Kingdom. Led by Queen Beryl, a team of generals—the Four Kings of Heaven (四天王, Shiten'ō, lit. "Four Heavenly Kings")—attempt to find the Silver Crystal to free an imprisoned, evil entity called Queen Metaria. Usagi and her team discover that in their previous lives they were members of the ancient moon kingdom called Silver Millennium. The Dark Kingdom waged war against them, resulting in the destruction of the moon kingdom. Its ruler Queen Serenity later sent her daughter Princess Serenity, her protectors the Sailor Soldiers, their feline advisers Luna and Artemis, and the princess's true love Prince Endymion into the future to be reborn through the power of the Silver Crystal. The team recognize Usagi as the reincarnated Serenity and Mamoru as Endymion. The Soldiers kill the Four Kings, who turn out to have been Endymion's guardians who defected in their past lives. In a final confrontation with the Dark Kingdom, Minako kills Queen Beryl; she and the other Soldiers then sacrifice their lives in an attempt to destroy Queen Metaria. Using the Silver Crystal, Usagi succeeds in killing Metaria and resurrects her friends.
At the beginning of the second arc, Usagi and Mamoru's daughter Chibiusa arrives from the future to find the Silver Crystal. As a result, the Soldiers encounter Wiseman and his Black Moon Clan, who are pursuing her. Chibiusa takes the Soldiers to the future city Crystal Tokyo, where her parents rule as Neo-Queen Serenity and King Endymion. During their journey they meet Sailor Pluto, guardian of the Time-Space Door. Sailor Pluto stops the Clan's ruler Prince Demand from destroying the spacetime continuum, leading to her death. Chibiusa later awakens as a Soldier—Sailor Chibi Moon—and helps Usagi kill Wiseman's true form, Death Phantom.
The third arc revolves around a group of lifeforms called the Death Busters, created by Professor Soichi Tomoe, who seek to transport the entity Pharaoh 90 to Earth to merge with the planet. Tomoe's daughter Hotaru is possessed by the entity Mistress 9, who must open the dimensional gateway through which Pharaoh 90 must travel. Auto-racer Haruka Tenoh and violinist Michiru Kaioh appear as Sailor Uranus and Sailor Neptune, who guard the outer rim of the Solar System from external threats. Physics student Setsuna Meioh, Sailor Pluto's reincarnation, joins the protagonists. Usagi obtains the Holy Grail, transforms into Super Sailor Moon, and attempts to use the power of the Grail and the Silver Crystal to destroy Pharaoh 90. This causes Hotaru to awaken as Sailor Saturn, whom Haruka, Michiru and Setsuna initially perceive as a threat. As the harbinger of death, Hotaru uses her power of destruction to sever Pharaoh 90 from the Earth and instructs Setsuna to use her power over time-space to close the dimensional gateway.
In the fourth arc, Usagi and her friends enter high school and fight against the Dead Moon Circus, led by Queen Nehelenia, the self-proclaimed "rightful ruler" of both Silver Millennium and Earth. Nehelenia invades Elysion, which hosts the Earth's Golden Kingdom, capturing its High Priest Helios and instructs her followers to steal the Silver Crystal. As Prince Endymion, Mamoru is revealed to be the owner of the Golden Crystal—the sacred stone of the Golden Kingdom. Mamoru and the Soldiers combine their powers with those of the Holy Grail, enabling Usagi to transform into Eternal Sailor Moon and kill Nehelenia. Four of Nehelenia's henchmen, the Amazoness Quartet, are revealed to be Sailor Soldiers called the Sailor Quartet, who are destined to become Chibiusa's guardians in the future; they had been awakened prematurely and corrupted by Nehelenia.
In the final arc, Usagi and her friends are drawn into a battle against Shadow Galactica, a group of false Sailor Soldiers. Their leader Sailor Galaxia plans to steal the Sailor Crystals of true Soldiers to take over the galaxy and kill an evil lifeform known as Chaos. After killing Mamoru and most of the Sailor Soldiers, Sailor Galaxia steals their Sailor Crystals. Usagi travels to the Galaxy Cauldron to defeat Galaxia and revive her teammates. Joining Usagi are the Sailor Starlights who come from the planet Kinmoku, their ruler Princess Kakyuu and the infant Sailor Chibichibi who comes from the distant future. Later, Chibiusa and the Sailor Quartet join Usagi and company. After numerous battles and the death of Galaxia, Sailor Chibichibi reveals her true form as Sailor Cosmos. Usagi then destroys Chaos with the Silver Crystal. Mamoru and the Sailor Soldiers are revived and return to Earth with Usagi. The series ends with Usagi and Mamoru's wedding six years later. | romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0085178 | Ardh Satya | The film opens at a party where Anant Welankar (Om Puri), a police officer, meets Jyotsna Gokhale (Smita Patil), a lecturer in literature at a local college. Anant is a sub-inspector with Bombay police. They seem to hit it off despite some initial skirmishing about ideology, and the friendship blossoms into a relationship.
Anant brings diligence, enthusiasm and a definite idealism to his job. But the job is harsh. There is a deep nexus between the local mafia, the cops and the (corrupt) politicians. Honest himself, Anant falls among the lower rungs of the police hierarchy and has very limited scope of authority on the state of affairs in his area.
When Anant arrests three common thugs, he is asked to meet with their boss, Rama Shetty (Sadashiv Amrapurkar), a don in the local mafia. Anant refuses all of Rama Shetty's attempts to get his men out or to entice Anant to join him. Shetty decides to watch over Anant.
Some time thereafter, a meek fellow from a local slum lodges a complaint about some ruffians who harass his wife. Anant finds them, locks them up, and administers a severe beating. As a fallout, the local MLA asks for Anant to be suspended.
Anant's boss, inspector Haider Ali, explains to a mystified Anant that the ruffians were the MLA's henchmen, providers of muscle during elections and political rallies. Anant is defiant with a clear conscience (he did nothing wrong) and ready to face a tribunal. Haider Ali explains that it will hardly get that far. Tribunals are either delayed indefinitely or are rigged (by corrupt politicians), and suspension during that time is a permanent black mark on one's record (for no other politician will be willing to deal with such a troublemaker).
Anant is initially baffled but goes along with Haider's plan to bring in Desai, a mediator or middle-man with connections in New Delhi, the "Centre" or national seat of power. Desai invokes higher powers to quietly cover up the matter. Anant's morals are shaken by this incident: He had to use means barely legal to uphold his righteous actions upon criminals.
Anant reflects upon his childhood. His father (Amrish Puri) retired as a Faujdar (constable) in the village police force. His father was a hard and violent man, quick to slap or beat his wife on the slightest pretext. Anant recalls looking on and being powerless to intervene. When Anant graduates college, he expresses his desire to pursue higher education but is forced into joining the police force.
Things get interesting when Anant finds one of Rama Shetty's goons, badly beaten, burnt and left to die. Anant brings the man into the hospital and takes his statement where he names Rama Shetty and others who inflicted this assault. Anant storms into Rama Shetty's rooms to arrest him. But Shetty is unfazed. He makes a simple phone call to a high ranking cop who immediately asks Anant to back off. Anant cites the context and the overwhelming evidence but is still ordered to step away. A consternated, resentful and hapless Anant leaves, feeling intensely humiliated.
Haider Ali explains yet again: Rama Shetty plans to run for city council in the upcoming municipal elections and simply cannot afford to let a petty matter distract his ambitions. Anant is horrified and enraged, and takes to drinking. His relationship with Jyotsna suffers. He is distraught when he is sent to provide security cover for Rama Shetty's campaign rallies.
He suffers another career setback when he leads an assault team to capture a dangerous daku (armed bandit) in the hills outside Mumbai, and the credit for the arrest is ultimately handed to another officer. His relationship deteriorates further and he takes to drinking fairly heavily. When Jyotsna confronts him, he confides in her.
Jyotsna tries to be supportive and suggests he consider another career. (She is motivated by recent news stories about police brutality and has decided that she will not marry a police officer.) He has always tried to do the right thing, but his well-intentioned actions always seem to be thwarted by the tentacles of corruption in the police force or the political strata. In the alcoholic trans a prisoner is killed by Anant in the jail when he uses 'third degree' and now Anant is not only likely to be arrested and jailed, but also has to lose his entire career. Finally he surrenders to Rama Shetty for political protection. Now, in the clutches of Rama Shetty, Anant has to obey his every order and humiliation. The dirty conditions put by Rama Shetty angers Anant and he kills Rama Shetty and then surrenders voluntarily to the Police for any punishment.
According to film expert Rajesh Subramanian, Amitabh Bachchan was first offered the lead role. The superstar, due to tight schedule, declined it. Om Puri was cast as Anant Welankar and it went on to become a career defining role. | cult, murder, flashback | train | wikipedia | A cop story with a difference; Om Puri nails it.
Ardh Satya is an excellently made film.
Govind Nihalani leaves no stone unturned in his portrayal of the trials and tribulations of the main character Anant Velankar.
He never wanted to be a policeman, but he reluctantly accepted the job because circumstances forced him to as his domineering father did not give him any other option.
Now, as a policeman, Anant is honest, hard-working and justice-seeking.
No, not at all what we get to see in mindless action films with their exaggerated portrayals of policemen going all nuts over their profession and their fake patriotism being the main issue.
Ardh Satya is a realistic film, its authenticity is more present than anything else in it.
It's a true depiction of the life of an Indian cop and it does not submit to stereotypes, which could have been the easiest way to go.As Anant, Om Puri plays a man who tries to fight criminals and those who break the low, but ends up having to fight against injustice within the system itself.
This movie is just his story, not necessarily as a cop.
Nihalani directs this feature with great integrity, and Vijay Tendulkar's script and dialogues are fantastic.
The sequences showing his interaction with Jyotsna, a young lecturer of literature, are stupendous and are of the best in the film, right from their first meeting which opens the film to the time when they are already considering a future marriage.
Even the portrayal of his relationship with his parents, in spite of the minimal screen time it is given, is spot on and is very troubling.Ardh Satya is a one-man show, and needless to say, it is Om Puri who dominates the proceedings with his heartfelt, brilliant performance as Anant.
Puri is an actor who has very rarely delivered something unworthy, although he has been given stuff unworthy of his talent.
This performance ranks amongst the finest works of his illustrious career.
The acting in general is very good in this film, but the rest of the cast are just here to support him, and they do it well.
Amrish Puri, as the tough, violent and authoritarian father, is unsurprisingly excellent.
He manages to convey a lot of his character's essence through just a few scenes.
Shafi Inamdar is also pretty good as Anant's boss.Last but certainly not least, Smita Patil is first-rate in a role that was totally in need of someone with her intellectual capabilities and would have turned into inconsequential by a lesser actress.
This is not at all one of those powerful author-backed roles she was known for playing, but it's still a very special one in her career.
As Jyotsna, she is natural, pleasant and exudes a certain warmth that is missing in the film.
I highly recommend you to observe the scene in which Anant shares with her his deep devastation towards the end.
This scene, devoid of clichés, is one of the finest in the film, showing Om Puri's highpoint but at the same time Patil's wonderfully unconventional reaction of just being there, quietly listening and ultimately lending him a hand of support.
The film's climax is most unexpected, and Ardh Satya is overall an excellent, involving movie that is highly recommended..
Hard Hitting Cinema Classic.
The most definitive movie on Mumbai Police.
This movie has stood the test of times.Om Puri gives a stellar performance, Smita Patil no less.
All the actors have done their best and the movie races on thrilling you at every moment.
This movie shakes your whole being badly and forces you to rethink about many issues that confront our society.This is the story of a cop (Om Puri ) who starts out in his career as a honest man but ultimately degenerates into a killer.
The first attempt in Bollywood to get behind the scenes and expose the depressing truth about Mumbai cops.
After this movie a slew of Bollywood movies got released that exposed the criminal-politician-police nexus.
This trend dominated the Hindi movie scene for more than a decade.
This movie was a moderate box office hit.
Govind Nihalani's directorial venture of Vijay Tendulkar's novel is brilliant.
Om Puri plays an inspector Velankar who is forced to protect underworld don rama shetty, played brilliantly by sadahiv amrapurkar.
This is Govind Nihlan's Most talked about movie.
This is a very good and a classic film.
Smita Patil plays the female lead opposite Om Puri.
Although Sadashiv Amrapurkar has only 4 scenes in the movie he dominates the movie.
This was Sadashiv Amrapurkars acting debut.Om Puri won a national award for this film for the best actor.
Filmfare award winner for Best Film,Story,Supporting Actor(Sadashiv Amrapurkar)..
"Ardh Satya" is one of the finest film ever made in Indian Cinema.
Directed by the great director Govind Nihalani, this one is the most successful Hard Hitting Parallel Cinema which also turned out to be a Commercial Success.
Even today, Ardh Satya is an inspiration for all leading directors of India.The film tells the Real-life Scenario of Mumbai Police of the 70s.
Govind Nihalani creates a very practical Outlay with real life approach of Mumbai Police Environment.Amongst various Police officers & colleagues, the film describes the story of Anand Velankar, a young hot-blooded Cop coming from a poor family.
The film is here revolved in a Plot wherein Anand's constant efforts against crime are trampled by his seniors.This leads to frustrations, as he cannot achieve the desired Job-satisfaction.
Resulting from the frustrations, his anger is expressed in excessive violence in the remand rooms & bars, also turning him to an alcoholic.The Spirit within him is still alive, as he constantly fights the system.
Finally he gets suspended.The Direction is a master piece & thoroughly hard core.
One of the best memorable scenes is when Anand breaks in the Underworld gangster Rama Shetty's house to arrest him, followed by short conversation which is fantastic.
At many scenes, the film has Hair-raising moments.The Practical approach of Script is a major Punch.
Alcoholism, Corruption, Political Influence, Courage, Deceptions all are integral part of Mumbai police even today.
Those aspects are dealt brilliantly.Finally, the films belongs to the One man show, Om Puri portraying Anand Velankar traversing through all his emotions absolutely brilliantly..
Ardh Satya's premise is summarized by the poem of the same name scripted by Dilip Chitre.
The line goes - "ek palde mein napunsaktha, doosre palde mein paurush, aur teek tarazu ke kaante par, ardh satya ?".
"The poem is recited midway in the film by Smita Patil to Om Puri at a resturant.
At the end of the film, Om Puri ends up in exactly the same situation described so aptly in the poem.The film tries mighty hard to do a one-up on the poem.
However, Chitre's words are too powerful, and at best, the film matches up to the poem in every aspect..
A man is given a choice.
If he picks the tougher one there is a good chance he won't be given another.
It is not just true of Anant Welankar, the young policeman in Govind Nihalani's Ardh Satya.
Developed from a poem by the same name, Ardh Satya is about the limbo marking the spot between cowardice and courage.
On a scale of courage, this marks the middle between "impotence" and "manhood".On one side is Impotence, and on the other is Manhood, and right in the middle, is the half-truth.The sub-inspector played by Om Puri is much respected by his colleagues.
For every move this upstart of a cop makes towards the upkeep of his "manhood" – by ramming into the local goon's criminal activity or correcting eve-teasers – he is reminded of his eventual powerlessness.
The system won't allow for his manhood because it is a secular place full of compromises.
For Welankar, there is no half-truth.
There is only trouble at the other end, but he pushes on, all the time answering the inner call to be a man.
All the while, the policeman opts for courage, but is forced to accept cowardice.
Perhaps, there is no Ardh Satya and it is all just plain lies.
But then, what's the point of the complete truth if it won't allow you another choice..
Inspectar velankar- a definite role for Om Puri.
Directed by Govind Nihalani, this is definite cop film of Indian cinema.
May be the first one which portrayed the stark reality of corruption in the police force & politics with no holds barred & how it effects on a young cop.
A man forced to join a career of a cop by his cop father.
Agreed that we grew up watching lot of good cop/bad cop Hindi films but this is different.
Today's generation, which grown up watching dark & realistic films like- 'Satya', 'Company' may be consider it inferior product in comparison but look at the time of its making.
The film was made absolutely off beat tone in the time when people didn't pay much attention to such kind of cinema & yet it becomes a most sought after cop film in class & mass audience when it released.
For Om Puri its first breakthrough in mainstream Hindi cinema & he delivered a class performance as Inspector Velankar.
Its more than cop character, he internalized a lot which is something original in acting.
Watch his scenes with his father whom he hates & Smita whom he loves.
Smita Patil maintained the dignity of her character to the expected level.
Shafi Inamdar was truly a discovery for me & he's a brilliant character actor if given a chance & here in some of the scenes he outsmarted even Om. The movie is also a debut of a promising villain on Indian screen- Sadashiv Amrapurkar as 'Rama Shetty'.
It's another story that he didn't get such a meaty role & almost forgotten today as one of the loud villain of Dharmendra's B grade action films.
Watch the scene where Om 1st time becomes a rebel for his father (played by Amrish Puri) & next both are sharing wine together.
How inner truth started revealing for both the character with confronting feelings of love & hate for each other.
Two faces of Indian Police Force- Masculinity & Impotency and in between lies- half truth (ardh satya)
Kudos to Nihalani's touch.
The film won 2 National Awards as Best Hindi Feature Film & Best Actor- Om Puri & 3 Filmfare Awards in Best Film, Best Director & Best Supporting Actor Categories.
Recommended to all who are interested in nostalgia of serious Hindi films.Ratings- 8/10.
After 'Aakrosh' , this was the second film for Govind Nihalani as a director.Till this movie was made there was no audience for documentaries in India.This movie proved a point that a documentary can fulfil the requirements of a commercial film without diluting its essence.
She was not like an usual heroine to do the usual stuff of running around the trees and shrubs.At one time,she even gave up her love when the hero's ruthlessness touched the roof top.There was another character in this movie, which was played by Om Puri contemporary, Naseeruddin Shah.He played as an inspector-turned-alcoholic character.The role conveyed the message of the end result of a honest cop who rubbed the wrong side of the system which also gave the viewers a chance to forecast the hero's ending.In his debut film,Sadashiv Amrapurkar captivated the audience with his cameo role which ultimately won him the best supporting actor by the filmfare.The cop in the movie was not a complete straight forward personality he was able to adjust to the system to an extent.
The anger which left half handedly continued in Govind Nihalani's other film "Drohkaal".
Even after two decades, this movie is remembered just because of the director and the entire crew.
The Best Movie Ever.
The performance by Om Puri, Smita Patil, and Sadashiv Amrapurkar and the whole chemistry comes off nicely, along with the minimalist approach to story telling and direction by Govind Nihlani.
The dialogues by Vijay Tendulkar is also great.
I have not seen another movie like this.
You cannot not be impressed by this movie.
Om Puri is the young man caught between his sense of duty and his inability to fight the system.
Sadhashiv as Rama Shetty gives just about the right touch to the movie with his smiling and soft speaking villain.
The first meeting of Anand Velankar with Rama Shetty's at Sadhashiv's place is absoulely stunning.
Smita Patil does not play a main role, but her part is also not distracting from the main plot.
And to add to this all Kafi Inamdar plays the role of a cop who has come to terms with the system and its workings.
He is also the 'guru' of Om Puri and helps him whenever he gets into trouble.The movie not only brings to focus the difficulties faced by a police officer trying to do his duty but also the other side of brutalities in police custody.
Om Puri captures hopelessness and the burning desire to break free in this exceptional performance in Ardh Satya.
Govind Nihalani's Path-Breaking 1983 Cult-Classic 'Ardh Satya' is indeed A Landmark!
A Hard-Hitting, Mind-Bending Cop-Drama, that offers a solid punch!
Even the performances, are spell-binding.'Ardh Satya' Synopsis: A newly appointed police rookie deals with corruption, romance, and brutality.'Ardh Satya' left me astonished.
As mentioned before, Its a Hard-Hitting, Mind-Bending Cop-Drama, that offers a solid punch!
The Journey of its protagonist, Anant Velankar, played impeccably by Om Puri, is haunting, blunt & ruthless.
Govind Nihalani's Direction is Remarkable.
Cinematography, Editing & Art Design, are good.Performance-Wise: As mentioned before, Om Puri is impeccable in the lead role.
He Won a National-Award for Best-Actor & Deserved To. Its a Hallmark Performance, that deserves an ovation.
Smita Patil, like always, is fantastic.
Amrish Puri is excellent.
Sadashiv Amrapurkar is superb, while Shafi Inamdar delivers his careers finest performance.
Naseeruddin Shah is as usual.On the whole, 'Ardh Satya' is A Landmark!
Among Hindi Cinema's Best Films!.
Half-Truth and All Lies.
While Govind Nihalani's 'Ardh Satya' may not be the only movie of its kind (a decent cop trying to survive the corrupt system within the police force), its rawness, insight, grit and Nihalani's minimal approach in making the film make this film something outstanding.
There have been numerous movies made since that attempt to tackle the very issues 'Ardh Satya' presents but hardly any of them (with a few exceptions like E.
Themes like alcoholism, corruption, deceptions and power play are dealt with sensibly.The subtlety in art direction, dialogue and acting, toned down score is very effective.
Anant's despair and helplessness in a corrupt world where power trumps, his choice of joining the academy and his resentment towards his father are easy to relate to.
His and Jyotsna's love story is a treat to watch and a welcome angle to the film.'Ardh Satya' showcases Om Puri's acting as he delivers a transcendent performance.
He captures Anant's nuances with conviction and appears very natural on screen.
Amrish Puri, Shafi Inamdar and Naseeruddin Shah (in a small role) are superb.
Smita Patil deserves special mention.
How does one play an ordinary character so extraordinarily?
Watch Ms. Patil in this for an answer.
Her performance is natural to the core.
She doesn't try to overshadow anyone nor is it one of those 'award-winning' roles but Smita Patil's presence beautifully balances the film.
Her warmth, subtle charm, sincerity and quiet attentiveness complement 'Ardh Satya'.I found the ending a little predictable but this is mostly because I have watched so many movies of this kind that have come out since (but pale in comparison).
A film with a strong theme.
A social film with a strong theme.
based on corruption in the political system, police and society in India-that's what Ardh Satya is all about.Story is about an honest and efficient cop who soon finds that he cannot stay that way in the corrupt system that prevails in India.The concept is very strong.
It is somewhat an explicit film, with hardly any background music at all.
Acting is good on the part of Om Puri and Naseruddin Shah.
The film is also not suited for kids.7 stars.
hard hitting, brave and real: om Puri take a bow!!.
Ardh Satya is not just a movie on corruption in police force (we have seen this in quite a few ) but rather this is the journey of a person who is searching, it seems, the purpose of his life, who is trying to seek the somewhat passive masculinity that resides within him.
the human weaknesses, existential crisis, emotional catharsis and angst of the policeman all done in such a brilliant manner that you can just feel awestruck at the marvelous portrayal by gem of an actor- Om Puri.
this is clearly the best performance of his illustrious career.
if not for the hard hitting content watch the movie just for the angry young man Om Puri whose performance will fill you full of admiration for the man and his craft..
Pathbreaking cop film.
Govind Nihalini started his career with AAKROSH, he made pathbreaking films which didn't follow commercial formula.
Ardh Satya is a cop film, but with a difference, being it's simplicity.
The film became a benchmark and still remembered as one of the best cop films.
It is seen through the eyes of Om Puri an inspector who faces problems while living an honest life.
It also has several sub plots which are well handled like Naseeruddin Shah's track who plays an alcoholic suspended cop and also Om Puri's interaction with his father Amrish Puri with whom he shares a love hate relationshipDirection is superbOm Puri is brilliant as always, he gives his best to the role and is simply brilliant, Smita Patil does well Naseeruddin Shah too is amazing, Sadashiv Amrapurkar is amazing as Rama Shetty, Amrish Puri is as always brilliant, rest are all good |
tt4216984 | The Wolf Man | Sometime in the early twentieth century, after learning of the death of his brother, Larry Talbot (Lon Chaney, Jr.) returns to his ancestral home in Llanwelly, Wales to reconcile with his estranged father, Sir John Talbot (Claude Rains). While there, Larry becomes romantically interested in a local girl named Gwen Conliffe (Evelyn Ankers), who runs an antique shop. As a pretext to converse with her, he purchases a silver-headed walking stick decorated with a wolf. Gwen tells him that it represents a werewolf (which she defines as a man who changes into a wolf "at certain times of the year.")
Throughout the film, various villagers recite a poem, whenever the subject of werewolves comes up:
Even a man who is pure in heart, and says his prayers by night;
May become a wolf when the wolfbane blooms and the autumn moon is bright.
That night, Larry attempts to rescue Gwen's friend Jenny from what he believes to be a sudden wolf attack. He kills the beast with his new walking stick, but is bitten on the chest in the process. A gypsy fortuneteller named Maleva (Maria Ouspenskaya) reveals to Larry that the animal which bit him was actually her son Bela (Bela Lugosi) in the form of a wolf. She also reveals that Larry will transform into a wolf as well since he who is bitten by a werewolf and lives will turn into one himself.
Talbot transforms into a wolf-like creature and stalks the village, first killing the local gravedigger. Talbot retains vague memories of being a werewolf and wanting to kill, and continually struggles to overcome his condition. He is finally bludgeoned to death by his father with his own silver walking stick after attacking Gwen. Sir John Talbot watches in horror as the dead werewolf transforms into his son's human form as the local police arrive on the scene. | haunting | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0003489 | Gli ultimi giorni di Pompei | In Pompeii 79AD, Glaucus and Jone are in love with each other. Arbaces, the Egyptian High Priest, is determined to conquer her. Glaucus buys the blind slave Nydia who is mishandled by her owner.
Nydia falls in love with him and asks Arbaces for his help. He gives her a potion to make Glaucus fall in love with him. In fact it is a poison which will destroy his mind. Arbaces' disciple Apoecides threatens to reveal publicly his wrongdoings. Arbaces kills him and accuses Glaucus of the crime. He locks Nydia in a cellar to prevent her from speaking.
Glaucus is condemned to be thrown to the lions. Nydia manages to escape and tells Glaucus' friend Claudius what happened. Claudius rushes to the Circus to accuse Arbaces and the crowd decides that Arbaces and not Glaucus should be thrown to the lions.
The Vesuvius starts erupting and a widespread panic ensues. Under the shock, Glaucus recovers his mind. Blind Nydia, the only one to find her way in the darkness caused by the rain of ashes, leads Glaucus and Jone to safety and finds peace by drowning herself. | romantic, murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0104843 | Medusa: Dare to Be Truthful | The film begins with the camera panning through pictures of Medusa's album covers and film posters eventually showing her lying in a bed while getting a massage and her hair done. She starts telling the viewers about how lonely she feels since her tour ended. The film then flashes back to when Medusa was rehearsing her "Blonde Leading the Blonde Tour". After being crushed by a giant genitalia statue, Medusa explains in a voice-over how the tour was a technical nightmare. Eventually, the tour begins in the Philippines, only for Medusa to find out that she was performing during the eruption of a volcano. In an interview, Medusa's manager Benny explains how Medusa's first single "Like a Video" ("Like a Virgin") was a hit for MTV, leading into a parody performance of Madonna's "Blond Ambition" version. After that, Medusa is shown talking to her boyfriend. The tour then moves to Japan where Medusa tells her poverty stricken dancers that they'll be receiving a pay cut. Another shows women protesting Medusa and her director showing how Medusa gained the inspiration to shoot a music video involving robbing a store. Finally, the tour moves to the U.S where Medusa and her dancers play a game of Truth or Dare. After that, she is shown being at a party where a director who tries to get her to star in a movie similar to "Heidi". Later, while Medusa is listing negative things about people, Bobcat Goldthwait shows up and gets offended when he sees Medusa gag after he called her show "neat". After that, Medusa is shown reciting lines from "Romeo and Juliet " while a voice-over explains that Medusa is planning to star in the Broadway show after the tour, and that her ex- husband Shane Pencil was helping her, but Shane gets fed up with Medusa and he leaves. Another voice-over during one of Medusa's show explains her she almost died during "Expose Yourself" ("Express Yourself") as she got electrocuted. After that, Medusa is shown visiting her dog's grave, only to find out she was at the wrong grave. While in Atlanta, Police Officers show up and explain that Medusa will be arrested if she shows her "muffin". Medusa performs "Party in My Pants" and "Vague" ( "Like a Prayer", "Into the Groove", and "Vogue"). Medusa then goes to the officers to get arrested only for them to ask her for an autograph. Finally, the tour finishes in New York and while Medusa is saying goodbye to the dancers, it is revealed that Medusa was viewing the footage while trying to find an ending. She ends up in the hospital to get a toy dino removed while a montage of clips plays with "Life May End" ( "Live to Tell") . The dancers come to visit her, and the film ends with them trying to sleep. | satire | train | wikipedia | Hysterical!.
Julie Brown hilariously demolishes Madonna's attempt at a rockumentary with gut ripping humor and truly original and catchy songs that rival Madonna's own.
Cinematography and sets are top notch.Kathy Griffin and Chris Elliott offer their own injections of comedy that enhances and compliments this film.
Appearances by Bobcat Goldthwait and Wink Martindale, as themselves, is an added bonus.It's hard to tell if Brown's performance is meant to insult or playfully tease Madonna, though I hardly think the Material Girl would find humor in it.My Favorite line: "Why don't you come here (to the Phillipines); all they eat is dog and I'm a vegetarian.".
The funniest spoof ever!.
This parody is cleverly done: from the songs (Express Yourself becomes Expose Yourself, Like a Prayer is now Party in my Pants and Vogue is now Vague) to the fake interviews of the cast of the show, this movie is hilarious.
Remember Madonna saying she didn't know about the rain season in Asia?
In this one, she doesn't know about the volcano season.
It is a precious jewel.
They got a lot of money on that spoof, and it pays off.
Highly recommended!!!.
Now this is great television!!!.
This is one of Julie's greatest tributes to music, alongside her "Trapped in the Body of a White Girl" album.
To quote the great Medusa "Dare to go bare, just wear your underwear, you'll get a ride home everytime" - Wow!!!
Now that is some good advice.
"You can dance, at my party!
Yeah, justify your dance shoes!.....You're invited to the party in my pants.
Yeah come on boy let's dance, at the party in my pants" Julie Brown is hilarious!!!
It is almost sad that this video is only 51 minutes long, but every minute is awesome!!!.
super!!.
This movie was a riot, it pokes fun of "Madonna - Truth Or Dare" in all the right places.
I love Madonna & I love Julie Brown.
How could I ask for more..Julie's spoof of "Vogue", entitled "Vague" was hysterical..
"Kelly LeBrock thinks she's great, she's just cold boogers on a paper plate".
"Brooke Shields, Dawber, Pam personality of Spam"!!
I could've died!
And just wait till you see what she can do with a watermelon!!.
Hilarious parody that is faithful to Madonna's original..
"Medusa: Dare to be Truthful" is an outrageously funny parody that is a fine companion to the original, "Madonna: Truth or Dare".
Julie Brown's brilliant creation skewers Madonna's highly entertaining documentary (although it wasn't exactly daring, insightful, candid, or truthful) with a faithfulness to detail, right down to the packaging.
I highly recommend this for Madonna fans, Julie Brown fans, or anyone who enjoys sharp and clever parody..
J is for Julie Brown!.
After all these years, I am puzzled as to why Julie Brown (West Coast) isn't a household name or a hugely famous comedic star.
She is one of the funniest females on the planet.
In this spoof, she takes on Madonna who is one of her favorite targets.
She is Medusa, a hugely successful singer, like Madonna who also happened to have documentary "Truth or Dare." Julie Brown spoofs Madonna as Medusa who came from Wisconsin, the land of dairy and beer.
I remember the segment where she went to Wisconsin to visit her family and a grave.
I don't remember if it was a parent or her pet.
I remember somebody saying that Medusa did nothing original.
She was just copying others.
I have to say that I hope this spoof documentary is available on DVD somewhere.
Julie Brown was at her best mocking and spoofing others..
Madonna gets a good skewering...she was way overdue.
In the spoof-crazy 1990s, it was a good idea to send-up the reigning queen of MTV, Madonna.
Impeccably copying the look and style of 1991's "Madonna: Truth or Dare", star and co-creator Julie Brown was not only precise in her satirical prodding, she was quite timely as well.
This Showtime production runs just under an hour, with maniacal Brown not simply singing and dancing à la Maddy, but lampooning the video vamp to the nth degree.
The original songs--take-offs on Madonna's proved hits--are bits of pop-genius in their own right, and Brown sells this catty, nasty, silly special with unabashed vigor.
The alternating black-and-white and color photography gets the look of "Truth or Dare" down pat, while our new heroine, Medusa, battles with her ass-kissing staff until she gets her way on everything.
Some ideas don't come to fruition, and many are simply run into the ground without benefit of nimble handling.
Still, Brown is so compulsively watchable (and likable), she kicks this thing into campy high gear with her unstoppable energy and unflagging chutzpah. |
tt0067828 | A Taste of Evil | Susan Wilcox (Barbara Parkins) is a young woman who was raped by an unknown man when she was a 13-year-old. Traumatized by the experience, she suffered a mental breakdown, did not speak a word for two years, and was entered in a Swiss sanatorium. Upon leaving the psychiatric institution for the first time, she returns to her old home where her mother Miriam (Barbara Stanwyck) is now in an unstable marriage with Harold Jennings (William Windom), an alcoholic. Susan returns to the woods where she was raped, and is followed there by someone. She suspects that this person is Harold, but Miriam tells her that Harold left her the previous night.
One night Susan sees a shadow by her window, then finds a dead man in her bathtub. She faints, regaining consciousness later in the presence of Dr. Michael Lomas (Roddy McDowall). There is no trace of a body, and it seems clear to Susan that someone is trying to drive her insane. Miriam believes that Susan is hallucinating, and begins to doubt the wisdom of Susan's release from the hospital. On a different night, Susan is chased out of the mansion by someone she thinks is Harold, and outside finds a dead body in the car. She turns to John (Arthur O'Connell) - an old family friend and the gardener - for help, only to find the car is missing when she returns.
After telling Dr. Lomas about her experiences, he concludes that her subconscious is rejecting Harold. Regardless, Susan begins to believe that Harold was the one who raped her. The same day that Harold returns to the mansion, someone from the woods calls out to Susan. She goes into the woods and finds the same dead man, who grabs her leg. She flees and hides in the cabin where she was raped. Harold arrives shortly afterward; he is later found dead, apparently shot by Susan. Miriam is told by the authorities that Susan will be returned to the sanatorium in Switzerland. It is then revealed that Miriam has been conspiring with John to subvert Susan's recovery, in order to disinherit her from her father's will. Miriam admits her lifelong jealousy of Susan, because Susan's father gave her more attention than he gave Miriam. It was John who raped Susan when she was 13.
A stalker targets Miriam, appearing to be Harold. She assumes that John is terrorizing her, and she fires him. The stalking continues unabated. One rainy night, Miriam catches sight of the stalker, who does appear to be Harold. John arrives shortly afterward, and Miriam shoots him fatally, it appears. She tries to leave the mansion, only to find Harold in the doorway. Driven to hysteria, she screams that she "made Susan kill" him. In the wake of this confession, the "stalking" is revealed as a counter-conspiracy masterminded by Dr. Lomas. Harold is alive, his "shooting" a ruse to lure Miriam into a confession. Miriam coldly allows herself to be arrested. | flashback | train | wikipedia | I fell asleep watching this movie late one night and woke up assuming I would one day get the opportunity to see it again.
Barbra Stanwyck and Roddy McDowell star in this chilling sleeper about a woman who return home to a country estate after spending years in a mental institution after being abducted there as a child.
Some truly scary scenes with some great plot twists that always keep you guessing.
I'm pretty picky when it comes to movies and I would highly recommend it to any horror/suspense/mystery buff.
Two scenes that stuck with me all those years were the shadowy figure entering the child's playhouse and the main character looking out a second story window and seeing someone standing on the lawn watching her on a dark and windy night.
Classic Chiller with Parkins and Stanwyck in Top Form.
To my surprise, it is just as effective watching today as I remember seeing it as a child.
There are many genuine thrills and chills as Barbara Parkins plays a young woman returning to the creepy mansion where she was traumatized as a child.
Barbara Stanwyck plays her mother.
Parkins was an underrated actress and is truly memorable in her role of the terrorized girl.
Stanwyck is dignified and elegant and this film is a reminder of the great talent that was hers.
A Taste of Evil is a very interesting movie that tackles a pretty big issue for it's time.
Anyways, the film starts with the young girl who is alone in her playhouse when a man (who we don't see) enters and attacks her off-screen.
After spending years in a psychiatric institution, Susan travels home with her mother Miriam to tackle her demons.
We meet some potential suspects of the rape; the mother's boyfriend Harold and a long time groundskeeper John.
Susan sees someone lurking in the shadows, she feels someone following her in the woods, and a very dead looking Harold keeps popping up around the house.
About halfway through the film we discover what/who is causing these strange occurrences, and I must say I was surprised by what it was and who assaulted Susan years ago.
It's a typical 1970's made for television thriller which I love, but this one adds a lot more such as the shocking storyline of the rape.
The acting was alright, Barbara Stanwyck was the best part about it.
"A Taste of Evil" focuses on a woman, Susan, who returns to her family estate after having been institutionalized following a sexual assault that she experienced as a young girl in the woods outside the home.
Soon after arriving home, however, visions, flashbacks, and sinister occurrences galore begin to intrude on her life.I was actually surprised by how darkly and disturbingly this film began—a young girl is sitting inside a playhouse built by her parents, isolated in the woods.
Especially for being in the early seventies.Based on Jimmy Sangster's Hammer-produced "Scream of Fear," "A Taste of Evil" was also scripted by Sangster, an produced by Aaron Spelling.
Like all of the glorious made-for-television films of the decade, "A Taste of Evil" is wonderfully atmospheric, with its obvious staged interiors, as well as the moody photography of the mansion exteriors (John Llewellyn Moxey, who later directed the phenomenal Christmas horror tele-flick, "Home for the Holidays," directs here with a keen eye on mood).
There are some fantastic scenes in the woods post-Susan's return, as well as nightmarish sequences and appearances of her apparent assailant.The film benefits greatly from having a phenomenal cast; Barbara Stanwyck leads as the matriarch, while Barbara Parkins is adequately emotive as the unstable woman.
Roddy McDowall is a welcome presence as the psychiatrist, and William Windom is sleazy and sinister as Susan's drunken stepfather.Overall, this is an enjoyable and at times legitimately suspenseful film.
The film's plot twists are also surprisingly wicked.
An enjoyable watch for a rainy evening; recommended highly to fans of the made-for-television horror and thriller films of the 1970s.
There were some classic jump up and scare-you-silly scenes as only Barbara Stanwyck could do.
If anyone knows where I can get a copy of this movie, I'd be truly grateful.
A Taste of Evil has remained with me since I was a child.
I searched filmographies of Arthur O'Connell to actually get the title for this film.
I remember the playhouse, I remember the sound of Barbara Stanwyck's voice, especially with key lines.
A Taste of Evil is an unintentional funny movie.
As mentioned before, story revolves around a daughter who comes home to an estate on the outskirts of San Francisco.
Movie has an excellent lovely Barbara Parkins, underrated legend Barbara Stanwyck, Roddy McDowell, and Arthur O'Connell, most notably for "Bus Stop" with Marilyn Monroe.
It is interesting because the first half of the movie is focused on Barbara Parkins and then the 2nd half is focused on Barbara Stanwyck.
However, the camp award goes to Barbara Stanwyck.
The funniest scene, which my friend and I keep laughing at, is when Barbara Stanwyck is cooking.
Barbara acts so bi-polar with a manic look on her face, she yells at Barbara Parkins as they leave to hunt, "Work up a healthy appetite, I'll have hamburgers piled right up to the ceiling." You have to see the scene to see what I am referring too.
As the movie progresses, you see funny scenes as a Raggedy Ann doll floating in the bathtub.
All the humor is on Barbara Stanwyck's facial expressions in the 2nd half.
Barbara Stanwyck Chiller.
Although I've only seen this film once, it lingers in my memory: I saw it at age 1O in 1971 when it was originally broadcast on television.
Although the rest of the cast, i.e. William Windom, Roddy McDowall & Barbara Perkins, etc.
did fine jobs with their roles, it's Stanwyck's playing of Miriam Jennings which lingers in my memory: talk about an unsympathetic role for an older Hollywood star to take!
If fans of Davis and Crawford doing their bits in the macabre thought Stanwyck stopped with THE NIGHT WALKER, think again!
Although it probably looks a bit tired and dated today, I remember the diabolical twist as being memorably sadistic and cruel plus there was a helping of LES DIABOLIQUES in the plotline.
The atmosphere was creepy - thunder and lightning and all - and I remember sinister Barbara dismissing her gardener (Arthur O'Connell) thusly: "You have until noon"....
GOOD CAST, GREAT PLOT, ENTERTAINING!.
TASTE OF EVIL is a wonderful suspense film from two horror masters.
The director John Llewellyn Moxey, who directed such great horrors as: Desire the Vampire, Killjoy, No Place to Hide, Home For the Holidays, and the famous TV film The Night Stalker, all made-for-TV movies.
The other horror master, writer Jimmy Sangster, who wrote excellent horror for: the TV film GOOD AGAINST EVIL, TV film SCREAM PRETTY PEGGY, many Hammer Horror films and the most famous and scariest KOLCHAK: THE NIGHT STALKER episode, HORROR IN THE HEIGHTS.
I'm glad I have this film, it is fantastic!SUMMARY: At a young age, Susan Wilcox (Barbara Parkins), is traumatically raped and goes into shock.
Many years later, her mother Miriam Jennings (Barbara Stanwyck) takes her home to their gigantic mansion.
While home, Susan sees her stepfather, Harold Jennings (William Windom), dead and his dead body floating around the house.
What is the secret of Susan's homecoming?I love the setting in the creepy old mansion.
The acting is so-so, Barbara Parkins does the best.
Hot off her success on The Big Valley, Barbara Stanwyck acted in a couple of spooky television movies.
In A Taste of Evil, she plays the overbearing, loving mother to Barbara Parkins, who was traumatized after being raped at a party when she was a little girl.
Parkins has finally recovered enough to return home, and Stanwyck tries to protect her from anything that might trigger a remembrance of the incident.
However, pretty much everything about her childhood home and the people who live there remind her of it, and soon she starts hallucinating!No offense to Barbara Stanwyck, but this is a typical tv movie.
The only good news is there's nothing wrong with Barbara Stanwyck's performance.
Susan Wilcox (Barbara Parkins) returns home after a lengthy stay abroad, in a mental institution.
As a child, Susan was brutally attacked and raped in her playhouse.
Once home, her mother, Miriam Jennings (Barbara Stanwyck) hopes she can settle in and readjust.
Susan is re-introduced to Her mother's second husband, Harold (William Windom), who hasn't seen her since she was little.
Everything goes along swimmingly, until Susan begins having flashbacks, and believes that a mysterious man is following her.
Susan keeps seeing a dark figure lurking in the shadows.
Is Susan really seeing these things, or simply regressing into a less rational state?
When she returns to her old playhouse in the woods, something happens there that seems to send Susan over the edge for good.
A TASTE OF EVIL is a tricky, made-for-TV suspense thriller w/ some jolts, and a double twist at the end.
The plot of A TASTE OF EVIL is a pastiche of cliches.
Stop me if you've heard this before: A young woman, raped as a child and just released after years in a mental institution, comes home only to find herself seeing and hearing things that prove elusive when she summons witnesses.
Even a plot this hackneyed can be revived to a certain extent, but "A Taste of Evil" is just uninspired through-and-through.
Still achingly familiar, at least that film was considerably more suspenseful, and contained one or two surprises."A Taste of Evil" is efficient enough within its very limited aspirations, and Stanwick makes an impression in her role, but the film still several notches below the high standard of numerous made-for-TV suspensers of the seventies..
Writer Jimmy Sangster's revision of his own "Scream of Fear" from 1961 involves a young woman returning to her family's home in San Francisco after spending several years in a Swiss institution; seems she was attacked by an unknown man when she was a child, however the familiar surroundings quickly begin playing tricks with her mind--or is someone trying to drive her insane?
Lumbering made-for-TV yarn at first features Barbara Parkins running around the opulent woodland grounds in a terrified state, then exchanges Parkins' screams for those of Barbara Stanwyck's, playing Parkins' mother.
Parkins keeps shooing Stanwyck off to the store or away to the airport, while Arthur O'Connell shuffles around as a simpleton groundskeeper and William Windom keeps popping up as a drunken stepfather (always with the same pained expression on his face).
In case you want to watch a horror movie for the first time and need to be sure from beforehand that you won't be disappointment with the outcome, it always helps to research the names that are involved.
For example, in the case of "A Taste of Evil", I felt pretty comfortable thanks to the involvement of three reliable names (excluding the cast).
The film comes from the nearly inexhaustible stable of producer Aaron Spelling.
The man in the director's chair is named John Llewellyn Moxey and his repertoire is also quite astounding, with legendary titles such as "Horror Hotel", "The Night Stalker", "Nightmare in Badham County" and about three dozen of other worthwhile titles.
How could "A Taste of Evil" possibly go wrong, especially if you also take into consideration that cast features a few impressive names like Barbara Stanwyck, Arthur O'Connell and Roddy McDowall?
Well, "A Taste of Evil" certainly doesn't disappoint and I won't hesitate for one second to recommend it to fellow horror fans, but still one of the aforementioned prominent names cheated a little bit
As the story slowly unfolded and tension mounted, I suddenly became more and more conscious that the plot felt familiar.
Poor Susan Wilcox returns home to her mother Miriam and the parental house, after she spent seven long years in a Swiss mental hospital to recover from the trauma of getting assaulted in her garden playhouse at the tender age of 13.
Oh that's right
it's as good as identical to that of the unsung Hammer treasure "Taste of Fear / "Scream of Fear".
Sneaky Jimmy Sangster must have thought that nobody in the United States ever saw or even heard about this film that already got released in 1961, so if he changed a few details left and right and gave different names to the main characters, he could cash a quick and easily earned paycheck!
The build-up takes quite long and feels overly derivative, because you know of course that somebody is deliberately trying to push Susan into another mental breakdown and that her hallucinations are staged.
"A Taste of Evil" touches upon a few sensitive themes, like child molesting and family rivalry, and the extended climax (taking place during a good old-fashioned pouring rain thunderstorm) is action-packed and wild..
A TASTE OF EVIL (John Llewellyn Moxey, 1971; TV) **.
This is basically a reworking of the classic Hammer thriller TASTE OF FEAR aka SCREAM OF FEAR (1961; a re-acquaintance with which will follow presently) – from the same scriptwriter, the late Jimmy Sangster – with the setting changed from the French Riviera to a San Francisco estate.
Apart from the fact that the same plot had been done to death – by Hammer and Sangster themselves – in the intervening decade and its being a TV-movie, the results here are still mediocre when compared to the classy original (even if that had owed a good deal to the French suspense masterpiece DIABOLIQUE {1954} to begin with), largely because the frissons appear entirely telegraphed in this case!This is somewhat surprising given that many of the people behind it were cinema veterans and, what is more, hardly new to the genre: director Moxey had made the splendid occult horror THE CITY OF THE DEAD aka HORROR HOTEL (1960), leading lady Barbara Parkins would do THE MEPHISTO WALTZ in the same year as this, star Barbara Stanwyck had been in William Castle's superior THE NIGHT WALKER (1964) and Roddy McDowall was a staple of the PLANET OF THE APES franchise; incidentally, Moxey and Stanwyck previously collaborated on THE HOUSE THAT WOULDN'T DIE (1970; also made for TV, and which I own as well but have yet to watch).
Anyway, the narrative centers around a girl who is raped at age 13 during a family party by an unknown assailant; this episode sends her to an 8 year spell in an institution but, when she returns home, begins to display alarming signs of being far from cured!
She continually sees her alcoholic stepfather's corpse all over the place when he is actually supposed to be away on business – her mother (Stanwyck) is obviously concerned and calls in doctor McDowall to review her condition; also involved in all of this is simpleton handy-man Arthur O'Connell.However, while the original kept piling on the twists at the climax so that one had little time to ask himself whether they were plausible or not, this one demonstrates only mild ingenuity throughout.
A silly film with a lot of serious plot holes..
When the film begins, a young girl, Susan, is attacked and raped.
Suddenly the film jumps ahead many years and you learn, through some clumsy exposition, that for the intervening time Susan (Barbara Parkins) has been in a mental institution.
A bit later, she sees another dead guy and runs away to tell others...and when she returns this one is gone as well.
It seems possible, at least temporarily, but it a plot device way overused in films.
Also, if Barbara Parkins seems familiar, she's one of the folks who starred in "Valley of the Dolls"--a truly awful and stupid (but thoroughly enjoyable) bad movie of the late 60s..
Too Similar to the Hammer Film.
A Taste of Evil (1971) ** (out of 4) Disappointing made-for-TV movie is pretty much a remake of Hammer's SCREAM OF FEAR.
In this film, a young girl is raped and years later she (Barbara Parkins) returns home only to fear that someone is trying to drive her crazy.
Her mother (Barbara Stanwyck) is trying to figure out if her daughter is crazy or perhaps there's someone really after her (and especially since the rapist was never caught).
A TASTE OF EVIL comes from writer Jimmy Sangster who also wrote the previously mentioned Hammer movie so it's clear that he knew what he was doing.
Director John Llewellyn Moxey had previously made THE CITY OF THE DEAD but he doesn't bring any of the same style or beauty to this thing.
The entire movie has a very slow pace as if the director wasn't sure what he wanted to do with the material or perhaps he just knew the material wasn't all that good.
Parkins is pretty good in the role of the daughter but the screenplay doesn't give her much to do outside of screaming and running around.
Stanwyck is always watchable but this here certainly wasn't among her best work.
The story is decent but nothing much is done with it and this is especially true if you've seen the original version, which was one of the best thrillers from the studio..
Barbara Parkins finds her Cabin of the Dolls..
A decade in boarding school hasn't made troubled heiress Barbara Parkins forget the brutal rape she suffered as a child.
Her now widowed mother (the legendary Barbara Stanwyck) has remarried, but Parkins doesn't like her new stepfather (William Windom), a drunk she suspects was the rapist.
With the help of doctor Roddy McDowall, her mother and handyman Arthur O'Connell, Parkins tries to put her past into perspective but the past is far too complicated...
Stanwyck takes the bizarre part and runs with it, even knowing that it's another hag horror.
Think of this story as the continuation of Stanwyck's "Double Indemnity" character had she lived, close to 30 years older but just as evil as ever. |
tt3110552 | Hotline Miami | === Plot ===
Hotline Miami, taking place in Miami in 1989, employs an unreliable narrator and events are sometimes presented out of chronological order. The player takes the role of an unnamed man dubbed "Jacket" by fans for his distinctive letterman jacket. One day, Jacket receives a voicemail about a supposed delivery of 'cookies' to his home. He finds a package outside which contains a rooster mask and instructions to perform a hit on a group of criminals and steal a briefcase in their possession, threatening that he is being watched and that "failure is not an option." After Jacket completes this mission, he receives further messages on his answering machine, each asking him to take care of an innocuous "problem" at a specific address; these locations invariably contain a criminal operation, usually run by the Russian mob, that he must eliminate. Throughout the game Jacket has visions where he is confronted over his actions by three masked figures; the cryptic rooster-masked Richard, the hostile owl-masked Rasmus, and the sympathetic horse-masked Don Juan.
During a raid on the estate of a movie producer, Jacket rescues a woman who was being sexually abused and brings her home. In another mission Jacket is called to a phone company where he finds everyone dead except for a lone biker, whom Jacket then kills. Jacket can find other animal-masked killers dead or dying during his missions, and after each mission he visits a store or restaurant where the same bearded clerk greets him. "Beard" gives him encouragement and free samples of merchandise.
Jacket's perception of reality becomes increasingly surreal. He begins to see the talking corpses of his victims during his everyday life. Beard abruptly dies, his bloody corpse remaining at his places of work, and he is replaced by an abrasive bald man, Richter, who offers Jacket nothing. One day Jacket arrives home to find his girlfriend murdered and a man in a rat mask on his couch, who shoots him in the head. The attack puts Jacket in a coma; he wakes up in a hospital and overhears that his attacker is in police custody, whereupon he escapes and storms Miami police headquarters.
Jacket discovers his attacker was Richter, who had also been following the orders of threatening voicemails, and steals the file on the police's investigation of the killings. With this he raids the mob-owned nightclub the calls were tracked to, finding the address of the headquarters of Miami's Russian Mafia. Jacket then goes to this address and kills the syndicate's leaders.
The game's main story ends with Jacket killing off the Russian Mafia's leaders, but afterwards the player can play bonus levels as the Biker from the telephone company. Another recipient of the mysterious phonecalls, the Biker has gotten fed up of carrying out their assignments and is trying to track the callers down. From raiding the phone company the Biker traces the calls to the mob-owned nightclub, and when Jacket arrives the Biker kills him. At the nightclub the Biker finds a hidden basement, where two janitors have been sending out the mysterious phonecalls. If the player has found secret letters hidden in Jacket's levels, the Biker will crack their computer's password and learn the janitors work for 50 Blessings, an ostensibly-peaceful patriotic organization, and have been using its membership to carry out killings to derail an alliance between the Soviet Union and the United States. The Janitors boast their "experiment" is only the "tip of the iceberg" of a larger conspiracy. Without the password, the janitors claim they were acting out of boredom and mock the Biker's attempt to rationalize his actions.
=== Characters ===
Most of these names are unofficial because they were not named in-game.
Jacket - He is the main protagonist of the game. He wears various masks and performs a number of brutal assassinations in response to cryptic messages left on his answering machine. He is later attacked by another masked assassin, who kills his girlfriend. Because of this, he pursues those he feels are responsible. While he is given no name, various pieces of merchandise and cross-promotion have adopted "Jacket" as his official moniker.
Biker - The protagonist in the chapters that occur after the main storyline is finished. He receives the same phone calls as Jacket, but is less willing to follow their instructions, eventually trying to end his affiliation with the group. This eventually leads him to a confrontation with Jacket. He is playable in the later chapters, but uses a different play-style than Jacket: he is unable to use stray weapons and can only use a cleaver as well as three throwing knives.
Richter - Another person receiving the same phone calls. He is the one who attacked Jacket and killed his girlfriend.
Richard, Rasmus, and Don Juan - Three masked personas that Jacket sees within his distorted reality.
Girlfriend - A woman the protagonist rescues early in the game. While nursing her back to health, it is implied the two begin a relationship. She is later murdered by Richter.
Beard - The only apparent friend of Jacket's, who works at every shop Jacket visits.
The Janitors - A couple of sneering green-attired "janitors", blonde and brown-haired, belonging to the militant American nationalist group 50 Blessings. They turn out to be behind the campaign of brutal terrorist violence in which Jacket, Biker, and Richter are involved as participants. They are modeled after the creators of the game, Wedin and Söderström. | psychedelic, neo noir, violence | train | wikipedia | Miami Violence Never Looked So Good.
Hotline Miami is a insane, bloody, and super violent in the depths of the Miami criminal world.
You play as a guy who receives phone-calls every-night making you do the dirty work.
While you're doing the dirty work, you get to wear theses different type of mask which have special abilities on how to deal with things.
While you're violently killing your foes, you have this amazing soundtrack that goes along perfectly.
Though the story is simply weird when you start progressing further like you're entering a bloody nightmare.
Pros: Replay value is high,tons of masks,very violent,levels are challenging,worth the price,amazing soundtrack.Cons: The levels are a little bit small.
This game is awesome if you want a some quick gruesome fun..
Inovating, breath-taking indie title with 80's vibe..
It's Miami, late 80's.
You are in your home and someone calls you.
It has a certain job for you.
Everything you need is in a packaged that was left in your door.
Be discrete.Hotline Miami have a mysterious plot that feels like you are having a psychedelic dream.
Once you enter a room, the music starts pumping, bright colors flashing that makes you enter in a madness of murder.
Everything happens real fast and you have to be quick in your reflexes.
After you're done with the killing spree, the music stops and you can only hear a static sound.
Only in the way back to the car is where you can realize the mess you've made.
It's a game with a solid mechanic, fast reflexes and a good range of variety from weapons, masks and strategy you can plan for each map and room.The soundtrack is amazing, from a good range of talented independent artists that will make you remind from the 80's with a modern touch.The game, in the end, has one question for you.Do you like hurting people?.
One of the best games I have ever played.
Hotline Maimi is a wonderful trip, like a good abstract movie or a bad ass surrealist book.I played the game for the first time on 2012 on my PC, I found it extremely intense and difficult, so after like 8 chapters I quit.This year, I bought myself a brand new PS4, which came with a bonus 10$ PSN card, so I said why not, lets try again this retro indie game,and hell that was a good choice.The story of the game is a mystery from the begin to the end of the game, because that's the creator's intention, they want you to make the conclusions.The game-play is mainly a brutal-gory top down massacre, that can be very painful and stressful at first, but with the "try and error" system, you end up controlling the levels in a easier way, but if you want to complete the game at the 100%(as me), you are going to need time and a lot of patience, mainly trying to get the A+ on each level.The controls, at least on PS4, are very easy to handle, in my opinion, smoothers than the PC ones, although when you start, they take some time to handle, but with time there's no major difficult or struggle.The graphics have a cool retro style, which ironically, look extremely sweet on HD.
Beside this, the game have a very "intense" look, with each stage having a changing color background, which can get some people dizzy or with a headache(luckily that wasn't my case).
All the gore of the game, combined with the retro aspect, make the perfect ambient to this non-stop killing festival.The music is by far the best aspect of the game, having one of the best soundtrack that I've ever listened to, with house and electronic songs that fit absolutely perfect on each chapter, being the perfect addition to this thrilling adventure.Overall, the game, at least to me, is an indie master piece, being today, one of the best games that the PS4 have to offer.Absolutely recommended if you like the retro style games, the ultra violent games or the good games in general.10/10.
Simple but at times frustrating top down shooter.
Console: PS3 (via PSN store) Genre: Top down 3rd person shooter/brawler/puzzle game Story: You play a man with amnesia who receives messages on his answering machine to accomplish certain jobs.
The gameplay makes it seem clear that these messages are coded instructions to kill armed people at certain locations.
You have to find out who you are as well as who is behind the phone calls you are receiving.
Or maybe you are just insane?
Graphics: My first console was the N64, and the graphics on this predates the image quality on that console, even though it is a new game.
So, not sure of the right label for the graphics...8 bit?
32 bit?
32 bit?
In other words, it's very primitive looking character models and level models.
I think my TV signals that the source is 1080i when I load the game...but the graphics still look the oldest school.Sound: Old school (think pre PSOne consoles).
Alright.
Fortunately this is a game where you can turn the sound down and listen to whatever you want without any negative impact on the game play.
At times characters do speak in the game but there is no sound in any case and you can read the characters' comments.Gameplay: Each "mission" starts in your character's lounge room, with a message left on their answering machine.
You take your car to the location mentioned then enter a building swarming with thugs with melee weapons or various guns/rifles.
Utilising stealth or gung ho tactics you have to kill all the thugs in order to complete the chapter and receive your score.
Some buildings only have one level, but others have 2 or 3 floors you have to clear.
You can kill thugs whilst unarmed or you can use weapons you knock from the thugs or once you have killed them.
Later in the game you will have to deal with attack dogs.
Then you get "mini bosses" in chapters, followed by a few chapters of full on boss battles, which are markedly different from the usual gameplay.
Earning high scores for chapters sees you receive masks for your character, which you can wear to future missions...they act as power-ups at times.
E.g. one mask will allow you to start a chapter with a knife whereas the default starting situation is that your character is unarmed.Good about the game: Even though you can die often in a chapter, at times this can be fun, as you try and go about things the right way to finish the chapter.
The game therefore has repeat play value.Bad about the game: * You can die a lot in some sections of the game and this is really frustrating and exasperating and just kills the fun out of this game.
Mainly I have some of those few boss type battles in mind.
Even though I did complete the game, for some of those chapters it just felt that I lucked my victory so there is no sense that came upon a solution to the problem of that boss fight...although with more replays, that lessens.
Finding those solutions does seem a matter of luck too.* If this was a true "pick up and play" game, it would be a lot of fun, but if you find that you must quit the game for whatever reason before you have completed a chapter, then when you resume at some later point, you will have to start the entire chapter again, which can be extremely annoying if just getting to that final level in a chapter meant having to conquer a really tough previous level in that chapter.
So, you can find yourself having to spend more time on a chapter than you would if it really was "pick up and play"/"dip in and out".* It's frustrating that you can die in a chapter due to not seeing a thug because the graphics are so low resolution...they don't stand out from the corpses that you put there previously.* Combat ideally should have a rhythm to it in this game but early on especially I felt that juggling the combat features was too confusing, even though there aren't a lot of controller buttons to use...e.g. locking on to a thug to take them out and then locking onto another thug to repeat the process...once you get a few thugs racing towards you about to gank you, it's easy to forget what button to press to do such and such.* Probably the biggest negative for me is that is one of those games that you will have to go on to You Tube or on to Forums in order to finish the game 'properly'/solve the Puzzle that the game offers.
I replayed the game equipped with the mask for revealing Secrets (presumably which help you solve the Puzzle which allows you to get a score in the final chapter of the game proper (which I have not yet done)...yet have not found all the pieces to the Wheel Of Fortune like letters you need to presumably solve that puzzle.
It's probably the low resolution graphics here again...Puzzle pieces not standing out from the background or from other non-Puzzle pieces.
Once you need to You Tube or look up answers to complete the game, that becomes a big negative for me...I have a life you know!
My toenails aren't going to cut themselves!
General observations: This game reminded me of the Metal Gear Solid: Virtual Missions bonus disc for the PSOne, which I bought when I was playing the PS2.
However, it's more complex and complicated than that game...which came across as a negative point for me..
Possibly The best inde game ever made.
Hotline Miami is a simple but fun top down shooter game, However it is very hard and frustrating and is massively replay-able.
Although this game doesn't have many chapters it will still take 4+ hours to complete.
This game has a lot of over the top violence even though it is pix-elated but is very unlikely to offend any body The plot is simple, a man gets phone calls that instruct him to go places and kill people.
These people are later revealed to be the Russian mafia and the people telling you to kill are an independent group of people.
The game gets more surreal as the game goes on and it just looks like an acid trip.
The music is also very good and i downloaded it after playing the game 10/10.
Perfect at what it does, but not for everyone.
Best indie game of all time, as in it does what it sets out to do without flaw.
Gameplay is overhead action at its finest, and deceivingly simple, since it only uses 3 buttons.
It also has a lot of depth story-wise, with a plot that genuinely surprised me, making it also deceivingly simple in that respect.
Even the (spoiler) level Trauma is well done, despite being frequently criticized.
It works because of it has purpose, and breaks up the game play slightly.
Another thing this game does well, maybe even the best, is the whole descent into madness angle.
The only two things I can think of that may turn people off are the difficulty and the gore/presentation.
Even though this game is stylized, it is very graphic with its violence.
The style, difficulty, craziness narrative, and gore all play into the game's somewhat subtle social commentary on games and the media in general, sort of along the lines of the phenomenal new Spec Ops, but unlike The Line, HM isn't as in your face and obvious about it, despite the components of the theme being right in front of you.
And do I seriously need to mention the soundtrack?
10/10, one of the greatest games of all time.
My 2012 GOTY. |
tt0028355 | Theodora Goes Wild | Theodora Lynn (Irene Dunne) is a Sunday school teacher and former church organist in Lynnfield, Connecticut, raised by two spinster aunts, Mary (Elisabeth Risdon) and Elsie Lynn (Margaret McWade). She also happens to be, under the pen name Caroline Adams, the secret author of a bestselling book that has the straight-laced Lynnfield Literary Circle in an uproar. The book is serialized in the local newspaper, and the Literary Circle, led by outraged busybody Rebecca Perry (Spring Byington), forces the newspaper's owner Jed Waterbury (Thomas Mitchell) to stop printing the salacious installments.
Theodora travels to New York City on the pretext of visiting her black sheep Uncle John (Robert Greig), but actually goes to see her publisher Arthur Stevenson (Thurston Hall). Though Stevenson reassures an anxious Theodora that only he and his secretary know her identity, his wife Ethel (Nana Bryant) pressures him into an introduction, which the book's illustrator Michael Grant (Melvyn Douglas) overhears. Intrigued, Michael invites himself to dinner with the Stevensons and Theodora. Theodora becomes annoyed when Michael smugly assumes that she is a teetotaler, so she orders a whiskey. As the night goes on, she becomes drunk. So does Ethel, forcing Arthur to take his wife home and leaving Theodora alone with Michael. When he makes a pass at her, she panics and flees, much to his amusement.
Michael tracks her to her hometown, and his whistling is immediately noticed outside her house. Because she technically is not supposed to know anyone outside of Lynnfield, he coerces her into hiring him as a gardener, thus scandalizing her aunts and providing Rebecca Perry with ample information for gossip. Michael declares that he is going to break Theodora out of her confining routine, ignoring her protests that she likes her life just the way it is. Despite herself, she enjoys herself when Michael makes her go berrypicking and fishing with him. Finally, she finds the nerve to tell the disapproving women of the Literary Circle that she loves him. When she tells Michael what she has done, he is less than thrilled.
The next day, Theodora finds that he has gone back to New York and left her. She tracks him to his Park Avenue apartment. He admits he loves her, but then his father (Henry Kolker), the lieutenant governor, shows up, followed by Michael's wife Agnes (Leona Maricle). The estranged couple only have remained married to avoid causing a political scandal for Michael's father.
Theodora determines to free Michael just as he had done for her. He wants her to hold off until his father's term ends in two years, but she is unwilling to wait that long. She courts publicity by revealing herself as the true Caroline Adams. She is staying in Michael's apartment even though he has moved out to get away from her, and she tells the press of her intention to publish a new book that details finding romance in her small town and searching for someone who will call her "baby" – a story that mimics her relationship with Michael. Meanwhile, Michael denies to the press that he has even met Theodora. She finally crashes the governor's ball and arranges for reporters to photograph her embracing Michael. Agnes seeks a divorce to avoid looking like a fool.
Theodora returns to Lynnfield and is warmly welcomed as a celebrity, even by her now-supportive aunts. She causes further talk when she brings a newborn baby with her. When Michael, now divorced, sees the child, he tries to flee, but then Theodora reveals that the baby belongs to Rebecca Perry's own secretly married daughter. | comedy | train | wikipedia | The script is beautifully structured and the performances are all terrific -- it's Irene Dunne's best film, and Elizabeth Risdon is wonderful in a smaller role as the aunt.
Irene Dunne plays Theodora Lynn, a proper New England girl.
Secluded all her life with her two prudish aunts and the other puritans of the "highly regarded" Lynn Literary Circle, she sublimates her revolt as the secret author of a tantalizing best-selling novel.
Like all the "early rom-coms," its time played a big role in not just its plot but its attitudes, which on the one hand make Theodora Goes Wild refreshingly irreverent but on the other still outmoded in certain varying personal ways.
Her Theodora became the forerunner of copious romantic comedies like The Awful Truth and Ninotchka, all anchored in similar principles: the enchanting transformation of their female protagonists.
Irene Dunne breaks out of small town conventions in "Theodora Goes Wild," a 1936 comedy also starring Melvyn Douglas, Thomas Mitchell and Spring Byington.
Dunne plays Theodora, who lives a sterile life with her two aunts in a small, Puritan, judgmental town.
He soon shows up in her home town as a down on his luck man seeking work and she's more or less blackmailed into giving him a job as the family gardener.This is a delightful comedy buoyed by the marvelous acting of Irene Dunne and Melvyn Douglas.
Douglas, who in later life would prove himself one of the great actors of all time, sails through this film as he sailed through so many others in roles that gave no hint of his enormous abilities.
Dunne is great as the staid spinster who becomes the talk of New York with her wild outfits, saucy attitude, and smart remarks.Underneath it all, of course, it's a love story some innuendo you don't find in a lot of '30s comedies, which adds to the fun.
Theodora Goes Wild is perhaps the greatest sleeper in film history.
If you think I'm joking, just watch her in Back Street, Love Affair (much better in my opinion than its more popular remake Affair To Remember), Show Boat, I Remember Mama, this film, The Awful Truth, A Guy Named Joe, Anna and The King of Siam, Life With Father, Ann Vickers.........
Today the home of a well known author like Irene Dunne would be a tourist attraction.But back in the Thirties, this still was the New England of Calvin Coolidge and descendants of the town founder just don't go writing romance novels.
But that's what Irene Dunne is doing only its under a pseudonym, lest the good people of Lynnfield make life uncomfortable for herself and her two maiden aunts.Irene's cover will be blown though when she meets her illustrator at her publisher.
Melvyn Douglas is quite smitten with her and he follows her back to Lynnfield from New York and persuades her that she ought to live life a little and not just vicariously through her novels.Dunne takes his advice with a vengeance after he's thoroughly embarrassed her.
Today she would be big time tabloid fodder and pays Douglas back in a way he can only blame on himself.It's charming pair of leads with a delightful supporting cast that play their roles to perfection.
A particular favorite of mine is publisher Thurston Hall who gets to do a drunk scene with Dunne, something the very proper Mr. Hall didn't often do.Irene Dunne got one of her five Oscar nominations for playing Theodora Lynn aka Caroline Adams, but lost in the big sweepstakes to Luise Rainer for The Great Ziegfeld.I'm not sure how you could do Theodora Goes Wild today though.
It reminds me a lot of myself, growing up in a small town like "Lynnfield", and being brought up to think and act the way Theodora was.
For a fact, this movie is a lot like Irene Dunne's life, actually her friends said they liked her best in this movie, because it is most like her in character.
But she is a true revelation here.) The story involves hypocrisy, puncturing it, overcoming inhibitions, being decent in a true sense rather than according to a pre-prepared code.Dunne is a rather frumpy woman from a small town who has written a scandalous novel under a pseudonym.
Her range was broad and her hits included many women's pictures, several comedies (including "Joy of Living," dismal through no fault of her own.) And she played Magnolia in my favorite of all movie musicals: "Showboat," which came out this same year..
Irene Dunne, (Theodora Lynn) played the role of a small town gal living in Lynnfield where everyone was very religious and lived life straight as an arrow.
Melvyn Douglas plays the role as Michael Grant who is linked romantically with Theodora and he gave a great supporting role.
Unfortunately, I can't figure out why.I actually like Irene Dunne, and always thought that Melvyn Douglas was in the same league with William Powell when it came to glib, sophisticated comedy, so I was all set to enjoy this one.
But about a quarter of the way through it, I found myself asking, "When is this thing going to get funny?" The subject matter--how the reactionary, repressive mentality of a clique of small-town religious zealots stifles any kind of individual creativity at all--is more suited to a drama than a comedy, and I think this film would have actually worked better as a drama with some comedy thrown in, which both Dunne and Douglas were more than capable of, than just as a comedy alone, which it really isn't.
Dunne and Douglas try hard, but they're just not given much to work with.I know that a lot of people think this film is on a par with "Nothing Sacred", "My Man Godfrey" or "Twentieth Century," but I just can't see it..
The wait was my loss.To begin with, it stars two of the undeservedly forgotten luminaries of the movie industry: Irene Dunne and Melvyn Douglas.
Irene Dunne had been in Hollywood six years and made 20 feature films before this, her first crack at comedy.
"Theodora Goes Wild" is a wacky comedy-romance that introduced the comedic talents of Irene Dunne to audiences.
"Theodora Goes Wild" is a hilarious film of give and take.
Dunne plays Theodora and Melvyn Douglas is Michael Grant.
A wonderful supporting cast includes Spring Byington as Rebecca Perry, Thomas Mitchell as Jed Waterbury, Robert Greig as Uncle John, Thurston Hall as Arthur Stevenson, Nana Bryant as his wife Ethel, Elisabeth Risdon as Aunt Mary and Margaret McWade as Aunt Elsie.This is a superb comedy to add to any film library.
As a fan of Irene Dunne's, and not having managed to catch up with Theodora Goes Wild, I was looking forward to finally getting to see this movie after having read the lavish praise heaped on it on this site.
What did let the movie down was a weak script and an irritatingly hammy performance by the usually reliable Melvyn Douglas.
If you really want to see Irene Dunne at her very, very best then you should catch her in the much better written My Favorite Wife, or Love Affair, both infinitely superior to their later remakes.
Thomas Mitchell manages to infuse some life in the opening half of the film, but even Mitchell, talented as he is, is stuck with a dull script that goes nowhere fast.And as for IRENE DUNNE and MELVYN DOUGLAS, while I agree that they both have credentials galore in smart screwball comedies, this is not one of them.
A few smart witticisms would have helped but the script is a painfully dull affair about a novelist smothered by the hypocrisy of living in a small town where the latest best-seller is causing a stir--and happens to have been written by her.
I should add I am a devoted fan of Irene Dunne and slightly less so of Melvyn Douglas but I can't see how these two professionals could have stomached this drivel.
Irene Dunne is the true star of the film.
I don't know what the reaction would have been to "50 shades of grey"!).I highly recommend adding this film to anybody's watch-list, as it is a very nice heartfelt movie, but especially for Irene Dunne's wonderful performance..
A writer, played by Irene Dunne, has written a scandalous, sexualized novel which has sparked controversy across the country none more so than in the writer's home town, where no one knows she's the author (she used a pseudonym) but are up in arms nevertheless about the book's content.
Today, I viewed THEODORA GOES WILD and was totally caught up in the fun of an exellently written script.
Then Melvyn Douglas' pursuit of Irene Dunne might have seemed charming in a different era, but it rankled me.
Thomas Mitchell, Irene Dunne, and Melvyn Douglas all do a great job.
I think THEODORA GOES WILD accomplishes what screwball comedy does best: it takes two misfits (in this case played by Irene Dunne & Melvyn Douglas) and shows them with all kinds of inner pain and complications caused by family and society at large.
Irene Dunne plays Theodora, a straight-laced young woman living with her two spinster aunts in a prudish small town, who just happens to be the secret author of a scandalous and best-selling series of romance novels.
When the town's gossip mongers become too much to bear, and Douglas takes off after her declaration of love, Theodora decides she's tired of being straight-laced and goes wild.Dunne and Douglas have a lot of chemistry in this, and even if the movie overall doesn't make much sense (what screwball romance ever did?), the two of them keep it fun and energetic.
I'm not sure Dunne's performance warranted the Oscar nomination she received, and I don't know what in the world the Academy was thinking to nominate the movie for its editing, but it's a solid comedy from the old days.Grade: B+.
Irene Dunne carries the whole film on her back and is wonderful.
Melvyn Douglas does well with his role until the script paints him into a corner as a tongue tied whiner after Irene turns the tables on him.
As this movie began, I was pleasantly surprised by Dunne because she was playing a repressed small-town woman and thus didn't produce any of the grand gestures that are typical of her.
All hell breaks loose when a woman in a small, conservative New England town writes a steamy best-seller under a pseudonym.
I found Melvyn Douglas' presence irritating and his performance grating, but I guess that's part of the charm of these comedies.
Theodora Goes Wild was released two years into Hollywood's production code and yet the entire premise of the movie is one huge "how did they get away with that?!".
A film with a heroine who writes risqué novels and rebels against her ultraconservative, God-fearing, Helen Lovejoy type aunts who deem it their obligation to keep the fictional town of Lynnfield, Connecticut (yet another screwball comedy set in the state) the one last pure, God-fearing town in America.
- This movie hasn't lost an ounce of relevance for today's world.The scene at the beginning of Theodora Goes Wild in which the local literary group read passages from the latest "scandalous" novel from author Caroline Adams really is jaw-dropping.
However, the local newspaper run by Thomas Mitchell starts printing a serialization of the scandalous bestseller in an effort to show the town how people live, love and learn in the real world.
Whoever said old movies are stuffy and the dreaded "O" word, outdated?Despite writing highly successful adult novels, Theodora's conscious still objects to it and thus requires a bit of Melvyn Douglas as Michael Grant to ignite Theodora's sexual awakening after he seduces her while wearing a vest as his only piece of torso.
Once Michael liberates Theodora from her small town way of life she returns the favour and liberates him from his New York, bourgeois decorum..
ACT ONE: In the town of Lynnfield, Connecticut, publisher Jed Waterbury (Thomas Mitchell) causes a scandal when his newspaper publishes a serialization of "The Sinner," a risqué best-seller by Caroline Adams.
Waterbury is forced to concede.The uproar is especially troubling for Theodora Lynn (Irene Dunne), a member of the town's founding family, who lives with her two uptight maiden aunts (Elisabeth Wisdon; Margaret McWade).
In fact, Theodora IS Caroline Adams, author of "The Sinner," a secret she keeps from her aunts, and from the town.ACT II: While in New York to meet with her publisher, Theodora meets Michael Grant (Melvyn Douglas), an obnoxious artist who designed her book's cover.Intrigued by the fact that "Caroline Adams" wants to keep her personal life a secret, Grant follows Theodora back to Lynnfield.
Grant gets Theodora to hire him as a "family gardener" by blackmailing her, threatening to tell her aunts that she is Caroline Adams.He takes up residence in the family's guest cottage, and drives the Lynn family (and the people watching the movie) crazy by his constant annoying whistling, and by setting his dog after the Lynn family's cat.The second act of this movie was one of the most screechingly-painful things I've watched in movies in a long time.
I really hated Toki, Grant's stereotypical Japanese manservant character, who is always going on about his "lemon pie.")Of course, Theodora's actions scandalize the town of Lynnfield, and cause a lot of trouble for her aunts.
But eventually Theodora is welcomed home by the town, despite the efforts of the hypocritical gossip Rebecca Perry to make her an outcast.The Third Act of this movie ALMOST makes up for the horrible Second Act, because Theodora turns the tables on Grant, and drives him crazy by causing a scandal about him in the press, just as he did about her in her home town.
It's a very sweet payback, and Irene Dunne has fun turning from a shy hometown girl into a wild celebrity author.But Theodora just doesn't realize that Michael Grant isn't worth it.
You see, one of their own is the author of a scandalous novel that they've been trying to get condemned, and once she has enough of them running her life with their babbity provinciality, she tells them off, leaves for New York, and really gives them something to gossip about."She" is Theodora Lynn (Irene Dunne), the seemingly sweet church organist who is followed by one of the representatives (Melvyn Douglas) of the publishing firm her book was released through, threatening to blow her goody two-shoes image out of the water for good.
Irene Dunne plays an overly prim and proper lady who lives in a town dominated by fun-hating old biddies!
The town is extremely similar to the one from the Hal Roach comedy, MISS POLLY, except that THEODORA GOES WILD is a good and funny film.
Dunne and Douglas are terrific and the film, despite its ridiculous plot, is a lotta laughs and is a good example of a "screwball comedy"..
says Melvyn Douglas as smug sophisticate Michael Grant, the perfect foil to Irene Dunne's title character, the virginal church organist Theodora Lynn, who lives with her two spinster aunts in her namesake Connecticut village and dashes off to big bad New York City with the seamy best sellers she writes to let off steam.
It's as if Julie Andrews was playing a singing nun and an aging topless actress IN THE SAME MOVIE, instead of decades apart in THE SOUND OF MUSIC and S.O.B. The script for THEODORA GOES WILD is consistently clever, and the supporting cast doesn't miss a trick to sell the comedy.
One of the best screwball comedies giving Irene Dunne still another losing Oscar nomination.This comedy tests values, traditions and brings the small town living versus the big city in plenty of view.Dunne is equally matched with fine chemistry between her and Melvyn Douglas.
The film also boasts a tremendous supporting cast with Spring Byington, Thomas Mitchell, Thurston Hall and Elisabeth Risdon at their very best.When a small-town writer writes a racy book under an assumed name, all hell breaks loose in the town when excerpts of the book are run by the non-stuffy Thomas Mitchell.While in N.Y., Dunne, the writer, meets the illustrator.
Only then we learn that there's been some, ahem, not so wholesome things going on.Irene Dunne - nominated for an Oscar for her role - puts on the performance of a lifetime as the woman whose writing upends the hamlet.
Melvyn Douglas isn't the type whom I would expect to see in a screwball comedy, but you're sure to love his performance as the illustrator.
But I submit that it hasn't aged particularly well.The plot revolves around a scandalous novel, "The Sinners", written by a small town young woman: Theodora Lynn, who has adopted the pseudonym Caroline Adams, to hide her identity from her 2 elderly aunts she lives with, in particular, and the people in her town, especially the conservative Literary Circle.
As her illustrator Michael Grant(Melvyn Douglas)remarks, in her book, she imagines many of the things she would like to do, but is afraid of disapproval.
Finally, Theodora gets the nerve to tell off the members of the Literary Circle, including her aunts, but good.
Seen today, accustomed as we are to seeing the adorable Irene Dunne in her later comedies slinkily casting those lovely eyes sideways and laughing that distinctive gurgling laugh it's hard to believe that after several years as a celebrated drama queen 'Theodora Goes Wild' represented for her a leap in the dark into the hitherto unaccustomed territory of farce; at which she immediately proved adept.Thomas Mitchell as the town's abrasive newspaper editor figures prominently in the opening and closing scenes, promising a more satirical subject than we actually get.
Melvyn Douglas does his best to bestow some charm on the obnoxious Michael Grant, but the two lead characters have absolutely nothing in common, and Theodora deserves much better than this mischief-making jerk who doesn't even let her know that he's married. |
tt0043386 | Casque d'or | Marie (Simone Signoret), a woman of considerable beauty, is distressed at her treatment by Roland, a criminal who is a part of a local syndicate. When Marie is introduced to the handsome stranger Georges, a humble carpenter, she falls in love with him instantly, much to the chagrin of Roland. When Roland's jealousy builds after a number of meetings between Marie and Georges, Roland decides to confront Georges behind a club where several members of his syndicate watch. After Georges gains control of a knife that had been thrown between them to initiate the fight, Georges manages to stab Roland in the back after a brief scuffle, killing him almost instantly. When the police arrive at the scene everyone flees, including Marie, who seeks refuge away from the syndicate at a nearby village.
Georges decides it is best to flee town. He is lured to a rendezvous with Marie by a note she sends. The two live an idyllic life in the nearby village, until Georges is brought word that a friend, Raymond, had been arrested for the murder of Roland. Félix, the leader of the syndicate, has placed blame on Raymond in an attempt to bring Georges out of hiding and win control of Marie. Not realising this plan, Georges confesses to the police that he is the real killer. While being transported between jails, he breaks free with the help of a diversion by Marie. Georges immediately seeks out Félix to seek his revenge. When he finds him in the presence of the police, he kills him anyway, condemning himself in the process. With the two murders on his hands, Georges is sentenced to die by the guillotine while a broken Marie watches in horror as he is executed. | murder, bleak, flashback, romantic, melodrama, revenge | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0027300 | Anthony Adverse | In 1773, young English beauty Maria Bonnyfeather (Anita Louise) is the new bride of the cruel and devious middle-aged Spanish nobleman Marquis Don Luis (Claude Rains). However, she is pregnant by Denis Moore (Louis Hayward), the man she loved before being forced to marry Don Luis. After the marquis learns of his wife's affair, Don Luis takes her across Europe but Denis tracks them down at an inn, where Don Luis treacherously kills him in a sword duel.
Months later Maria dies giving birth to her son at a chalet in the Alps in northern Italy. Don Luis leaves the infant in the foundling wheel of a convent near the port city of Leghorn (Livorno), Italy, where the nuns christen him Anthony, as he was found on January 17, the feast day of St. Anthony the Great. Don Luis lies to Maria's father, wealthy Leghorn-based merchant John Bonnyfeather (Edmund Gwenn), telling him that the infant is also dead. Ten years later, completely by coincidence, Anthony (Billy Mauch) is apprenticed to Bonnyfeather, his real grandfather, who discovers his relationship to the boy but keeps it a secret from him. He gives the boy the surname Adverse in acknowledgement of the difficult life he has led.
As an adult, Anthony (Fredric March) falls in love with Angela Giuseppe (Olivia de Havilland), the cook's daughter, and the couple wed. Soon after the ceremony, Anthony is asked by Bonnyfeather to depart for Havana to save Bonnyfeather's fortune from a laggard debtor, the merchant trading firm Gallego & Sons. On the day his ship is supposed to set sail he and Angela are supposed to meet at the convent before departing together, but she arrives first while he is late. Unable to wait any longer, she leaves a note outside the convent to inform him that she is leaving for Rome with her opera company. But the note Angela leaves Anthony is blown away and he is unaware that she has gone to Rome. Confused and upset, he departs on the ship without her. Meanwhile, assuming he has abandoned her, she departs and continues her career as an opera singer.
Learning that Gallego has quit Havana, Anthony leaves to take control of Gallego & Sons only remaining asset—a slave trading post on the Pongo River in Africa. Three years in the slave trade (so he can recover Bonnyfeather's debt) corrupts him, and he takes slave girl Neleta into his bed as he believes Angela has abandoned him. Anthony is eventually redeemed by his friendship with Brother François (Pedro de Córdoba). After the monk is crucified and killed by the natives, Anthony returns to Italy to find Bonnyfeather has died. His housekeeper, Faith Paleologus (Gale Sondergaard) (Don Luis' longtime co-conspirator, and now wife), has inherited Bonnyfeather's fortune. Anthony reaches Paris to rectify the situation and claim his inheritance.
In Paris, Anthony is reunited with his friend, prominent banker Vincent Nolte (Donald Woods), whom he saves from bankruptcy by giving him his fortune, having learned from Brother François that "there's something besides money and power". Through the intercession of impresario Debrulle (Ralph Morgan), Anthony finds Angela and discovers she bore him a son. His wife fails to reveal she is now Mademoiselle Georges, a famous opera star and the mistress of Napoleon Bonaparte. When Anthony learns her secret, she sends him their son, stating that he is better suited to raise the boy. Anthony departs for America with his son, Anthony Jr. (Scotty Beckett), in search of a better life. | romantic, murder, melodrama | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0084090 | Inseminoid | On a desolate planet, a team of 12 Xeno project scientists are conducting an archaeological excavation of the ruins of an ancient civilisation. Shortly after an underground tomb network is found to contain crystals and wall inscriptions, photographer Dean White (Dominic Jephcott) is engulfed in a rock blast and left incapacitated. Deciphering the alien language in the caves, xenolinguist Mitch (Trevor Thomas) theorises that the civilisation was built on the concept of dualism: the planet orbits a binary star, and a pair of twins seems to have ruled the race that once inhabited it. Medical assistant Sharon (Heather Wright) discovers that an energy field surrounds the crystals, which causes her to deduce that a "chemical intelligence" controlled life on the planet.
A mentally unbalanced Ricky Williams (David Baxt) is driven to re-enter the caves when a sample of crystals pulsates and the chemical intelligence exerts its influence through a mark on his arm. Thrown into a grille in a compromised environmental suit, Gail (Rosalind Lloyd) commits suicide, removing her helmet and freezing to death in the toxic atmosphere while trying to amputate her trapped foot with a chainsaw. Documentation officer Kate Frost (Stephanie Beacham) shoots Ricky with a harpoon gun before he opens both the inner and outer airlock doors and renders the air inside the base unbreathable.
Following the burial of Ricky and Gail, Mitch and Sandy (Judy Geeson) return to the caves to collect more crystals. A monstrous creature appears and dismembers Mitch before raping Sandy. Found distraught, Sandy receives treatment from Sharon and chief medical officer Karl (Barry Houghton), who discovers that the assault has triggered an accelerated pregnancy despite the regular intravenous injections of contraceptives given to the women in the team. When further explosions within the catacombs scupper chances of deeper investigation, the surviving members of the team are left with nothing to do but await the arrival of a Xeno rescue shuttle.
The intelligence assumes control of Sandy, who has been marked in the same way as Ricky. She stabs Barbra (Victoria Tennant) to death with a pair of scissors, demonstrating superhuman strength while committing the murder, and then mutilates Dean and the remains of Mitch, drinking their blood. The rest of the team seek refuge in the Operations Room as Sandy destroys essential machinery – including the base transmitter – with explosives. When the imbalance in Sandy's mind appears to correct itself, Karl, Sharon and Commander Holly McKay (Jennifer Ashley) attempt to sedate her to spare the unborn children. Sandy's madness returns and Holly and Karl are killed in an accident with heat-sealing apparatus, whereupon Sandy disembowels the corpses.
Senior officer Mark (Robin Clarke) radios Sandy – his romantic interest – from the Operations Room to stall for time as Kate and operations chief Gary (Steven Grives) depart to requisition chainsaws from a storage room. The ruse is uncovered and Sandy harpoons Gary outside the airlock, breathing the atmosphere to no ill effect as she mauls his flesh. Preparing for a final confrontation, Mark stumbles across Sandy's newborn, mutant twins. He entrusts them to Sharon as the mother blasts through the Operations Room door and destroys all the equipment inside, although it is evident that she no longer possesses unnatural strength. Crippled by an explosive charge, Kate is gored to death. In a last stand, Mark strangles and kills Sandy with a ripped-out cable. He returns to Sharon to discover one of the twins biting at her slit neck, before its sibling launches itself at him.
Twenty-eight days later, Xeno Auxiliary Module 047 lands on the planet to investigate the loss of contact with the team. With the base in ruins, the mission records destroyed and the scientists either murdered or missing, combat marksmen Corin (Kevin O'Shea) and Roy (Robert Pugh) abandon the search for survivors and pilot Jeff (John Segal) contacts Xeno control to request clearance to return. The final shots reveal that Sandy's children have stowed themselves away inside a storage compartment on board the shuttle. | violence, murder | train | wikipedia | Low production values, low production costs, bad acting, bad dialogue, bad special effects - we found it hilarious (unlike Boggy Creek II, which was just plain awful)After the prologue, the opening line is "Hey wait a minute!" as in "what's this strange thing I've found on this strange alien world" - get the idea?
INSEMINOID Aspect ratio: 2.39:1 (J-D-C Scope)Sound format: MonoWhilst exploring a series of caves beneath the surface of Jupiter's moon Xeno, a scientific research team unleashes a long-buried alien creature which impregnates one of the female members of the crew (Judy Geeson).
With the subsequent pregnancy developing at an alarming rate, Geeson is compelled to protect her unborn 'children' from scientific scrutiny and begins to massacre her colleagues, one by one...Responding to the worldwide appetite for overblown space operas established by STAR WARS in 1977, yet remaining true to his roots as a purveyor of exploitation-horror movies (SATAN'S SLAVE, PREY, etc.), British director Norman J.
With funding from British and Hong Kong sources, the film went into production at Chislehurst caves (a grim but picturesque location just outside London) shortly after Ridley Scott's ALIEN (1979) wrapped principal photography, though Warren and producer Richard Gordon insist the movie wasn't influenced by Scott's blockbuster in any way.Unfortunately, INSEMINOID's lofty ambitions are somewhat undermined by its modest £1 million budget, yielding a range of sets, costumes and visual effects which are more reminiscent of "Blake's 7" and "Doctor Who" than STAR WARS, and the cheapskate production values often provoke unintentional laughter.
Faced with some fairly amateurish dialogue, most of the cast can't help but sink to the occasion, though Geeson is remarkably good in the leading role, transforming herself from terrified victim to monstrous avenger with scene-stealing glee (unfortunately, she later bad-mouthed the film in no uncertain terms, despite recently admitting she'd never actually seen it!).
Stephanie Beacham (SCHIZO, TV's "The Colby's") plays the material with earnest conviction, while Victoria Tennant (THE WINDS OF WAR) makes no impression at all as one of the early victims of Geeson's rampage.For all its drawbacks, however, the film is fast-moving and eager to please, and benefits enormously from John Metcalfe's expansive scope photography, which Warren uses to evoke a sense of scale at odds with the movie's financial limitations.
An expedition team investigating a planet faces terror as a woman on the team gets raped by an alien (with something that looked like a plastic pipe filled with green ooze) and starts killing her colleagues.
Although the sets and visual effects are cheap-looking, the screenplay causes its characters to behave foolishly most of the time, and the electronic score may drive you mad, director Warren keeps up a brisk pace to prevent you from becoming bored, while Geeson delivers a pretty chilling performance..
Like a previous contributor, I saw Inseminoid on BBC 1 last Saturday too - but to my eternal shame, I must admit that I actually went out of my way to see it!Y'see, when I was a spotty teenager way back in the early 80s, I was always intrigued by this movie's premise - aliens!
On a remote planet,a group of archaeologists have established a base deep inside a network of caves.While out exploring one day,one of the team,Sandy,is abducted by a monstrous alien that forcibly impregnates her.As the alien fetuses grow inside her,Sandy is driven insane by the need for blood to feed her offspring and starts slaughtering her fellow scientists."Inseminoid" is a cheaply made "Alien" clone,but I don't care.It's a pretty good horror film on its own that kept me on the edge of my seat.There is plenty of gore and a little bit of sleaze,so I wasn't disappointed.The script is weak and the acting is average,but "Inseminoid" is fast-paced,twisted and immensely enjoyable.So if you liked "Galaxy of Terror" or "Forbidden World" give this one a look.Just ignore the negative reviews and check it out.7 out of 10..
Judy Geeson is excellent in a role that requires a hell of a lot of merciless ranting and screaming.HORROR PLANET refers to the original U.S. release of the film, which was cut.
The creature impregnates one of the crew members, and slowly she started to turn into a crazed killer while the alien offspring grows inside her.Now, the movie is driven by its story and acting talents, and barely relying on the special effects.
And after going back again and watching it as an "adult", there is little to really be fond of about it: the film is cold, distant, cruel, sickening, barbaric, perverse, twisted, and rather dull for periods of time.Yet HORROR PLANET has a very devoted cult following due to the presence of whacko director Norman J.
I am not overly fond of HORROR PLANET as a film, but the movie itself is a fascinating production that has a bizarre history that is almost more interesting than the story it tells.
Originally released as the more revealingly titled INSEMINOID in 1980, it was a British made production with a Dr. Who like budget, conveniently staged entirely underground or in space station sets so that no major special effects were needed beyond the gore effects.And like FORBIDDEN WORLD and GALAXY OF TERROR especially, HORROR PLANET embraced all of the sexual aspects of the ALIEN/human interaction's possibilities, doing so with attractive B supporting actresses known for their willingness to do exploitation work to help get a film done.
But HORROR PLANET [which came first] gives us more of a big insectoid/slug, which impregnates Ms. Geeson with it's disgusting, human skinned but insect headed progeny, and director Warren depicted their emergence such unrelentingly graphic slop that the original cut of INSEMINOID was Rated X by the MPAA.As such INSEMINOID could not find a distributor in the US in 1980, and was apparently banned in certain parts of Europe [including the original lobby poster design, which was deemed to be obscene], only finding a release in Japan where, as we all know, they will watch just about anything.
In 1982 a significantly cut version -- now called HORROR PLANET and again, distributed by Roger Corman -- was finally granted an R rating, and it's across the board "bomb" reviews for being apalling, gross, perverted ALIEN sleaze sort of guaranteed it's cult following when the movie turned up for home video in 1983 and again in 1988 on Laserdisc as well, all of which quickly went out of print and are now collector's items.
But if watching Judy Geeson being impregnated by a giant worm, give birth to twin alien maggots and then murder & cannibalize the rest of the cast in some warped space fever/dementia is your idea of a good time, well Norman J.
I bought 3 movies recently in a pack, horror planet, galaxy of terror and creature.To be quit honest horror planet is not as good as galaxy of terror and creature but it does not deserve the very low rating it is getting.There are so pretty cool gory effect in the movie, the acting is not that bad and you have a few good actors in there too.The special effects are what you would expect from a 80 sci fi horror movie nothing to compare with alien but still not that bad either.This movie deserves a higher rating at least a 6 not a 3.4 like it as right now..
The budget of the film seems a bit low, but it works surprisingly well, and the alien is used sparingly, Geeson herself does much of the work and is very convincing, changing constantly between scared, vulnerable and helpless and homicidal and cannibalistic, when she goes mad she is very scary and intimidating, and shows sadistic relish for her victims, eating dead bodies and even eating a man's intestines just after shooting him while he is still alive and watching.
(you should really see her in 10 Rillington Place to give you an idea of how great she is, and what she is capable of)I had no idea what part (or how big) she played in this Movie, and along the same lines as great stars of the past like Diana Dors, Judy often plays in movies where her parts are small, or she gets killed off quite early on, so you can imagine my delight, when, not long after the film gets going (a possible spoiler here) when it looks like she gets killed, and I was ready for disappointment, it's actually only the beginning of her taking over and leading the whole Movie!After just reading the other 23 reviews from viewers, and how awful this film has been slagged, I'm not going to join forces; for two reasons;First; I've only seen it the once, and while many people may despair at my saying that any Movie should be seen twice before writing 'critical' comments such as I've read at least, I don't agree that every single Movie that is made has to be so realistic, that it's too real.
to the Movie, which basically involved a lot of beautiful atmospheric colour, and some beautiful haunting music, and so it 'looked' and sounded good, even though I was to wait a long time to see it.So no; I won't be returning the DVD for my money back yet, not until I've seen it at least once more, and then I'll return here to leave a more comprehensive review.I just think everything deserves a chance.
Soon the usual assorted crew members of the archaeological expedition are getting needlessly separated, doing stupid things like walking backwards down dark corridors, and generally doing everything they can to get eaten.When the highlight of the movie is someone attempting to cut off their own foot with a hedge-trimmer (and just exactly why an exo-archaeologist is wandering around an alien cave system carrying a hedge-trimmer is never explained) you know you are in trouble.There are many bad movie moments in this film.
(Including a couple of classically bad fights with actors 'punches' missing each other by yards.) Stephanie Beacham is the best thing in this movie and acts everyone else off the screen by doing as little as possible in the hope that no one notices her.
The cheap looking sci-fi horror thriller begins with a little intelligent dialogue but then descends into stupid and idiotic, mind-numbing action sequences that awfully detract from any possible enjoyment of the movie.
One was IMPOSTOR a big budget American movie that was very disappointing while the other was a British movie called INSEMENOID which won this weeks most reviled movie in every TV guide and for once the TV listing mags got it right since this is the worst movie I've seen all week Someone decides to do an ALIEN clone with a vampire which might have worked as a premise but Norman J Warren has decided to cast English Rose actress Judy Geeson as a cruel and blood thirsty vampire .
Warren's low-budget sci-fi/horror Inseminoid is an absolutely dire viewing experience from start to finish, cheap and nasty to look at, poorly directed, and devoid of any originality, atmosphere, tension or excitement whatsoever.Shot in and around Chislehurst Caves, which are made to look like an alien environment through the 'clever' use of coloured filters and a smoke machine, this cheap, exploitative piece of crap sees a group of interplanetary boffins (including past-their-prime Hammer babes Stephanie Beacham and Judy Geeson, and future star Victoria Tennant) discover a malevolent extraterrestrial buried in a tomb.
The creature infects a member of the team, turning him into a raging maniac, before raping Geeson's character, sending her into a non-stop fit of violent hysterics for the rest of the film (I found Geeson's performance virtually unbearable; I cheered when she got strangled).Visual effects are primitive (think 'Blakes 7' and you won't go far wrong), there is some rather basic gore which is unlikely to impress, and only Geeson gets her baps out (Stephanie's would have been better), but praise must go to the set, prop, and costume designers, without whose sterling work I wouldn't have laughed so hard: the movie's high-tech space base is constructed from plywood, vacuum formed plastic (decorated with naff futuristic stencil graphics), and assorted plastic crates; the deep space exploration team come equipped with a set of hedge trimmers (!?!?); and space-wear consists of a choice of silver or gold jumpsuit teamed with either a firefighter's mask or motorcycle helmet, and a length of vacuum cleaner hose attached to supply oxygen..
In deep space a group of people you couldn't care the least about get killed and eaten by a young women in their team who has been raped by an alien and goes on a murderous rampage - sounds bad - IS BAD!The acting is diabolical from everyone concerned, the dialogue is hilarious, The 'special' fx are so bad even five year olds would find it hard to be frightened, the plot is ridiculous, The direction is choppy and the editing so poor it gives you a migrain - apart from that it's greatThis Alien rip-off has long since been forgotten & no doubt been left off the 'actors' CVMY VERDICT:- Good for a laugh just don't expect to be scared 4/10 (for hilarity value).
The special effects are non-existent (e.g. motorcycle helmets are used for space helmets!) The music is sooooo bad you will be taking plenty of aspirin.I will be talking a little bit about the movie's plot and scenes, so if you really want to torture yourself.
Despite the fact that Mitch's steak sause covered cadaver was brought back too, the crew pretty much act like "Alright it's back to work!" The rest of the movie is excruciatingly long as Sandy freaks out and pretty much kills and eats everyone except Mark, who ends up strangling her.
Well judge for yourself, but ultimately it's films like this that make you treasure Alien even more; regardless of budget differences.Inseminoid, great title at least, is hysterically bad.
The set design may be no great shakes - the film looks more like a big-screen version of the cult TV series BLAKE'S SEVEN than anything Ridley Scott put his name to - but the caverns that double as the subterranean outer-space dungeons are none too shabby and quite convincingly lit (just forget about the silly red-filtered shots of the planet's surface, so obviously shot in a quarry somewhere), and John Metcalfe's widescreen photography makes the low-budget production look expansive, if not exactly expensive.In short, INSEMINOID is the simple tale of a bunch of incompetent, to say nothing of downright disagreeable cosmonauts who touch down somewhere in the outer reaches of the galaxy and promptly tamper with the ecosystem, including some malevolent crystals and some sinister-looking pods.
Before you can say "quatermass!", the crew members start getting bumped off, going crazy, cracking up, sawing their own feet off (a strong contender for the most cringe-inducing scene in the movie) and, in Judy Geeson's case, being forcefully artificially inseminated by a huge, glowering, crustacean life-form whose alien seed resembles lumpy green porridge.
Geeson blows one guy's stomach open with a bulky laser gun, slices up future Steve Martin better half Victoria Tennant with a pair of scissors and snacks on a shrieking Jennifer Ashley, taking time out in between committing these ghastly murders to give painful birth to two slimy and ugly lethal humanoid alien babies in a sickening sequence that's absolutely appalling to behold (naturally, it's one of my favorite moments in the film).
The cheesy music score by John Scott is a little too silly at times, but for the most part it's good schlock movie music.The acting from the mostly British cast is generally pretty good, with familiar faces like Stephanie Beacham and Victoria Tennant.
The cast, at least on the female side, includes some relatively well-known names such as Judy Geeson, Stephanie Beacham and Victoria Tennant, none of whom look as though they know what they are doing in a film like this.At its best, science fiction can ask some pertinent questions about how science and technology might possibly develop in the future, and also about the philosophical, ethical and social implications of those developments.
Warren & is probably better known in the US under it's alternative title Horror Planet rather than it's proper & better title Inseminoid, written by special make-up effects man Nick Maley & his wife Gloria everyone who says anything about Inseminoid seem to mention the fact that it's a low budget Alien (1979) rip-off which I think is a little unfair.
The acting is pretty good here & a decent cast are taking this far too seriously, there are one or two familiar faces here with Judy Geeson, Stephanie Beacham & Victoria Tennant all making an appearance.Inseminoid is a film which is just considered an bad Alien rip-off because I suppose basically it is but there's enough deviation here & the script takes slightly different directions that it's not the worst offender out there.
HORROR PLANET is one of the worst films ever made for these reasons (*includes spoilers*):1) After the "alien" mates with the woman, she just walks around with these bloodshot eyes.
One of the saddest things in the world is knowing that someone has a talent and doesn't use it.4) The writing is terrible and the make-up crew should've been fired for making everyone look like they were on crack.5) The whole scene with the "alien" mating with the woman is over the top.
And I thought that only a director like Hitchcock could have achieved such a brilliant masterstroke.Finally, the film is original in its idea of an alien monster raping a human female and the exploitation of the subsequent trauma she faces after becoming pregnant.
Amazing that he is put away by Kate(Stephanie Beacham)yet the entire crew has a problem killing another, Sandy(Judy Geeson)who is kidnapped by a big bug-eyed alien who inserts a tube into her vagina with little monster fetuses making their way into the human womb for gestation. |
tt0115341 | Sabrina, the Teenage Witch | The movie centers around Sabrina Sawyer, who is sent to live with her eccentric aunts in Riverdale. On her 16th birthday, Sabrina discovers that she is a witch. Sabrina then develops a crush on Seth, the cutest boy in school who happens to be dating Katie La More, the school's "queen bee." Sabrina has to find a way to use her newly discovered magical power to get Seth to notice her, but at the same time not cast a love spell, which could backfire on her.
After Katie dumps Seth, he starts to notice Sabrina. Sabrina is able to use her magic to win a track competition and get Seth to ask her to the Spring Fling. Katie discovers Sabrina's secret and sets out to let everyone know what Sabrina is. Sabrina has to use her magic to turn Katie into a poodle to stop her but later changes her back. All the while, Harvey likes Sabrina and waits to see if she will have a change of heart and start to notice him. The story ends happily with Sabrina and Harvey together at the dance. | paranormal | train | wikipedia | Sabrina The Teenage Witch is a very well produced and funny show because of one good reason, the characters all have great chemistry.
The Story is about a young half witch/ half mortal called Sabrina Spellman (Melissa Joan Hart) and she went to live with her Aunts Hilda (Caroline Rhea) and Zelda (Beth Broderick) and their world dominating mad cat Salem Saberhagen (Voiced By Nick Bakey).
My favourite character (s) are Sabrina because Melissa Joan hart is a very funny comedy actress and she can make everything funny (plus shes fine), Salem because he makes me laugh all the time i watch him Nick Bakay is a very talented actor and Aunt Hilda, Caroline Rhea is the best actress on the whole show because she portrays wacky Hilda with brilliance.
This show was very funny when they had Mr Kraft, Libby Chessler and Harvey Kinkle but it went down hill when they brought in talentless actors and actress, such as that girl from Clueless and Solei Moon Frye who is not a good actress at all.In Conclusion i give the School Years of Sabrina 10/10 and the College years a 7/10 because i felt that it lost its sparkle after this!
I used to love watching "Sabrina, the Teenage Witch" Friday nights on ABC's TGIF.
My friends and I used to get together every Friday just to watch this show and we never missed an episode.My favorite character was Salem.
I think Melissa Joan Hart played a good teenage witch, too.
My favorite episodes were "Sabrina Through the Looking Glass" and "Hilda and Zelda: the Teenage Years".
"Sabrina, the Teenage Witch" is quite moving and very funny, and it's a shame that it took me so long to realize how great it was.
No one could play the character of Sabrina better than Melissa Joan Hart.
I loved the aunts Zelda and Hilda, but I think they remained on the show too long, as they should have went off the show as soon as Sabrina went to college.
Judging any young adult, be her Sabrina the Teenage Witch or Melissa Joan Hart, one must be pleased with the judgements made so far and have some trust at this point.
I think what was threatening is that many people assumed Melissa Joan Hart was the cute teenager they see on television and not the beautiful adult she is in real life.
Sabrina, The Teenage Witch was once a great show but it has gone downhill over the past several seasons.
The show lost its charm during the college years because Sabrina moved out of her aunt's house, she didn't use her magic that much.The high school years of Sabrina, The Teenage Witch are excellent because it has a very good amount of great characters such as Mr. Kraft, Valarie, Libby, et al.
My favorite character was Mr. Pool but Mr. Pool was only featured in the first season of Sabrina, The Teenage Witch..
Mellissa Joan Hart demonstrated that she was a good comedienne and was ably supported by the two actresses playing her aunts, as well as the lovely Lindsay Sloane in seasons 2-3.Then it all went a bit sour.
But with the network having a hit on its hands they weren't about to let it go, so we ended up with an almost spin-off show showing Sabrina at college dealing with the sort of teen issues that felt like they'd escaped from somewhere else.If you're wanting to see the show at its best, check out seasons 1-3..
This show is the best.Melissa Joan Hart is the perfect actress to play sabrina.This show conbines humour and some real life situations but the great thing about this show is that its not realistic some great shows are realistic but sometimes it's cool to watch a show that doesn't show you real life and bad things that go on.
Now in its sixth season (and a success on both Nickelodeon UK and ITV, though even its biggest fans must wonder how the latter managed to go head-to-head with "The Simpsons" on BBC1 and beat it in the ratings), it's fairly amusing, and the makers had the basic right idea in letting Sabrina go on to college (life moves on even for TV characters).
But if the series started with Sabrina finding out on her 16th birthday that she's a witch, and this is six years later, then she can't be a teenager on the show any more than she is in real life (Melissa Joan Hart started playing Miss Spellman when she was 22, after four years playing explain-it-all Clarissa).
I do think the college episodes were not as good as the high school ones but they were better than the last series which was awful.
When Sabrina Spellman (Melissa Joan Hart) turns 16, she is told by her aunts Hilda (Caroline Rhea) and Zelda (Beth Broderick) that she is a witch.It's a fun teen series.
The plots for each episode are laborious and predictable and the script clichéd and even painful and even given the enormous plot potential for a teenager with magical powers, the powers that be in relation to this show don't seem to be able to come up with anything exciting, adventurous or enthralling for Sabrina to be involved in Despite all this I keep watching the reruns of this show simply because I like Caroline Rhea and Beth Broderick so much and, the more I can see of them the better.
I did enjoy the series when I watched and I really missed TV shows like this, especially live action: the simplicity of it but also, what I love most of it is how relatable the show tries to be.
Sabrina, I feel like the writers tried to give her a personality but it wasn't totally memorable but I feel like they were just trying to write the story about the typical teenager in this time, and in that sense, I thought they did a good job of.
Now I watch them and I remember how easy and fun it was to be a teenage, light hearted, funny, and full of friendship :)My favourite character was Harvey, although how he didn't realise something strange was going on I will never know.
Sure with some of these actors they only play one note stereotypes but they don't really look like they're trying to pull anything off, with the others I can see something.So that was Sabrina The Teenage Witch and it isn't really that great.
Yeah, okay, I tuned in back in the day to see the very cute Melissa Joan Hart on the TV screen, and felt weird about it because it was a show about a teenage girl, but I knew the actress playing said teenage girl was 20 (kind of near my age at the time), and actually didn't feel so bad :)But, the girl aside, I actually tuned in for the zingers from Sabrina's cat.
Sabrina the Teenage Witch was one of my favorite T.V shows of life :D i used to watch back to back episodes everyday when i got home from school.
"Sabrina, the Teenage Witch" was once a very cool TV show but, like most TV series, later it went downhill and was no longer that great.Like most TV series from the past, "Sabrina, the Teenage Witch" started very well and during its first years it was original, creative, imaginative, fresh, charming, funny and with some magic as well.The main character of this TV show, Sabrina (amazingly portrayed by the pretty Melissa Joan Hart) is a very charming and adorable character.
For one thing, Salem (Sabrina's talkative black cat) became too artificial-looking when we all know that he used to look like a real cat before.
My kids recently started watching the reruns of this show - both the early episodes on the N, and the later ones on ABC Family - and they love it.
I also wish they'd done some self-referential humor about the changes - like on "Boy Meets World" where they drop the little sister for an entire season or so, and when a different actor later shows up playing her, they ask her where she's been and she says "upstairs," or when early series token geek "Minkus" shows up for the high school graduation, they ask him where he's been and he says "over there," pointing to the part of the classroom never shown by the camera, before saying "Hey, Mr. Turner, wait up!" and running off screen (Mr. turner being another character who left) Oh well - maybe there will be an E true Hollywood story on this or something?
Sabrina the Teenage Witch is on of my favorite sitcoms.This begins with a teenage girl named Sabrina who comes to live with her aunts.Her life changes forever.For her birthday,she discovers that she has magical powers.With her newly discovered powers,Sabrina balances her friends,school life and family with her magical side and learns important lessons along the way and often from getting out of random situations.I think Sabrina the Teenage Witch is a sweet,teen sitcom enjoyable for the whole family,even for guys.Melissa Joan Hart is one of my favorite actresses of all time.The lines are as pure as the characters who say them.The relationship developed between Harvey and Sabrina is the best.Other than the last episode when they end up together,my favorite has to be the one when Sabrina can tell any mortal that she's a witch and it will all be forgotten after the day is done.It showed the friendship she had between Valarie and Harvey and it also showed that Valarie wouldn't even trade popularity over her friendship with Sabrina.What I love more than the characters,comedy and character development are the episodes.The episodes are all about morals and lectures often given by parents.The show delivers the messages with carisma and brings back old and slightly forgotten sayings such as "the green-eyed monster" or "caught in a web of lies".I absolutely love this show and wish it would still show more episodes.For me,seven seasons isn't enough.8/10.
i don't know why some of you are bashing the show cause it's still great,even though the first 5 seasons were great and the last two are still good even if the aunts aren't in the show,and melissa joan hart is a great and funny actress sure this show won't be that popular like friends and will and grace but still it lasted that long and so many teenagers i know like the show,so my opinion is that the show still rock..
This show is pretty good, it's nothing you wait all day at work/school to get home to, but it's good if you just want to plop down on the couch and have a laugh every now and then.Melissa Joan Hart has the leading role as Sabrina, the high school sophomore who finds out she's a witch, and that she can cast almost any spell, some with unexpected consequences though.
Sabrina [Melissa Joan Hart] has been sent to live with her two aunts Hilda [Caroline Rhea] and Zelda [Beth Broderick] Spellman.
It's also amusing how they're always talking about things that happened centuries ago, and usually blame Hilda for bad things that happened.Melissa Joan Hart is the perfect person to play Sabrina.
She knows exactly how to act to play Sabrina, and even as young as she is, does a splendid job!It's also good how the show can manage to be a funny sitcom about high school and college that any age can watch and be attracted to.
It shows a teenager doing things that kids can relate to- like having boyfriend problems and bullying peers, then moves on to the more different side- being a witch.
It shows kids- and adults- that different does not mean wrong, and in a world as judgemental as this, that's a good thing.Besides, the cat's funny!:).
And now you know why ABC is airing "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire" seven nights a week.The regular shows it has in its' nighttime lineup aren't doing the job.Sabrina The Teenage Witch is a clear example.The show is not funny.The direction of the show and its pace is horrible,one scene moves on to another scene and then to another scene without a clear idea of what is going on.The actors therefore are rushed and the stories seem stilted.The mechanical cat looks cheap and is not good puppeteering in any sense.
Melissa Joan Hart is easy on the eyes and maybe a good actress,who knows,but you can't figure this out in this production run by her mother and done with canned laughter,not in front of a studio audience.The elder Hart has made many changes in the show's four seasons and actors come and go,therefore only Sabrina and her family exist as core characters,but the two aunts Sabrina has at home suffer from the same problem of the show awful direction and pace.This show should be in TV heaven with cancellation right now as aside from seeing MJH and her looks what is the use of this show?It isn't entertaining..
Occasionally, it's funny (usually Salem the cat with his sarcastic remarks) and Melissa Joan Hart is very perky as Sabrina.
Along with Sabrina, who was portrayed perfectly by the beautiful and talented Melissa Joan Hart, we got to experience her new-found powers, achieve her magic license and discover the secret of her family.The cast was amazing.
It's not brooding or mysterious, it doesn't really even have a story, it's just a collection of fun episodes about a 90's high school girl with magic powers, a talking cat and two crazy aunts.A TV show this simple just works.
with the help of her Aunts (Heilda and Zelda Spellman) and the 'family cat' Salam Saberhagen she manages to survive school life.another aspect of the story is the romance of Sabrina and her high school crush/boyfriend Harvey Kinkle despite the fact she is a witch and he is a mortal.However, in season 5 Sabrina started to lose it's touch when Sabrina starts John Adams college and when Harvey breaks up with Sabrina because he found out she was a witch.As a conclusion,i think that Sabrina made my childhood and that it should make a come back..
During much of the show's run, Sabrina is a high school student who lives with her two aunts, Hilda and Zelda, as well as a warlock-turned-cat named Salem.
I loved watching Sabrina as a kid although I never did get to see every episode so I decided to watch it all from beginning to end and I am pleased to say it didn't lose any of it's magic now that I'm an adult.Melissa Joan Hart (Sabrina) is fantastic and brings comedy to the show.
A lot of people criticize the college years of Sabrina but I actually like them a lot better than the teenage years.In the high school seasons, Sabrina was spoiled, self-centered, and honestly not a very likable character.
What carried the show were the side characters like Salem, Hilda, Zelda, Dreama, Harvey, and so on.However in the university seasons I felt that Sabrina actually became likable because she was less selfish and actually used her powers to help other people who needed it.It is too bad that a lot of people couldn't adjust to the change because I would have liked to see a few seasons which documented her life in the real world as an adult, maybe solving real world/ mortal problems.I also would have liked to see a side series about her cousin Amanda and her adventures in the delinquent high school.
I LOVE how season 2 draws out a base line for Sabrina to balance her school studies + studying for her witch's license + Harvey + Libby, Valerie.
She lives with her two aunts Zelda & Hilda and she is in love with a guy named Harvey(or course it was on and off).Eveytime this was aired I used to enjoy watching it from the day it premiered back in 1996 to the day it ended (I think it was 2004 it finshed for good as Sabrina goes off in a motorbike with Harvey as he was the only guy for her) and I used to laugh at all the cray spells Sabrina pulled like the one with the dough man or the one where she becomes Libby and she acts all sweet and innocent like her LOL.Since that show ended Wizards of Waverly Place took over(yeah its something like it except in Wizards they aren't witches they are wizards).
The characters at the beginning were great; Harvey, Jenny, Libby, the quizmaster, Salem and Mr. Poole (my personal fave, shame he left so early on) Hilda and Zelda her aunts started off OK, but then became irritating.I liked Mr. Kraft too as he was always that little bit closer to discovering Sabrina's secret.
The last episode made me feel a lot better though (SPOILER)having Sabrina end up with Harvey on her wedding day to dullard Aaron was great!
I used to love Sabrina The Teenage Witch and have seen every single episode.
All in all I still love to watch the old episodes of Sabrina the Teenage Witch, but I think the writers took it too far and should have left it with Sabrina leaving high school.
The cat Salem is the most funny character after Sabrina, I think.
Sabrina, the Teenage Witch was like a witchcraft sitcom.
I didn't find all the jokes funny, I just watched because some of Sabrina's episodes were interesting.
Melissa Joan Hart was perfect and fit to play the main character, but for me, it was Salem that stole the show in some episodes.
Sabrina is the best witch I have seen to hit media and she insures that what your watching is entertaining, funny and magical..
I used to love the magic of Sabrina and the teenage witch. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.