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
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
tt0073864 | Le vieux fusil | In Montauban in 1944, during the German retreat from France, Julien Dandieu is an ageing, embittered surgeon in the local hospital. Frightened by the German army entering Montauban, Dandieu asks his friend Francois to drive his wife and his daughter to the remote village where he owns a chateau. One week later, Dandieu sets off to meet them for the weekend, but the Germans have now occupied the village. He finds that all the villagers have been herded into the church and shot. In the château, now occupied by the Germans, he finds his daughter shot and his wife immolated by a flame-thrower.
Dandieu decides to kill as many Germans as possible to avenge his family. He takes an old shotgun he used as a child while hunting with his father and sabotages the chateau's bridge before he starts to kill them one by one, taking advantage of his knowledge of the secret passages within the chateau. Trapped inside the castle, the Germans begin to think they are surrounded by many partisans and do not realise that he is, in fact, the only one. When a Resistance detachment drops by, Dandieu refuses their offer to help him and continues his vendetta on his own. Eventually, with no more cartridges for the shotgun, he collects the flame-thrower which killed his beloved wife and uses it to kill the leading SS officer as he is about to commit suicide.
Alerted by the partisans, the inhabitants of a nearby village and a company of American soldiers arrive to collect the dead. Dandieu is picked up by Francois, but has suffered a nervous breakdown following the aftermath of the slaughter, behaving as if his family was still alive. The film ends with a flashback to one of his happier days now gone, where he and his family had undertaken a bike tour. | revenge | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0076100 | Grand Theft Auto | Two young lovers, Sam Freeman (Ron Howard) and Paula Powers (Nancy Morgan), want to get married in Las Vegas. When Paula introduces Sam to her parents they dispute their daughter's decision: they see Collins Hedgeworth (Paul Linke), the son of a wealthy family in the area, as her fiancée. Paula's parents are rich as well and her father, Bigby Powers (Barry Cahill), is planning to run for governor. They think Sam is marrying Paula for the money and call him a fortune hunter, which Paula fiercely disputes.
Sam is thrown off the premises and Paula is sent to her room. She escapes through the window, steals her parents' Rolls-Royce, picks up Sam and hits the road: this is the beginning of two runaway lovers in a wild explosive car chase and race towards Las Vegas. As news of their elopement spreads, several people start off after them to try to stop the fleeing couple.
Paula's father, Bigby Powers starts the chase by arranging his helicopter. Collins Hedgeworth leaves his stable and starts chasing his love interest like mad. When he calls to the TenQ radio station – to DJ Curly Q. Brown (Don Steele) – he offers a USD$25,000 reward for the ones who can catch Paula and Sam. As a result the chase becomes more and more chaotic as many people along and on the road try to stop the couple in order to claim the reward. A number of cars are wrecked and stolen, and a subsequent reward of $25,000 is offered for Collins Hedgeworth, who is wanted by the police for grand theft auto, after he stole a car.
With so many cars following them, Paula and Sam turn onto small, country roads to try to lose their pursuers. He wants to head somewhere else to get married, but she is set on a Vegas wedding. Paula's father makes an emotional appeal to her via telephone, but she refuses to listen to him. As they approach Las Vegas, Sam begins to have doubts about Paula's reasons for eloping, and questions whether she is genuinely motivated by affection for him or a desire to spite her father. She persuades him that she does want to marry him.
The chase is gaining increasing coverage in the news media, with live cameras following the chase. The pursuing cars become involved in a demolition derby, leading to a massive pile-up. The priceless Rolls Royce is totally destroyed, but Paula and Sam manage to escape. They eventually get married. | cult | train | wikipedia | The seventies, a time when, despite the depressingly high crime rate, people left their keys in the ignition without giving it a second thought; when cars were stolen so often we considered them communal property.(By the way, if you're ever the victim of a car theft, stand in the road shaking your fist as the car drives off, then yell 'come back here!' as loudly as possible.
This is sure to get your car back.)The seventies were a magical time, when gubernatorial candidates wore jumpsuits without fear of ridicule and kept hired goons on retainer; when towns had only one radio station and we all listened to it; when whiny polo players were considered good catches.And the car chases!
Many times, while driving to his job as Jack Lord's shoe buffer, he would come across an impromptu car chase headed to Las Vegas or Tahiti or some other fun place and you better believe he joined in!
In the seventies, radio stations thought nothing of scrapping their entire playlist and sending up a fleet of helicopters manned by skinny DJs in smoked glasses to spend days covering a car chase while whole police forces sat idly by, except for that one wacky policeman who always seemed to show up carrying some personal vendetta against one of the chasers and was in way over his head but didn't know it because he wasn't too bright but we understood and we loved him anyway.Because it was the seventies..
Transitioning from actor to director and writer, Ron Howard is at the top of his game.
In "Grand Theft Auto", Ron plays Sam, a smart, simple man who runs off with a rich man's daughter named Paula ( Nancy Morgan) , whom her father and mother disapproves completely.
The two couple go on into a high speed chase all the way to Las Vegas to elope.Unfortunately, the father wants to put a stop to it.
But, stealing every car cost everyone their chances to stop the couple from heading to Las Vegas.
The fiancé mother (Marion Ross) was in so much trouble with the law from stealing a car, to assault to a policeman, I don't think she''ll ever see the light again.
With so many stars including Happy Days producer Garry Marshall, Marion and Ron weren't very Cunningham like in this movie: the language, obscene gestures, and Marion hitting the officer in the groin.
Instead she and Sam steal her father's Rolls Royce and head to Las Vegas to elope.
From this a large road chase eventuates with Colin calling a radio station to announce a $25,000 reward for Paula.
Soon Paula's father has got out the big guns to stop them, while plenty of nutty people join in chase for the doe and the local radio station DJ happens to be commentating the action in a hovering helicopter.Just sit back, and soak it all up.
Following the success of Ron Howard's starring vehicle "Eat My Dust".
Another chance was on offer, and this follow up had Ron Howard kicking off his directorial debut under the watchful eye of producer Roger Corman and what we get is purely light-headed fun with non-stop bustle and chaos ensured.
This tight budget drive-in, b-film is a madcap chase comedy all the way, which is ebulliently staged and provides such a rush due to Howard's concisely economical and desirable direction.
The animatedly mindless screenplay, which is penned by Ron and his father Rance Howard crackles with plenty of freedom to cluster and stretch out the story with mini sub-plots, clever visual gags, highly witty dialogues and a circus show of colourful characters.
The concept is simple, old-school and cartoonish, but Howard's knowledgeable timing and honest tailoring lets the film open up naturally with its crackerjack pacing that never lets the momentum slip and expansively robust and tightly choreographed stunts that lead onto a smash-a-thon of fast and stolen motor vehicles ending in flourish of explosions.
Nancy Morgan shines excellently in a sprightly cheeky turn as Paula and Ron Howard amusedly sits on cruise control as Sam. The Corman-regulars that co-star on this one range from the eccentrically self-absorbed performance by a fantastic Don Steele, Clint Howard, Rance Howard and a minor appearance by Paul Bartel.
Not Bad For What It Is. Ron Howard's directorial debut (in which he also stars) is a pretty good piece of drive-in movie fun, with a silly but fast-paced story and enough car chases and crashes to keep those who go for this kind of thing plenty satisfied.
Before Ron Howard made his most famous movies, he started with this ultra-wacky car chase story.
Sam Freeman (Howard) and Paula Powers (Nancy Morgan) try to announce their marriage plans to her parents', but the latter refuse to accept it.
Much like in "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World", everyone drives in every direction at top speed, damn the peripheral consequences.One thing that really caught my eye was that Marion Ross starred in "Grand Theft Auto".
Maybe it would look like this:Marion: "Now Richard, always remember to be careful behind the wheel."(Richie zooms off.) Marion: "He always took after Howard when it came to driving."***Either way, the movie's outlandish (in fact, it's done like a B-movie), but it's impossible not to like..
I did buy the DVD of this film because it was a Ron Howard's first movie.
If you're looking for fun, non-boring, happy and even romantic film, you should definitely get this.7 of 10.
GRAND THEFT AUTO (2+ outta 5 stars)Pretty minor car crash movie from the peak of the car crash movie boom of the mid-to-late-70s.
Notable as the directorial debut of star Ron Howard...
so producer Roger Corman deserves some credit for the later *good* movies that Howard directed.
cornball plot about 2 young kids in love stealing a Rolls Royce and heading for Vegas to get hitched.
Last major film role for Ron Howard...
GRAND THEFT AUTO (Ron Howard, 1977) **1/2.
Made for Roger Corman's low-budget outfit (he explains how it all came about in the accompanying interview), this road movie on the lines of VANISHING POINT (1971) and THE SUGARLAND EXPRESS (1974) evolves into one uninterrupted chase along the American midwest.
It's undeniably enjoyable on a non-think level, relying on an endless stream of energetic stunts (mostly gratuitous car crashes and explosions) to carry its thin plot as far as it can go.
Howard also took the lead role and co-wrote the script with his father Rance; fellow cast members from Howard's popular HAPPY DAYS TV series also put in appearances…and there's even a cameo by director Paul Bartel!
The technical crew holds some surprise: Allan Arkush (who later helmed the Corman-produced ROCK 'N' ROLL HIGH SCHOOL [1979]) served as second-unit director, Gary Graver (best-known for his collaborations with Orson Welles) was the cinematographer, and Joe Dante (even after having started his own directorial career) edited the film!.
The funniest car chase movie of all time!.
Forget Smokey and the Bandit, check out Grand Theft Auto if you want a car-chase movie in the comedy genre!
This was also Ron Howard's directorial debut.
This was also Ron Howard's directorial debut.
It's about these teenagers who go joyriding in stolen cars, and they get into the most deliriously funny situations anyone could imagine in a car-chase movie!I don't care if this movie didn't get any good reviews or if it wasn't considered 'cool', but hey, after all it was Ron Howard's first movie he ever produced.
If you're in the mood for a serious car-chase movie, rent something like Bullitt or The French Connection.
Opie Grows Up & Has Fun Coming Out. The Howard brothers, Ron & Rance got together to write this film.
Plot wise, at least it has a plot, but it gets a little wild at times.Amazing Howards direction is good enough here that for his first film it comes out OK.
Her family is rich, while Ron's TV mom (Marion Ross) is just against the whole thing.
You get the feeling fairly late in the film that some of the characters including Ron & the girlfriends own are just getting developed.
Paula Powers and Sam Freeman (Ron Howard) shock her rich parents with news of their engagement.
After a couple of crashes, Collins offers a reward over the radio and the mad chase go into high gear.This is Ron Howard's full length directorial debut.
The plot is only an excuse to put on a cross-country car chase like "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World".
He can have some fun but he's not changing the way car chases are done..
For any reasons other than nostalgia, I can't imagine anyone wanting to watch this lame film, the actual purpose of which seems to be an excuse to wreck cars and trucks.
It's just kind of entertaining though to look back at a movie that, while totally stupid, shallow and poorly acted, is simultaneously absurdly pure, simple, and innocent, just to remind myself of how different times really were when I was young, and that it wasn't just a dream..
Good For What It Is. Grand Theft Auto (1977) ** 1/2 (out of 4)Ron Howard made his directorial debut with this Roger Corman chase picture.
In the film Howard plays Sam Freeman, a man who runs off with his rich girlfriend (Paula Powers) who just happened to steal her father's Rolls Royce.
Soon her fiancé (Paul Linke) from a pre-arranged marriage is on the chase as is his mother, various cops and countless other people who jump in on the bounty placed on the runaways.
Howard does a pretty good job with this film as there's really not too much you can ask for in a chase picture except that it be fast and fun.
GRAND THEFT AUTO is certainly a lot of fun for fans of the genre because it offers up some non-stop chases, plenty of action and some pretty memorable characters as well.
The action in the film pretty much starts at the two-minute mark and never lets up as we get all sorts of wild chases and car crashes.
It really does seem as if everyone just sat around trying to come up with the various ways you could crash cars either into one another or into various objects.
I thought the supporting group of "chasers" were a lot of fun and especially Marion Ross as the fiancé's mother who won't back down until she gets her baby back.
Howard and Nancy Morgan do a nice job together even with their characters being the least interesting in the film.
Howard was obviously working with a very small budget but the editing really kept the film going, made it rather stylish and also made it look like it was a much bigger picture.
GRAND THEFT AUTO isn't a masterpiece but it's a fun piece of drive-in entertainment..
If there was a genre "Car-chase Movie"....
The only point of the film is to show car chase after one another, on highways and in the desert.
I've always had a soft spot for car chase movies, so naturally this one interested me.
SPOILER WARNINGS:In his directorial debut, Ron Howard plays high school kid Sam who is in love with rich girl Paula.
Her dad wants her to marry rich kid Collins Hedgeworth, whom Paula denounces as a 'flake'.
Her dad tries to get the better of her by confiscating her car keys, but then she gets the last laugh as she purloins her old man's Rolls-Royce and picks up Sam.
The two then set off for Las Vegas to get married.Polo-playing wimp Collins tries to give chase, as does his mother, who is trying to get him back before he hurts himself.
They include: a pair of horny mechanics, a bunch of bumbling private eyes hired by Paula's dad, a money-hungry preacher, a group of dynamite toting rednecks, a group of Hispanic low-riders and an LA cop looking to bust most of the group for grand theft auto.
This film is brilliant and is a must for car chase fans, like me!.
Recap: Paula Powers, daughter of governor candidate Bigby Powers, has decided to spurn the fiancée, Collins, that her parents have chosen for her, and elope with her love Sam. She steals Bigby's Rolls Royce and heads for Vegas.
But when he crashes his car, he calls to a popular radio station offering 25 000 dollars if the pair is caught, then steals a car and restarts the chase.
Everyone that spots the Rolls wants in on the action, and it doesn't help that the whole circus is reported live.Comments: One of a few quite similar movies that appeared at the end of the 70's along with such titles as Smokey and the Bandit and Gone in 60 Seconds.
Like many of the others, Grand Theft Auto has a simple idea, offer a simple excuse for an extended car chase, crash a lot of vehicles in spectacular ways, and run it for approximately 90 minutes.
But at as such it offers some easy entertainment, a few laughs and some very easy watching.A little extra fun to watch as it is the real directing debut of Ron Howard, who also plays the lead character Sam in the movie.
And as in many other of Ron's movies, brother Clint also appears in the cast.But other than that, it isn't much to remember.
If you enjoy a car chase movie, this is maybe something you want to see.
Eloping because her parents were not happy of her marrying against their wishes, Nancy Morgan and boyfriend Ron Howard(who also directed)head for Vegas in papa's(Barry Cahill) Rolls Royce with many vehicles damaged along the way.
Morgan was supposed to marry a rich prick(Paul Linke, who is hilarious) she doesn't even like because her parents wanted her to be a part of his wealthy family.
Set out on the highway, Linke chases after them, with his mom(Marion Ross, Howard's Happy Days co-star)trying to find him.
There's nothing quite like vehicle carnage and director Howard lets out all the stops, with a car destroying something(or being destroyed by something)every five minutes it seems.
Howard and Morgan evading those out to catch them, constantly avoiding "reward seekers", hired men paid by her father(using "G-men", or at least they look like them, and a helicopter crew), and nutty Linke who thinks she's under Howard's mind control(in his mind, he's a hero in pursuit of a damsel in distress).
Like other cross country chase movies, Howard and Morgan's "odyssey" becomes popular news and they reach a form of celebrity.
But, Howard doesn't end there..an obnoxious radio personality, who had been following them from a helicopter, decides to continue bugging them, finding instead a suburban house and outside pool awaiting him(there's nothing quite like seeing a station wagon exploding through the living room of a house).
Clint Howard shows up as one of the gearheads who chases after our eloping young lovers.
Rance Howard, Ron's dad, is hired by Morgan's father to find the kids.
GRAND THEFT AUTO is exactly what it was intended to be, an entertaining comedy action drive-in movie.
I thought Morgan and Howard has wonderful chemistry as the eloping couple, and the cast really inhibit their roles with a great deal of oomph..
Headstrong rich gal Paula Powers (a winningly spunky portrayal by the fetching Nancy Morgan) steals the family Rolls Royce and heads off to Las Vegas to marry her amiable working class boyfriend Sam Freeman (a likable turn by Ron Howard, who also made his directorial debut with this film).
Director Howard, who also co-wrote the simple script with his dad Rance, tells the entertaining story at a zippy pace, maintains an engaging light-hearted and good-natured tone throughout, and stages the assorted wild'n'wacky vehicular carnage with considerable go-for-it brio.
Better yet, the enthusiastic cast attack the material with infectious aplomb, with especially energetic contributions from Marion Ross as the disapproving Vivian Hedgeworth, Peter Isacksen and Clint Howard as a pair of loony hot-rodders, Rance Howard as no-no0nsense private eye Ned Slinker, Paul Linke as pompous preppy Collins, Don Steele as obnoxious disc jockey Curly Q.
Ron Howards' humble but diverting beginning as a director..
Ever amiable Ron Howard stars in this typical enough entry into the chase-and-car-crash genre.
He plays Sam Freeman, the young man whom rich girl Paula Powers (Nancy Morgan) intends to marry, against the wishes of her snooty, judgmental father Bigby (Barry Cahill).
Bigby, who's running for governor, would rather she marry another rich person, the *really* schmucky Collins Hedgeworth (Paul Linke).
So what Paula does is appropriate her fathers' Rolls Royce and take off with Sam for Las Vegas.
The story escalates into a circus as Collins takes off after Sam & Paula, Collins's mother Vivian (Howards' 'Happy Days' mom Marion Ross) takes off after *him*, and other assorted greedy individuals join in the pursuit hoping to obtain the awards offered for the return of both Paula and Collins.Howard had already starred in the thematically similar "Eat My Dust" for Roger Corman, with the proviso that he get to direct their next joint effort.
Howard and his dad, character actor Rance Howard, devised this story, in which Ron could technically be billed as the star but not have to be in every scene so that Ron could focus on the direction.
Of course, despite the game efforts of this cast (also including Rance, Rons' brother Clint, The Real Don Steele, Hoke Howell, Ken Lerner, and Leo Rossi, with Paul Bartel and Garry Marshall in cameos), the real "star" of course is the intense action; Allan Arkush (who has an uncredited bit as the clown) handled the second unit direction and the vehicle stunts are absolutely first rate.
The script by Jr. and Sr. Howard does have some good laughs going for it, to be sure; it's a hoot to see Ross actually flip off a cop!The music by Peter Ivers is quite catchy, Gary Graver handles the cinematography, and the editor was Joe Dante. |
tt0024915 | British Agent | In the days leading up to the Russian Revolution, Stephen Locke (Leslie Howard), a minor British diplomat, watches rioting in the streets. Revolutionary Elena Moura (Kay Francis) shoots it out with a Cossack soldier; when she retreats onto the grounds of the consulate, the soldier follows, forcing Stephen to intervene to protect British extraterritoriality. After the Cossack leaves, Elena emerges; she and Steven are attracted to each other, but their politics clash. Elena departs.
After the Russian Empire is overthrown and the Soviet Union is born, most of the Western diplomats evacuate. Stephen is left behind with just a servant, "Poohbah" Evans. Day after day, he waits with mounting frustration for instructions, passing the time with others in the same situation, American Bob Medill (William Gargan), Gaston LeFarge (Phillip Reed) and Tito Del Val (Cesar Romero).
His boredom is lifted when he meets Elena again. She is now an important member of the government, working for Commissioner of War Trotsky (J. Carrol Naish). He romances her, and they quickly fall in love.
However, her first loyalty is to her country. She demonstrates this when Stephen finally receives orders from England. He is to try to prevent the Soviet Union from concluding a separate peace with Imperial Germany, which would free up large numbers of German soldiers for the Western Front; however, he is warned that he is only an "unofficial" British representative. Stephen carelessly reads the message in Elena's hearing. She passes along the information to her boss. As a result, when Stephen pleads with the Soviet government in Moscow to keep fighting, his arguments are undercut by their awareness of his status. He manages to get a delay of three weeks, to see if he can persuade his superiors to agree to Soviet demands: £50 million, five army divisions and munitions. Instead, without Stephen's knowledge, the British send a force to Archangel to fight alongside the internal enemies of the Soviets.
After the Czar is executed, Medill, LeFarge and Del Val persuade Stephen to join them in supporting counterrevolutionary forces. When Lenin is seriously wounded in an assassination attempt, the Soviets initiate a harsh crackdown. LeFarge and Del Val are killed while attempting to contact a rebel military leader in the city. Medill tries to do the same, but is caught and tortured for Stephen's whereabouts. When he refuses to crack, he is sentenced to die by firing squad the next day.
Elena is ordered to persuade him to tell her where Stephen is; knowing she is in love with Stephen, Medill gives her the address. She reluctantly gives the information to Trotsky, who orders soldiers to level the building. Elena sneaks into the building, determined to die with Stephen. They are reprieved, however. Just as the soldiers start shooting, news arrives that Lenin will recover, and that he has ordered the release of all political prisoners. Later, Stephen and Elena depart for England; at the train station, Medill requests they send him a supply of bubble gum. | murder | train | wikipedia | "never mix business with pleasure" - but this film is an exception to the rule.
"British Agent" succeeds in being both thought-provoking, and emotionally engaging.
It would've been easy to lose the characters in the history lesson, but, fortunately, even the supporting cast make an impression and make you care about what happens to them.
I thought there was a good balance between expository dialogue and action scenes, as well.True, at 80 minutes the story is rushed - it could've been a bit longer, especially to give more depth to the relationship that develops between Steve (Leslie Howard) and Elena (Kay Francis).
One feels sympathy for all the characters, and understanding of both sides - no small feat, considering the opposing political views.This film provides an effective introductory history lesson, a relatively unbiased portrayal of two different countries/ideologies, and a gripping love story.
It's not easy to juggle all these elements into a cohesive whole, but I believe "British Agent" does a fine job of educating *and* entertaining.
Apparently based on the memoirs of Sir Robert Hamilton Bruce Lockhart, this film pits Leslie Howard versus the tumultuous events in Russia during 1917, and 1918.
Though this film leaves out any mention of someone named Sidney Reilly (the infamous "Ace of Spies", whose exploits were also recounted by Lockhart), and Kay Francis steps in as a Russian firebrand.
Meeting by accident the night of the first revolution, "Locke" and Elena are instantly smitten.When Locke is sent back to Petrograd to stall the Soviet's armistice with Germany (which would endanger the Allies on the western front), Elena is now secretary to a certain V.
Short on romance, but long on suspenseful political drama and schemes.
Leslie Howard is terrific as usual, and Michael Curtiz' direction is crackling.
Also hard to overlook is a young actor named Cesar Romero, displaying a light comedic touch..
Well, a film starring Leslie Howard and Kay Francis and directed by Michael Curtiz could never be a complete disaster.
"British Agent" from 1934 is far from that, but because of the script, it's a little strange.This film is based on the memoirs of R.C. Lockhart.
"British Agent" is only 80 minutes long and it packs in a tremendous amount of plot.
Leslie Howard is Steven Locke, who works for the British embassy in Russia at the time of the revolution.
He falls for Elena Moura (Francis), a woman he saves.
This is the first problem because they meet in one scene and are madly in love in practically the next.Locke is instructed to keep Russia from signing a separate peace with Germany, which would be harmful to England.
Elena holds to a different ideology, being a follower of Lenin.
That's the second problem -- in the midst of a revolution, Locke receives a dispatch from London and reads it out loud while Elena is in the house.Elena continues to be in love with Locke, betraying him at the same time.The acting is very good, and Howard and Francis have wonderful chemistry.
Possibly if the love story had been developed more, it would have been more believable.It's always a delight to see Leslie Howard in a film, as well as Kay Francis.
I'll take them any way I can get them, and here, it's in "British Agent.".
Early espionage rare film set in revolutionary Russia.
The cast is tremendous in this 1934 Warner Brothers film, "British Agent." Based on a 1932 book, the movie takes place mostly in Russia in the early days of World War I and of the Bolshevik Revolution.
My high rating of the film is partly because of its historical value.
It depicts very well those events and that time in history.
Few movies have been made of these two events in relation to each other.
Even with Hollywood changes and the natural nuances of the source writer, R.H. Bruce Lockhart in his memoirs, the movie has value for the historical events it covers.
It also is credible in its portrayal of the culture and people, as well as costume and dress of the time.
It would be interesting to know how much the characters in the film are based on real people.
Still, some are obvious from people in Lockhart's book.
It's not hard to get his connection with the male lead, Leslie Howard.
In name – Lockhart and Locke, as well as in character.
Howard plays Steve Locke who is vice-consul to the British embassy in St. Petersburg and Moscow.
When the revolution breaks out and the embassy officials are called back to England, he is left behind as the sole British representative.
He's then the acting Consul for Great Britain to Russia.
In real life, Bruce Lockhart was Acting British Consul- General in Moscow when the first Russian revolution broke out in early 1917.
But he returned to England before the Bolshevik Revolution of October.
His main purpose was to persuade Russia not to sign a peace pact with Germany, and to come into WW I on the side of the Allies.
That's very close to the portrayal of Locke's character and his movements in this film, if not the exact titles he carried.
Kay Francis plays Elena Moura.
She and Locke are the romantic element of this film, and it comes across as a believably deep-felt love between the two.
Howard and Francis carry off this relationship very well, with a respect for each other's ideology.
In real life, Lockhart did not have this romance, but he helped the couple that did.
British writer Arthur Ransome had been living and writing in Russia when he met Trotsky's secretary, Evgenia Petrovna Shelepina.
After the end of the Bolshevik Revolution, Lockhart helped her get to England.
Lockhart's life itself is very interesting for his wide travels and experiences.
It's every bit as intriguing as this film that is based on a short span of that life.
Sir Robert Hamilton (R.H.) Bruce Lockhart, was a journalist, author, secret agent, British diplomat to Moscow and Prague, with other travel and business experiences as well.
He was a secret agent also in his consulate positions in Russia.
Lockhart's son, Robin, wrote the book about Reilly, "Ace of Spies." It was the basis for the 1983 TV miniseries, "Reilly, Ace of Spies."The rest of the cast in this film are excellent.
William Gargan, Cesar Romero, J.Carrol Naish, and several others play their parts superbly.
As I said the historical aspects and book connection raise this film a couple notches.
The only criticism I have is with the conduct of Howard's character, Locke.
I don't know if Lockhart or anyone else in British intelligence of the time advised on this film.
But if British intelligence operated as loosely in that day as it appears in this film, it would be no wonder to any viewers how the enemy could find out so much about Britain's operations.
And then, when he sees she's gone a couple of times after that, he doesn't seem to think any more about it, or he disregards it.
I would suppose that by WW II, British intelligence would have improved to a point that such loose and stupid behavior would get one shot or locked up as a collaborator or very bad source of leaks at the least.
I wonder that no one thought about that when making the movie.
Perhaps it really was that way?The movie opens in 1917 Petrograd outside the British embassy.
St. Petersburg/Petrograd was then the capitol of Russia.
There are many more interesting details about that time and those events.
In the meantime, and for all others, this film serves as a good peek at the events and time.
And, it's a film that most people should enjoy..
Purportedly based on the memoirs of R.H. Bruce Lockhart, the UK's man on the ground during the days of the Russian Revolution, Leslie Howard plays the consul general at the British Embassy whose other tasks include fomenting a little counterrevolution on the side.
That's constantly getting in the way of his romance with Bolshevik Kay Francis.What was fascinating here was that the spy Howard was so terribly indiscreet as to allow Francis to gain valuable information for her side.
As a British Agent it seemed like everything that Howard was trying came up real short except in the romance department.But Howard and Francis are a good match in screen chemistry in the romance department.
As history British Agent leaves a lot to be desired.
I think had the film been done by a British studio it probably would have turned out better..
Leslie Howard in the thick of things in the Russian revolution.
Much better than its reputation, this film has been treated rather unfairly by ignorants who haven't bothered to look deeper into it, like also other films of the Russian revolution, especially Sternberg's "The Last Command" and Marlene Dietrich's "Knight Without Armour", perhaps the best film of the Russian revolution.
Bruce Lockhart, who lived through this story himself, happened to be a legate at the British Embassy in Petersburg when the crisis grew crucial, and later was in the thick of things in Moscow.
He was the one who told the story of Sidney Reilly and his conspiracies and efforts to save Russia, and he later played an important part in the Second World War as Churchill's right hand in the propaganda war against Germany.
He wrote a series of extremely interesting memoirs and was also in the centre of things in Prague 1948 when Jan Masaryk was defenestrated and the communists took over.
Leslie Howard makes a very credible and true characterization of Lockhart's critical ordeals in the heart of the revolution at a loss against the lack of initiative, resolution and political insight in London.
He and Reilly could have saved Russia from the communists, if London had responded.
This film romanticizes the drama, of course, with some exaggerations and focusing too much on Kay Francis, while Lenin's would be murderess was much more interesting - she is only shown in the deed.
Although between "Of Human Bondage" and "Captain Blood", "British Agent" hardly deserves to be neglected..
Here's a side of the Revolution you didn't see in Warren Beatty's love-letter to Lenin, REDS.
The protagonists are a group of diplomats who are trying to counter the Red revolution by supporting the White army faction.
But they're being undermined by a beautiful Russian woman (Kay Francis) who happens to be having an affair with one of the English agents (Leslie Howard), and passes info on to Lenin himself.It's all kind of a muddle, with historical tidbits mixed in with a maudlin love story.
It's hard to think of Francis as a Russian, since she makes no attempt at an accent, and Leslie Howard is one of my least favorite actors of the era (he always seems like a weedy little wimp).
There are some nice sets, some war action, and a very young Cesar Romero.
Definitely not as good as other international spy pictures of the 30s-40s but it deals with events not often covered in filmdom, so it's worth a look..
You get Leslie Howard, Kay Francis, a flock of 'A' film character actors and Michael Curtiz to direct, and "British Agent" is the best you come up with?
My rating above is the best I can do for this stemwinder of a movie - and it's only 80 minutes long.
Where did they go wrong?For starters, the muddled plot is neither suspenseful nor compelling and the picture is saved only by its two stars.
It is always a treat to watch Howard, one of filmdom's brightest and best actors in any picture, even if it's beneath his considerable talent.
He had just finished "Of Human Bondage" and his next was "The Scarlet Pimpernel", so with "British Agent" he was in between pictures.
Kay Francis was so lovely in all her pictures (See "Jewel Robbery") - she did it for me the way film archaeologists describe Greta Garbo - that I forgive her for a lapse in judgment for taking on this one.
Normally glamorous and alluring, she was out of her element as a Russian revolutionary.
"Casablanca" was about 10 years off.I am certain the Russian Revolution was more interesting in person, but it is Hollywood's job to recreate events and make them exciting and entertaining.
Despite a completely unbelievable romance, the film has got something....
Hollywood and the American people seem to know very, very little about the Russian Revolution--I should know, I am a retired history teacher.
In particular, few would realize that portions of Russia were occupied by foreign troops to ostensibly guarantee the safety of their nationals--though the US, Britain and others actually helped the White Russians (the anti-Communists) militarily during the period near the end of WWI up until about 1920.
So, the fact that "British Agent" is set in Russia during this period makes it very interesting and unique.
Aside from the very leftist film "Reds" (don't get me started on my I dislike this dull film) and "Dr. Zhivago", this is the only mainstream film I can think of that actually tries to discuss this period in history.Leslie Howard plays a government agent sent to Russia following their first revolution--the one that preceded the Communist revolution five months later.
So Howard is given the impossible task to convince this teetering government to stay in the war because the Allied forces were afraid Russia exit would doom them to lose.
And, such missions to Russia DID occur--but they had absolutely no effect and the country soon had a new revolt and they simply quit fighting.All this is pretty interesting and here is where the film starts to bog down--even though it's actually supposed to be based on the true story of a lady revolutionary.
Kay Francis plays this woman and although Leslie is not in the least sympathetic to the communist cause, they inexplicably fall in love.
My other gripe against the film is small and very typical for movies of the era.
This is that no one in the film really looked or sounded Russian!
Still, if you can ignore these two problems, the film is interesting and informative.
Romance and intrigue in WW1 Russia.
It's always such a pleasure to see Leslie Howard.
His acting is superb and his romance with Kay Francis touching.
How director Michael Curtiz put so much plot and action into such a short film about the Russian Revolution is impressive.It is interesting to observe that the British Embassy was in Petrograd,and just a British Consulate in Moscow.
How the Embassy was able to amass all those guests, in all their finery, in the middle of war torn Russia on the brink of revolution, is surprising.Howard's cohorts, Reed, Gargan, and Romero were immensely enjoyable.
Gargan's addiction to gum was amusing and provided a light element to all the drama.When their world is about to blow up around them Howard and Francis are saved by the bell and they ride off into the sunset.
Big story, small picture.
How do you tell a story whose characters are involved in momentous historical events (the Russian Revolution's effect on World War I) in only eighty minutes - with a love story and international complications added for good measure?
You follow the unfortunate example of this picture, and condense everything: history, conflict, character motivation, plot resolution.
The result is a simplistic, unbalanced and inane account of choosing between love and duty (Kay Francis has the answer: she chooses both) while the bullets fly, bombs explode, and a wounded Lenin struggles to regain consciousness so that the lovers may flee to a happy ending.A solid cast - with an especially good performance by J.
The earth has turned 36,500 days since New Years 1917, and the end of the empire meant a new Russia, one that would impact world history.
As a new regime rises with a different style of leadership at the helm, the world held its breath, but certain governments were not about to stand idly by.
That's where the British coming in, sending secret agent Leslie Howard over to check everything out, hoping for the best as World War I airs its ugly head, but not taking any chances.
This involved the possible release of German soldiers, something that England and much of the rest of the world could not resist.Handsomely put together by Warner Brothers at their most lavish, it was under the direction of Michael Curtiz, one of the most versatile of all Hollywood directors.
Howard represents the English embassy after many British flee, and when he begins a romantic liaison with Russian revolutionary Kay Francis, his ideals are brought into question as more havoc breaks out.
On her part, Francis (who is first seen shooting at a Cossack) has strong ideals herself, and when asked to betray the man she lives, is torn apart.
Lavish but politically convoluted, thus is problematic because one should know more about the Russian revolution if one expects to understand everything.
A lot of footage appears to have been edited out and while the film tries to flow without cohesion, there's enough history brought up to tie together a few loose ends.The cast is fine, with Howard a hot leading man at the time with at least two other classics released at the time.
Francis is cast in quite a different role, not a majorly romantic part, and certainly far from her dozen of other films concerning mother love.
Her wardrobe is a far cry from her many clothes horse parts, and she does fine alternating between sympathetic and deceitful.Others who stand out include a young Cesar Romero and Irving Pichel, although some of the accents are questionable.
In Francis's case, it's nonexistent.
As a huge fan of hers, I've seen many of her films three, four times, some more.
But for some reason, prior to this viewing, I was unable to make it through the whole film. |
tt0388473 | Tokyo Goddofazazu | One Christmas Eve three people, a middle-aged alcoholic named Gin, a former drag queen Hana and a dependent runaway girl Miyuki, discover an abandoned newborn while looking through the garbage. Deposited with the unnamed baby is a note asking the finder to take good care of her and a bag containing clues to the parent's identity. The trio sets out to find the baby's parents. The baby is named Kiyoko (清子), literally meaning "pure child" as she is found on Christmas Eve.
Outside a cemetery, the group encounters a high-ranking yakuza trapped under his car. The man happens to know the owner of the club Kiyoko's mother used to work in; he is getting married to the man's daughter that day. At the wedding, the groom tells them that the baby's mother is a former bar girl named Sachiko. He gives them Sachiko's address, but the party is interrupted when a maid, revealed to be a Latin American hit man in disguise, attempts to shoot the bride's father with a Tokarev TT-33. The hit man kidnaps Miyuki and the baby and takes them back to his home. There, Miyuki befriends the hit man's wife and shows her some pictures of her family.
Hana searches for Miyuki and Kiyoko while Gin takes care of an old homeless man whom he finds dying in the street. After giving Gin a little red bag, the old man peacefully passes away. Some teenagers show up and beat Gin and the deceased old man. Meanwhile, Hana finds the girls and they go off to find a place to stay.
Hana takes them to a club he used to work at. Gin, who was found by another member of the club, is also there. The trio sets out to find Sachiko's house. They're informed of the unhappy relationship between Sachiko and her husband. The group rests at a store until they are told to leave by the clerk. Hana collapses, and Gin and Miyuki bring him to the hospital. At the hospital, Gin finds his daughter, working as a nurse. Hana berates Gin in front of his daughter and storms out of the hospital. Miyuki follows with Kiyoko.
Hana and Miyuki find Sachiko about to jump off a bridge. Sachiko insists that her husband got rid of the baby without her knowledge, and they return it to her. Meanwhile, Gin finds Sachiko's husband, who reveals that Kiyoko is actually a baby that Sachiko stole from the hospital. They chase after Sachiko and the baby. After an intense car chase through the city, Miyuki follows Sachiko to the top of a building, where Sachiko reveals she became pregnant, thinking it would bring her closer to her husband. When the baby was stillborn, she decided to kidnap Kiyoko from the hospital, thinking, in her grief, the baby was hers. Sachiko tries to jump off the building, but her husband comes out of his apartment (just across the street) and begs her to start over with him. Sachiko jumps off nevertheless and Miyuki catches her but Sachiko accidentally drops the baby off of the building. Hana jumps after Kiyoko. He catches the baby and lands safely due to a miraculous gust of wind.
Hana, Miyuki, and Gin are taken to the hospital. Miyuki hands Gin his cigarettes and drops the old man's small red bag on the floor, revealing a winning lottery ticket. Kiyoko's real parents want to ask the trio to become her godparents. When a police inspector introduces them to the trio, the inspector is revealed to be Miyuki's father. | psychedelic, comedy, flashback | train | wikipedia | The "miracles DO happen on Christmas" cliché is very boring and I typically don't enjoy movies that employ it, but this is a very different kind of Christmas movie.We are given three homeless characters with complex personalities and backgrounds, who are as endearing as they are repellent.
We learn the secrets that made these people homeless, we learn about the workings of human shame and desperation, and we learn that "miracles DO happen on Christmas." But in the least cheesy way possible!The plot is very slow-moving, but still, it is interesting and very carefully laid out.
This would be a very compelling live-action movie, but the use of animation adds so much visual interest, particularly the expressive (and sometimes hideous!!) face of Hana, the gangly transvestite.
Having suffered through the painfully pretentious and shallow, pseudo-Lynchian mess of Perfect Blue, I was understandably skeptical about watching another film by Satoshi Kon (I have not yet seen Millennium Actress, but am now quite intrigued to do so).
Tokyo Godfathers (a title which at first struck me as belonging most probably to a pseudo-psychological mafia thriller) was not only a pleasant surprise; it was the best anime feature I've seen in many years, probably since Ghost in the Shell, excluding anything by Hayao Miyazaki.
Like the classic Grave of the Fireflies, Tokyo Godfathers struck me as unusual in the fact that it draws much from European cinema English, Irish, German or Italian while most commercial anime features try to mimic American film-making.
Kon triumphs, like in his excellent series Paranoia Agent, by not succumbing to the accepted prototypes and standards of how characters should look in an anime film; the lead characters in the film are all gorgeously ugly, in a way that even Miyazaki had not yet dared to do.
Especially charming is Hana (AKA 'Uncle Bag'), the golden-hearted transvestite, who supplies much of the film's comic relief but also some of its most touching moments.Tokyo Godfathers despite some far-fetched but amusing plot twists and coincidences is at its core a very simple story, a beautiful little story about family, love and friendship.
This movie is not only a technical masterpiece of the Japanese animation style, but can also rival a good independent live-action film in its storytelling.
As a Westerner, I was astonished at how the homeless characters adapted to Japanese traditional practices for their survival.The story of "Tokyo Godfathers" is much more compelling and heartwarming than Kon's previous films, "Perfect Blue" and "Milennium Actress", but the signature semi-realistic drawing style from his other films is still prominent.
Kon is the next Miyazaki, and I predict that he will continue to bring Japanese animation films to the international foreground years to come..
The story revolves around 3 homeless people (a middle aged man name Gin, a homosexual cross-dresser name Hana, and a teenage girl named Miyuki) who discover a newborn baby in the garbage.
Right from the start, Tokyo Godfathers was among the funniest animated features I had ever seen.The film quickly draw comparisons to Three Men and a Baby as well as the idea of the three wise men.
At the same time, the provide a touching story of three people with nothing but the clothing on their bodies going out of their way to find the child's home.If you get the chance, Tokyo Godfathers makes for the perfect holiday feature for everyone to watch.
Director Satoshi Kon has concocted a little wonder of an animated film, a character based ensemble action comedy about thwarted families, homelessness in Tokyo and strange twists of fate.
Sure, it's always possible to do these kind of things in live action (more or less) but thank God we have a filmmaker of Kon's vision applying his ample animation skills to stories like this.
Sadly, the film was not added to the IMDb until months later, so I've had to sit on my comments for some time.I'm a big fan of director Satoshi Kon. Both of his previous films feature stories and issues not normally seen in animated films.
Tokyo Godfathers, a 2003 Japanese anime from well known director Satoshi Kon (Paprika, Millennium Actress), is about an unlikely trio of homeless people that finds a baby abandoned on Christmas eve.
There are also some similarities to Dickens' Christmas Carol including numerous flashbacks and a character encountering what seems to be a future version of himself who offers him a second chance.Satoshi Kon's film is more than just a pastiche of his influences, however, he brings his own unique sensibilities to the table.
In continuing my trip into the late Satoshi Kon's all-too-small body of work (four feature films as director and one television series that is MUCH too hard to track down), I now come across this film, 2003's Tokyo Godfathers, which I unfortunately missed when it was first released and was actually the first time I had heard of the director.I was happy to finally come across a copy and pop it in...
It's a sentimental piece of pap that has the ambition to the Japanese anime answer to It's a Wonderful Life: a Christmas story that is not necessarily all about Christmas that has supernatural (or "miracle") overtones, and goes sometimes into dark places.The short of it: three homeless people, one a bearded guy with a family that he left behind, a transvestite who insists on being called a woman's name and is so flamboyant as to make Harvey Fierstein jealous, and a young runaway girl whose father is a cop.
Like many anime films and series I can think of (on the action-side Dragonball Z and on the more adult side Princess Mononoke), the story can get complicated, if not impossible to follow.
Specially when it's Christmas time and every one else is at home enjoying their Christmas while our trio is risking their lives for one baby.The movie isn't dubbed like other anime.
Yet "Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas" is still a beautiful song and there are plenty of movies that warm the cockles of my heart when the holidays come around.I can go through the gambit of classic holiday films, each of which conjures memories.
And of course for unbridled Christmas spirit you can't go wrong with the occasionally corny Love Actually (2003) or the genuine Joyeux Noel (2005).I didn't think it would be possible to surprise when it came to Christmas films but I recently sat down to watch Tokyo Godfathers (2003) and had my inner pessimist silenced for a an hour an a half.
Still there are very few anime movies or shows that I have seen and don't at least place value in.Tokyo Godfathers is in my opinion, a valuable cultural masterpiece.
Despite adult subject matter, it is a luminous film for family audiences that has more to say about the good of human nature than say A Christmas Story, Bad Santa or even It's a Wonderful Life (1946).
The film follows their quest to reunite parents and child.What lifts this film into magical territory is that the lives of each of these homeless people would make personal day-to-day survival for most of us testing enough, without having to consider the continual needs of a baby.
Although the story is often carried along by inexplicable coincidence, it is tightly plotted and does not suffer from clunky dialogue or too much sentimentality (as can sometimes negatively affect Japanese films in my experience) -- in fact, the dialogue is superb throughout and often very funny.The music and drawing style are wonderful and the life of early 21st Century Tokyo is perfectly captured in the cityscape.
A less experimental & more grounded effort when compared to his earlier works, Tokyo Godfathers is a funny, poignant & melancholic story that unfolds without playing with the viewers' sense of reality but still packs enough twists n turns to keep them guessing.Taking place on Christmas Eve, the story of Tokyo Godfathers follows 3 homeless friends, a middle-aged alcoholic, a former drag queen & a runaway girl who while foraging through the garbage encounter an abandoned newborn and later set out to unite the baby with his parents.Co-written & directed by Satoshi Kon, his third feature film is a departure from his reality & imagination blending projects such as Perfect Blue & Millennium Actress but it still carries a sense of mystery that requires the full attention of its viewers, for the plot takes many unexpected turns before reaching its final outcome.The illustrations of the hand-drawn animation are slightly different as well but it's rich & finely detailed.
The mystery surrounding the baby's parents takes them on a series of adventures, and the ending provides a proper closure to the arcs of each one of them.Covering the themes of loss, family, abandonment, homelessness & forgiveness in a warm, accessible fashion and staying true to the Christmas spirit with a miracle that redeems all, Tokyo Godfathers unfolds at a much calmer pace than expected but the reward for sitting through it is a satisfying one.
It's Christmas time in Tokyo and as three homeless companions wander the streets, digging through trash for dinner, they come across an abandoned baby.
I certainly had no complaints, the whole story was a blast to follow, especially because you really couldn't predict where it was going.But, beneath all the craziness and oddness, Tokyo Godfathers is a character film and it pulls it off fantastically.
I know things that I have thought in the past are:They are drug addicts Veterans who have been wronged Good-for-nothing bums "Tokyo Godfathers" was co-directed by Satoshi Kon, "Millenium Actress" and "Paprika," and Shogo Furuya, Animator Director of "Millenium Actress" and "Spirited Away." It deals with three hobos who find a baby abandoned in the trash bins and the mishaps and adventures they have in trying to find the baby's mother.
We discover their stories and dreams during the search, and how the baby brings them all luck and hope in different ways.I think that all parents should sit down with their children and watch this movie.
No way, it's an x-mess film AND it makes us feel happy!Somehow totally reminded my of Night on Earth by Jim Jarmusch...What beautiful anime!If you're out for some VERY positive, funny, crazy film that has still an excellent feeling for serious drama (elements and bits) and a titanium solid story then your choice must be Tokyo Grandfathers!Description in one word: ENJOY!.
However this Japanesee animated film takes a completely different slant on the story of three people coming across a baby to be cared for during the Christmas season.
Take Three Fathers, demote them to homeless people, multiply by 100, make it anime and you get the wonderful Tokyo Godfathers.
At first I thought the animation was not great, the story was about Christmas, homeless people, drags, what could I like about it?
It's an action comedy that lets you feeling good about yourself, not depressed :)Looking back at the movie, now that I've seen it, the almost caricaturesque animation completes the very well thought script, the good music and the basic plot.It is definitely worth the watch.
This movie is very well put together - including the sequence of events, music to set the mood, kind humour, good character development, expressive animation, and a touching story.
If you start watching with an open mind and set any preconceptions on how people are supposed to behave aside, you will have a great time going through an emotional roller-coaster together with the three main characters, and will properly enjoy this movie.
Live action or anime, however, the story of two homeless men – one transgender – and a runaway who find a baby abandoned among some Tokyo garbage and their effort to unravel the mystery of its parentage plays as compellingly backwards as it does forwards.
From Satoshi Kon, the director of Millennium Actress and Perfect Blue, comes the intriguing tale of three homeless people who discover an abandoned baby while foraging through some trash.
Sometimes the voices on anime movies or TV shows can get really irritating, but not in "Tokyo Godfathers".
Dramatic, Touching and Fun. A wonderful tale taking place during the holidays about an unlikely 'family'; Gin, a middle-aged man who claims to have lost everything; Miyuki, a teenage runaway with a somewhat touchy temper; Hana, a middle-aged transsexual.When the homeless family discover an abandoned child in the garbage, they venture on to find the child's family.
I was pretty much deceived by this movie; I was hoping that the director could use the animation media as well as in perfect blue or millennium actress where all the characters can switch from a real to an unreal world without any sign or clues.
"Tokyo Godfathers," again, is an animated comedy film with a simple but realistic premise about life and coincidence.
Like Satoshi Kon always gambles with the viewers' minds, "Tokyo Godfathers" is not the same as "Paprika" or "Perfect Blue" which I've watched with various stories that cannot be predicted yet mindblowing from beginning to end.
"Tokyo Godfathers" is so different from the two works that I've mentioned earlier but this film contains sensible humor even though taking a slightly heavy theme about homeless, transvestite, discrimination, and abandoned.We follow the three major characters who have variations in their flashback and the life they lived in.
Yes, like a life always meets destiny because of that coincidence, these three characters are in an experience they will never imagine where they are just homeless people who have no place to live.
Satoshi Kon used Christmas as the main background of this film, the baby as the bearer of its blessing that determined the destiny of three main characters.
This is a great movie and one of the best Christmas films of all time.
Tokyo Godfathers is not quite as good as Paprika but it is a truly beautiful film and of Kon's work I'd go as far to say that it also is his most accessible.
The animation is beautiful and detailed if in a different way to the more surrealistic styles of Perfect Blue and Paprika, here very intricate with very expressive character design, and very fitting with the film's tone.
Set in the Christmas period, it's full of dark elements in the holiday season, yet filled with plenty of hope and goodwill as we see the characters develop and the plot unfold.The story centers around three homeless folks - Gin (Toru Emori) the middle aged drunk gambler bum, Hana (Yoshiaki Umegaki) the transvestite, and Miyuki (Aya Okamoto), the youngest of the lot, a girl who ran away from home.
And thus their road trip in and around Tokyo begins.What holds your attention, is the way our trio encounters mini episodes of adventure in their quest, ranging from meeting up with a real Godfather, to slowly unravelling their back stories, which I find both touching and believable, and more so for an animated picture.
Unlike the other anime movies ,this movie don't have a lot of action scenes , or giant robots or monsters .It's just a story of ordinary people that learns that they could be better and make heroic things thanks to the events that happen in their lives during the Christmas .
And this movie is full of sincere emotions , and works very well as comedy as much as drama .Like that wasn't enough the animation is very good ,full of details in the scenery and the characters .
Synopsis: Three homeless people in Tokyo - Hana (a wonderful transvestite)Gin (a protective soul) and 16 year old Miyuki find a baby in the trash on Christmas Eve. Gin and Miyuki are prosaic and want to take her to the police but sentimnental Hana (abandoned himself as a child) wants to find her family.
Tokyo Godfathers, by Shogo Furuya and Satoshi Kon, is an anime film so content to be mediocre that it is dispiriting to watch.
`Tokyo Godfathers' is not, as the title would suggest, a film about the Japanese mafia, but rather a sentimental fable about three homeless people a destitute gamble, a lovesick transvestite and an ill-tempered runaway who find an abandoned newborn babe, wrapped in swaddling clothes and lain in a dumpster, on Christmas Day.
Sure there are lots of ridiculous coincidences as others here have pointed out but that's part of the humor of the film.This story of three homeless people finding a baby in the trash and their adventures locating the parents is more like a non-Miyazaki studio Ghibli film then your average anime.
Although not quite up to par to Miyazaki efforts, Tokyo Godfathers surprised with it's good story lines, entertainment values, and background animation settings.Lighting effects were very well done in many scenes while motion maybe not as much so but above satisfactory.
This rare Japanese Christmas anime movie from Satoshi Kon shows the theme of "coincidences".
It's Christmas Eve in Tokyo, three homeless people just found an abandoned baby while searching in some trash.
This movie also has one of the biggest 'twist' ending in a film that would not only surprise the characters, but also the audiences.
Set in winter in Tokyo this film follows the lives of three homeless people, one an alcoholic gambler, one a transvestite and one a runaway teenaged girl.
In the end I bit the bullet and watched Tokyo Godfathers and wished I hadn't put it off for so long.The story may be a little unconventional, both for anime films and also Christmas films, but Kon makes it work.
If you don't believe in such things, you can take it as serendipity or just a story with several happy endings.The film itself is a little different from Kon's other works.
Although this Christmas film was inspiring because of three homeless people trying to find the baby's parents and like honestly they looked after her so well.
Kon captures the beguiling neon glow of Tokyo in the film's many night scenes, turning the city into a magical setting for a tale of Christmas miracles.. |
tt0283160 | Extreme Ops | Commercial director Ian, Hollywood producer Will, three extreme sports enthusiasts Chloe, Kittie and Silo, cinematographer Mark, and Ian's boss, Jeffery, take their trip to the Alps for seasonal practice and stunt filming in preparation for filming a daring, yet dangerous big-league advertisement against an actual avalanche. They are flown to a resort under construction for comfort by their helicopter pilot Zoran. On the first night of their stay, as Will and Silo are bluffing, they spot a man with a woman entering a room. Will and Silo, on a dare, secretly videotape the beginning of their affair, but are chased away by a pair of dogs. Will and the team are unaware that the man they videotaped is Serbia's most wanted war criminal, Slobodan Pavle, who was believed to be killed in a plane crash, and that the resort the enthusiasts are residing is actually his hideout; the woman with Pavle is his love interest, Yana (whom Jeffery had encountered on the train en route to the mountain). Pavlov is also accompanied by his henchmen, Ivo, Ratko, Goran, Jakša and Pavle's son, Slavko. Will states later in the film that he read about Pavle in a newspaper article. On the second day of filming, the enthusiasts proceed to film the first controlled avalanche. At nightfall, as Will, Chloe, Kittie and Silo play truth or dare in a hot tub Will had heated up using coal, Slavko spies on them. Deducing they had videotaped his father and mistaking them to be members of the CIA, he reports this to Pavle, and recommends killing them swiftly, which Pavle agrees to do.
On the third day of filming, after Ian, Will, Chloe, Kittie, Silo, and Mark head to the mountain again, Jeffery is kidnapped by Slavko and Ivo and is brought before Pavle. After finding Will's camera and seeing the footage containing the start of the affair, Slavko and Ivo hijack Zoran's helicopter when he returns to the resort, and force Zoran to tell where the group is filming. Once they land on the mountain, Slavko and Ivo confront and hold the group at gunpoint. However, when a perverted Slavko attempts to force Chloe and Kittie to engage in foreplay, a disgusted Ivo pulls a gun on him, which escalates into a Mexican standoff between the two. Mark, who had planted explosives high up the mountain, detonates them on Ian's cue, startling Slavko and Ivo, and causing them to accidentally shoot each other dead. After narrowly escaping an avalanche in the helicopter, the group realize that by accidentally videotaping Pavle, they have jeopardized their own lives and plan an escape.
They return to the resort, but they find Ratko, Goran and Jakša roving the compound. They manage to subdue Ratko and attempt to escape on a cable car, but Pavle, having been alerted of the group's presence, takes control of the cable car and has it sent back to the dock. The group make a quick escape and ski further down slope as Pavle and his henchmen open fire, during which Kittie is nearly shot when they shoot her snowboard apart. They are blocked off by a very steep cliff, and decide to tether down to a gap they intend to use as an escape route. As Will is trying to tether down, Pavle and his henchmen, after recapturing and killing Zoran, arrive in his helicopter. After throwing Zoran's body out, they open fire upon Will, who parachutes to safety, before concentrating their fire on the rest of the group. Silo manages to throw his snowboard into the helicopter, hitting Jakša and causing him to fall to his death, but not before he shoots Silo in the abdomen. The remaining henchmen attempt to continue shooting at them, but the helicopter's low fuel lines and the time remaining until nightfall force them to return to the hideout to refuel and wait out the night. Kittie stays behind to tend Silo's wounds, armed with a rocket launcher with only one round while Ian, Chloe and Mark split up to escape.
At the hideout, Pavle tells Yana he is determined to kill them in an effort to avenge Slavko and Ivo, but then slaps her, threatening to kill her when she negatively mentions his son. After Pavle leaves the room, Yana double crosses him and pleads with Jeffery to take her to New York. Jeffery agrees and they decide to wait until Pavle and his remaining henchmen leave to track down the team again. Will, who has landed on a tree and stayed hidden throughout the day, manages to free himself and escape. As morning rises, Pavle and his henchmen resume their objective. Hearing the helicopter approaching them, Ian and Chloe escape through another gap while Mark stays behind to set a trap. At the same time, Kittie attempts to fire the rocket into the helicopter, but it misses and nearly hits a cable car carrying Jeffery and Yana. As the helicopter hovers below the edge of a cliff, Mark takes out a string of cable and when he ski-jumps off the cliff, jams the tail rotors with the cable in mid-air before safely landing his jump. This causes the helicopter to spiral out of control and crash on the ledge of a cliff, killing everyone on board. The sound of the explosion causes a massive avalanche, and Ian and Chloe ski for their lives while also successfully video taping it for the commercial by having Chloe ski in front of it. They narrowly manage to take cover behind a rock as the snow nearly engulfs them.
Back in the States, after viewing the commercial to Mr. Imahara and his assistant, Kana, the commercial is met with a positive response and agree to air it on television. Ian then receives a phone call from Kittie, and tells him to look out the window. When he does, he sees that Will, Chloe, Kittie and Silo are on top of a train performing stunts, something they also did at the beginning of the film when they were en route to the Alps. The film ends when the four enthusiasts let go of their skateboards and let them fly through the commercial's billboard, one of which goes through Chloe's mouth as Ian says "There we go again" while smiling. | suspenseful, comedy | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0070013 | Les démoniaques | At the end of the 19th century, on the north European coasts, live three shipwreckers simply nicknamed the "wreckers".
The Captain is their leader, followed by Le Bosco, Paul and the beautiful but perverted Tina.
When two young women accidentally stumble upon these wreckers, they brutally and violently rape them. The next day, the Captain thinks that he is going insane when he sees the women's dead bodies. He wrecks a tavern and gets into a fight with Le Bosco. The Captain, Tina, Le Bosco and Paul go back to the wreck to kill the women, who manage to escape. Wandering around, the women come across a clown who looks after them. The women are unable to speak, but a man tells them he can help them. They communicate via a drawing and the man realises that they want revenge. The women are the only ones who can free the devil from being imprisoned in the ruins of an old castle; by making love to each of them, he will give them the power to get their revenge. The women, now the "démoniaques", return for their revenge. At the beach, they are again attacked by the Captain and Le Bosco, who tie them to the wreck. The Captain goes mad and kills Tina and Le Bosco. He realises that what he has done is wrong, but is unable to save them, and the tide comes in and they all drown. | paranormal, violence, revenge, murder, sadist | train | wikipedia | Even worse, the supposed killing of the two girls (Lieva Lone, Patricia Hermenier).
The acting was atrocious.Now, if you want to see Joëlle Coeur (Fly Me the French Way, Seven Women for Satan) fully naked, and engaging in sex with John Rico, that's a whole other story.The Captain (Rico) hardly has time to enjoy the aftereffects when he is visited by apparitions of the two girls.
Yes, there is the usual mumble jumble ritual, but there is also orgasm.Don't expect a lot of gore in this film.
I think Rollin may have been trying to make an art film instead of a horror film.It is a shame that Lieva Lone and Patricia Hermenier did not stick around to do more films, but another chance to watch Joëlle Coeur is always worth the time..
Pirates, clowns, nude mute girls and sex, French-style..
I have a problem with Jean Rollin films.
Despite all the stylish surrealism, great French locations and nudity I still find his films incredibly boring.
I do appreciate Rollin's persistence of vision throughout his string of poetic sex/horror exploitation films through the 70s (clowns, castles, twins, beaches) but my mind begins to wander during his films and this is no exception.
The plot follows a dream logic known only to the director with too much time spent watching these sailors fight, rape or just sit in a bar.
The worst Rollin film I've seen yet.
Hell, it's even worse than Rollin's later film TWO ORPHAN VAMPIRES (1997), and that's pretty bad.
The only redeeming thing about this film is looking at luscious Joelle Coeur's naked body.
Coeur couldn't act worth a damm, but she sure was great to look at.Anyway, two blond-haired girls are shipwrecked on shore and are raped and murdered by the scavengers who lured their ship up on the rocks with lights.
There's just a lot of rolling around on the ground and it didn't look very violent to me.Their spirits make a pact with the devil(?) who doesn't even look like a devil in some old church ruin near the shore.
There's also a mime or woman in a clown suit who serves no purpose at all.The story is flaccid and hackneyed, the acting is awful (the worst I've ever seen for a French film), and the sets are too bright.
There's nothing scary or interesting going on at all except for Tina (Joelle Coeur) taking off her clothes and prancing around nude all the time.
Oh yes, she has a soft-core sex scene with the lead scavenger captain (John Rico) who looks old enough to be her father.It has all the feel of a bad Jess Franco film.
I hate to twist the knife, but it certainly breathes new life into the expression "Z-grade".The video blurb looked so promising - two girls raped by wreckers, take refuge in an abandoned abbey where they make a pact with the Devil to seek revenge.
Way too much time is spent on watching people walking long distances, or labouring blindingly obvious plot developments (the psychic brothel madam excels at this!)There is not nearly enough skin to compensate for having to sit through this, though some spiritied sex scenes do capture the attention.
The biggest draw of the film for me was the female member of the wrecker gang (character Tina).
I have a soft spot for beautiful girls who get sexually aroused by wicked deeds.Bizarre points include the Devil's two attendants - a female clown, and a Rasputin look-a-like.
After being raped and left for dead, a pair of women suddenly starts to invade the lives of the pirate gang that originally killed them after finding themselves imbued with supernatural powers and set out to take revenge on the gang for what happened to them using those powers.This one wasn't all that bad of an art-house-style horror film.
From the very beginning, featuring the beach rape of the girls as they're tormented by the gang features plenty of such titillating fare as the girls are captured, stripped, raped and disposed of while the fact that a vast majority of the revenge scenes are handled with the idea of the girls seducing the group one-by-one and then killed them off, give this one a lot of such material throughout the film.
Moreover, there are all the inserts of nameless prostitutes and village girls getting fondled and played with alongside the finale of the female leader pleasuring herself to the girls being raped once again in incredibly wild, vivid fashion brings that up a lot as well, and with the general atmosphere found here really gives this one a pretty sleazy feel.
Since the opening shots of the groups' rape and attack of the girls is done almost entirely devoid of dialogue makes for a rather startling and striking opening lasting nearly fifteen minutes before anyone really speaks a word, and the entirety of scenes that go by filled with silence or a more artistic representation really makes this one feel like a much more ambitious film than just straightforward exploitation like the way it's presented here.
Even the action scenes, from the all-girls brawl on he ship to the escape from the underground jail are handled more like an art-house film than a traditional horror film and really manage to showcase extraordinary skills here.
Not just due to the film's art-house look and feel, but the films' reliance on poetic atmosphere and the group going insane from their belief in what's going on makes this rather shock-less for nearly all of it's run-time despite the general plot line supporting such a potential outcome.
The softcore groping and sex scenes don't help matters, but because the revenge finally comes in the last third of the film it rarely feels like much of genre effort and really stands out as the major drawback to this one.Rated Unrated/NC-17: Continuous Full Nudity, strong sex scenes, Language, Mild Violence and several rape scenes..
The first scene on the beach with the young girls rape and attack is very good and the next one in the bar with them appearing as ghosts too...
Unfortunately the movie doesn't go on like that all the time.
There are good and bad moments but the scenes of nudity with Joelle Coeur are erotically very good.
But all in all there is a good atmosphere even if some scenes are a bit too long and some of them are great, like the one where the religious statues fall one after each other on the ground.
Jean Rollin knows how to mix sex and horror, as well as many other authors of that 70's era.
This is not one Jean Rollin's greatest works, but it does have one shinning light, Joelle Coeur, the gorgeous female wrecker.
Like all of Rollin's films (that I have seen) this one is full of all his artistic visions, but for some reason the film still seems slower in it's pace and is a little more difficult to get into.
Like all Rollin's film it's worth watching, but in this instance, only for the gorgeous Joelle Coeur..
Not Much To Say. A group of shipwrecked sailors brutally rape two young woman and the woman re-emerge after making a pact with the devil to get their revenge.More of the same from Jean Rollin.
Rollin does indeed have a unique view of art.If you want to see more of the same nude women and pointless sex scenes, this is for you...
but as far as plots go, this is not one of Rollin's stronger films.
Demoniacs, The (1974) ** 1/2 (out of 4) Four crooks (three men, one woman) work as "wreckers" as they lure ships to the shore only to make them crash on the rocks so that they can loot them.
The latest ship had two beautiful women (Lieva Lone, Patricia Hermenier) wash up on shore so they're raped and eventually killed.
This French-made horror tale isn't the best that director Jean Rollin has to offer but there are enough interesting moments to make it worth viewing to fans of his.
Those unfamiliar with the director will probably want to start elsewhere because while this has some good stuff in it, at the same time you can't help but be disappointed that it's not better.
The biggest problem with the film is that the 95-minute running time seems a lot longer and there are way too many scenes where nothing happens except people just walking around doing nothing.
I'm not sure if he was under pressure to release a film at a certain length but his slow style certainly doesn't help here.
I thought both Lone and Hermenier were very good playing the roles of the dead girls.
The film certainly doesn't ask too much out of them except, for a time, to be scared and at other times being "death" like and they do this just fine.
The real scene-stealer is Joelle Coeur as the beautiful but deadly female wrecker.
Being a Rollin film one can expect all sorts of nudity and we also get some mild gore but nothing strong enough to keep horror fans interested.
The low-budget seems a lot smaller than most of Rollin's work and one can't help but wish a little more was done with the story..
In future I will avoid any film by Jean Rollin like a toothache..
Bizarre but i liked it, it was well made with some impressive directing from Jean Rollin especially the shot near the Ruins.
The story was very interesting if a bit confusing at times, and we get TONS and TONS of nudity!.
Paul Bisciglia is the comic relief here and Joelle Coeur is beautiful but didn't have to do much except act crazy and take her clothes off.
"For God's sake let me kill them." The usual dull Rollin art/horror/sex/exploitation stuff..
Les Demoniaques, or Demoniacs as it is largely known under in English speaking country's, starts on a beach where a gang of four people, one known as the Captain (John Rico), his right hand man LeBosco (Willy Braque), Paul (Paul Bisciglia) & an attractive but deadly woman named Tina (Joelle Coeur) wave lanterns to attract ships which then get wrecked on the rocks & sink at which point they steal anything of any value, these gangs are known as 'wreckers'.
This particular night things go well & they recover some loot, suddenly they see two young women (Lieva Lone & Patricia Hermenier) stagger ashore, obviously survivors from the shipwreck.
LeBosco & Paul rape, beat & generally abuse them while the Captain & Tina have sex together.
The two women manage to make it to the apparently cursed ruins of a Church where the devil resides in a crypt protected by a guy with a long beard & a woman dressed as a clown (Mireille Dargent), they release the devil who gives them the power to extract a terrible revenge on the gang of wreckers...This French Belgium co-production was written & directed by Jean Rollin who made quite a few of these arty surreal horror sex films of which I have not seen many, however I thought Les Demoniaques was an OK film if not exactly brilliant.
The film moves along at a fair pace & never becomes too boring although the character development leaves a lot to be desired, no one in Les Demoniaques has any sort of personality beyond whether they are meant to be good or bad.
The two shipwrecked women are good & are violated innocents while the wreckers are uniformly evil who never stop drinking, fighting & having sex.
No, Rollin is far more interested in the visual side of a film which is not a good thing.
Lots of things don't make any sort of sense as he tries to mix horror, art, exploitation, sex & supernatural elements with uneven results, I was also expecting a big 'pay-off' for the wreckers at the end which unfortunately never materialised, that alone made sitting through the thing rather unsatisfying.Director Rollin lays on the visual style with Les Demoniaques being a very textured film, I love the old wooden boats, the inside decor of the tavern, the stone work of the Church, the bright almost cartoonish costumes & the dangerous looking jagged rocks of the beach.
Personally I think the arty surreal shots in Les Dominaques aren't that distracting, although the scenes in the Church with the clown, crypt keeper & some guy locked in a room who looks more gay than devil like are bizarre to say the least & destroys any credibility that the powerful & graphic opening establishes.
There is far more nudity in Les Demoniaques than violence, in fact apart from some fights & a bit of blood there isn't much graphic horror here while the nudity & sex is plentiful including a couple of very graphic & exploitative sexual assaults which do nothing for me personally.
You should also be aware that Les Demoniaques was filmed in French & I don't think an English language version exists so the sparse dialogue is subtitled throughout.Les Demoniaques must have been a really low budget affair, there are barely any actors in it, it has about three locations, no special effects to speak of & as a whole it could be described as minimalist.
However the locations Rollin chooses are appropriate, from the Gothic Church ruins to a beach full of stranded shipwrecked boats.
The acting is pretty poor from all involved especially the two shipwrecked women who are mute for the majority of the film yet still manage to be awful & irritating, oh & that Tina is a nice looking bird with or without clothes...Les Demoniaques is an OK Euro horror sex film from Rollin, if your a fan of his style of film-making then you'll probably love this, if not then you'll probably hate it.
Four pirates(..labeled "wreckers" for they draw ships with light crashing into the shore to pillage them)ruthlessly rape and assault two blond young women as they walk to shore, appearing from the darkness in nothing but gowns.
Soon the Captain(John Rico), already insane, is haunted by ghostly apparitions of those two girls they left for dead on the shore.
Yet, somehow, the girls survive fending off yet another proposed attack by the pirates, making their way to the "haunted ruins" which holds a demonic presence, imprisoned by two guardians who can give them the power they seek in weakness needed for revenge.I really enjoyed this one, even if I was often left with my jaw open wondering what the hell was going on.
I couldn't help but snicker when the twins make to the haunted ruins and are greeted by the female clown.
Many would probably throw their hands up at that, but I couldn't help but love such an audacious move by Rollin to throw a modern image inside a film representing pirates.
I like how over-the-top the pirates are, even Tina(..let me stop for a moment and gain my composure)who Rollin films in nearly every scene naked, delighting in her devilish ways.
Take, for instance, the Captain who lifts his mug to drink with beer spilling out all over himself, or Bosco(Willy Braque), always morose until he begins to trash the fisherman's bar and brothel.The film is Joelle Coeur for me.
Rollin's camera eyeballs a naked Coeur with her arms stretched to the heavens after their conquest and corruption of the innocence of two girls who had just lost everything.
The wrecking is child's play compared to the rape and destruction of innocence.I liked how Rollin gets his skeleton and bat in the film, by using them as "decoration" in the brothel-pub.
Oh, and I loved that winged creature statue in the brothel-pub as well(..I believe Rollin shoots one of the girl's apparitions next to it when they haunt the Captain).The ruins left me in a state of bliss, particularly how Rollin shoots the female clown guiding the girls to the "crypt-watcher"(..he looks like a Russian czar, or something)down those massive steps.
One of my favorite techniques established by Rollin is how he follows his female beauties, either naked or clothed under a gown or shirt(..just long enough to cover their crotch), holding a candle to guide themselves, as they make their way to a specific destination.I also liked how the final sequence ends with water engulfing the main characters.
Oh, and my favorite scene, besides the bedroom sequence where the Captain is fondling a bird he'd later rip into as Coeur slowly gets naked, is a certain character's death as a piano plays on it's own..
The film revolves around "wreckers," bandits who beached boats and raided the spoils.
The pirates rape the girls.
Still alive, they wander into haunted ruins, guarded by a woman in clown make-up and Rasputin.
The clown woman is bizarre, especially her first appearance perched on a rock.
As you'd expect, female nudity abounds and Rollin frequently frames the nubile bodies in a greater tableau, such as a stark naked babe standing on a bed in a ruined room, chastising the cowering men.Once empowered by the devil, you'd think the movie would become a rampage of revenge.
In the last ten minutes, the movie descends into almost pure allegory, as the mute girls (Did I mention they're mute?) are set upon by their attackers.
I think that's what the movie is getting at, something about the death of innocence.
The girls' tan lines betray the setting."The Demoniacs" is Rollin at his most linear but also his most pretentious.
People siting all around in a bar having sex and the only thing to change that is to fight with one another, a guy kills a girl without noticing, and when a friend gets mad at him for that he kills him too!!
and what's with the clowns, the cheap looking actor playing the wizard or whatever he is, the tide that is rising and the change in water level is very visible!! |
tt0051524 | The Decks Ran Red | The SS Berwind is a rusty old ship chartered by the line to meet high demand. The captain of the Berwind has died and the coroner wants an autopsy due to the suspicious circumstances of the death, which has caused several crew members to leave the ship. In need of a captain, Vic (Harlan Warde) and Mr. Adams (Jonathan Hole) meet with the "White Fleet" USS Mariposa First Officer, Edwin 'Ed' Rummill (James Mason) and his wife Joan (Katharine Bard) to offer him the Berwind. Ed has applied for captain vacancies for five years but has little chance of getting one of the main ships of the line. He is warned of the recent problems by Vic, but agrees--against the emotional pleas of his wife--to join the Berwind in New Zealand.
Henry Scott (Broderick Crawford) and Mace (David Cross) work in the loud and hot engine room of the Berwind. Scott says he's upset that the Berwind's current First Officer, Mr. Moody (Hank Patterson), hasn't been offered the Captain's position (due to his old age of 76). In fact, Scott intends to use this decision to rile the crew as he puts into action his plan of mutiny. While the ship's deceased captain noted in the log that Scott is an "Exemplary Seaman," Mace knows that Scott has been responsible for stirring up problems among the crew several times.
Scott says he needs a second partner who is good with a gun, to assist him and Leroy Martin (Stuart Whitman) in a mutiny plan he has been working on for years while researching maritime history and law. Letting Mace know he has found out his secret--he's an ex-con who robbed a liquor store last year--Scott traps him into being the third partner. Scott lays out his plan to make a million dollars by “steaming up” the crew into a mutiny, killing the officers (and eventually the entire crew) to make it look like they abandoned a sinking ship, thus leaving the partners in possession of a ship which they can sell off for salvage value.
Scott and Leroy proceed to foment anger among the crew due to Moody being overlooked for promotion. The new captain arrives to find a poorly kept ship, an unhappy Moody and a lack of key crew that have left the ship. In need of a cook and steward, the captain hires a local Māori couple--Pete (Joel Fluellen) as the cook, and his beautiful wife Mahia (Dorothy Dandridge) as the steward.
Setting out to sea Capt. Rummill is optimistic, while Scott and Leroy force Mace to choose between joining the partnership or being thrown overboard. In the officer’s saloon, officer Alex Cole (Jack Kruschen) warns Rummill about the devious nature of Scott and Leroy. Moody dies early in the journey, of what is believed by the crew to be a broken heart, further inflaming the crew against the new captain.
One day Scott enrages Pete by letting him overhear that his wife (Mahia) will be seduced by Leroy. A butcher-knife-wielding Pete confronts Leroy while he is attacking Mahia, knocking out Leroy causing Pete to be confined to his cabin. Mace continues to be distraught over being part of the conspiracy and is still having nightmares that cause him to sleep-talk about the plan. Having warned Mace to never do this again, Scott and Leroy honor their threats and throw Mace overboard, making him the first known victim. After the officers discover that Mace is missing, Scott shows a gun he says he’s found to the captain, warning that a mutiny may be afoot and that Mace may have been murdered.
Due to concerns over what is going on, the captain moves Mahia to a cabin across from him, allowing her access to his cabin to borrow a book to read. Scott uses this event to launch the mutiny plan he's waited nine years to enact. Scott and Leroy try to convince the captain that the crew will mutiny because Mahia has been seen in his room and it is believed the captain has locked up Pete and moved Mahia near him so he would be able to attack her.
Trying to uncover what is going on, the captain questions several crew members but this doesn't reveal any concerns of which Scott warned. Scott then convinces the crew to set Pete free. With tensions mounting and no bullets for the gun Scott found and gave to the captain, one officer says he’s brought aboard an old German Luger with a few rounds.
Scott and Leroy call the crew together to convince them to mutiny against a captain who Scott says needs to be turned into the Line for taking advantage of Mahia. The crew begins to suspect Scott has been lying to them all along, then a crewman reveals that he heard Mace's screams and that he believes Scott and Leroy killed Mace. The planned mutiny having backfired, Scott convinces Leroy they must kill the whole crew before the crew can join the officers against them.
Hearing a sound, the officers rush to find the ship's radio has been destroyed. Scott and Leroy uncover their hidden stash of a rifle and handgun while the officers have only knives and the Luger. In the meantime, the crew follows previous orders by locking Pete back in his cabin; showing that they will not mutiny. Taking their rifle to the loud engine room, Scott kills a crew member at point-blank range and forces Leroy to kill the second. Seeing this, another of the crew attempts to warn the others, only to be killed by Scott. Not hearing the shots, the fourth engine room crewman is murdered by Scott.
The officers realize that no one can be contacted in the engine room, and go to find the bodies and that the engine is slowing due to the ship taking on water as part of Scott's plan to make it appear that the crew abandoned a sinking ship. The sinking is stopped, and the captain warns that the crew not be informed so they won't try to go for the lifeboats and be also killed.
The officers order the remaining crew to assemble in the saloon, where it's revealed that three crew members are missing and that Pete and Mahia were told to stay in their cabins. The captain orders new First Officer Jim Osborne (Guy Kingsford) to stay with the lone pistol in the salon to protect the crew while the ship's Chief, "Bull" Pringle (John Gallaudet), goes to find Pete, and the captain searches for Mahia.
Scott, armed with the rifle, intends to start at the bridge and work his way down to kill everyone while Leroy stays on deck with the handgun. Finding Mahia in bed asleep, Rummill warns her of the killings. After Mahia dresses they flee from a pursuing Scott only to be saved at the last second by a covering shot from Osborne. Bull attempts to evade Leroy to make it to Pete, not knowing Pete has already joined the crew in the saloon. Hearing a shot that Leroy has taken while wounding Bull, Pete grabs his butcher's knife to go to Bull's aide. While protecting Bull, Pete is killed by Leroy, allowing Bull time to escape. Bull, making it back to the saloon, reveals Pete and two other crewmen (including Elliott) are dead. Mahia tells the captain he is a coward to not pursue Scott and Leroy, and the captain tries to settle a panicking crew.
With Mahia having gone for her husband and the crew taking to the lifeboat, the captain orders three officers without children to stay to fight. Before the escape, though, Scott traps Mahia on deck. Having Mahia in his sights, Scott gives the officers and crew 60 seconds to get in the lifeboats and leave.
Knowing that alone on sea in a lifeboat the crew will all surely die, and with seconds to act, the captain hatches a risky plan. He realized that Elliot, who was last known to be taking a reading of the ship's speed using a Chip log, may have been killed before he pulled in the log and its line floating behind the ship. The captain surmises that he could abandon ship, but then use the line from the log to climb back aboard. He orders the crew to abandon ship, with Scott and Leroy planning to keep Mahia aboard with them. With the lifeboat away, Scott and Leroy return to the engine room to restart the engines and continue their plan of partially sinking the ship. Scott then goes to the bridge to pilot the ship, leaving Leroy to run the engines.
Having rowed a distance from the ship, the captain and officer Pringle then fight the cold water to swim back to the stern of the ship. Pringle, though, is unable to keep up and eventually drowns, as the captain must leave him in order to have any chance of making it to the ship before Scott and Leroy get it underway again. Rummill makes it to the log line just as engine pressure is restored. With the propeller now turning below, he must make an impossible climb to the deck. Once aboard, though, Rummill finds Mahia and takes a knife from the kitchen since his wet gun is now not reliable.
Mahia advises the captain to try to kill the weaker Leroy first with the knife before going after Scott on the bridge. She convinces Rummill of her plan to put Leroy off-guard down in the engine room by claiming Scott has attacked her. Mahia tells Leroy that Scott has promised her half the money, and that Scott will eventually kill Leroy. Mahia convinces Leroy they can be together instead, and as they begin to kiss she takes Leroy's handgun from his back pocket and shoots him twice, leading to his slow death.
Scott, still on the bridge, steers the ship towards the lifeboat to kill the remaining crew. When he is not able to contact Leroy to change the ship's speed, he rushes unarmed to the engine room where he is confronted by a knife-wielding Rummill. Seeing Leroy's handgun on the engine room floor below, Scott leaps for it and fires at Rummill; only to realize the gun is empty. Rummill then leaps on and fatally stabs Scott, while in the sea the crew evades the ship bearing down on them.
With ten crewmen now dead, the movie ends with those remaining on the lifeboat cheering their rescue by Rummill, who is now back in command. | murder | train | wikipedia | Brisk if uninspired old dark house story set aboard a freighter.
The Decks Ran Red flaps as the title under which sets sail a tense and focused movie that takes place aboard a freighter.
The Berwind sails into port in New Zealand because its captain has mysteriously died.
Awarded his first command, James Mason flies in to take over as skipper of the troubled ship.
He finds a slovenly and insubordinate crew, and his officers tell him that mutiny may be in the wind.
Since some of the hands have jumped ship, Mason has some holes to fill.
The only cook available will sign on only if he can bring his wife, Dorothy Dandridge (as a Maori whose command of the English language encompasses even the future-perfect tense).
This sultry native, the only woman on board, doesn't cool down the smouldering unrest, but the arsonist is Broderick Crawford, who fuels the fires in order to advance his own half-baked scheme: To murder all the crew but a few henchmen, making it look like desertion and mutiny, then scuttle the ship and sell it and its cargo as salvage for $1-million.
It's basically an old dark house story taken to the high seas, with murders aplenty and the briny deep to swallow up the corpses.
And, despite Mason, Crawford and Dandridge, its production values are not those of The Titanic.
Still, it sails brisky along (slackening a bit toward the stretched-out ending) under Andrew Stone's competent if lackluster direction.Stone and his wife Virginia were Hollywood's answer to the mama-papa candy store: He wrote and directed, she produced and edited.
Their long career resulted in many forgettable films and some embarrassments as well (Song of Norway, for one).
But there were a few modest successes, too: Highway 301, The Night Holds Terror, Blueprint for Murder.
The Decks Ran Red can join them as a decidedly not luxurious but still seaworthy vessel..
The Cast Ran Ragged.....
Whether it actually is or not, this claustrophobic suspense yarn seems like a 'B' picture.
Though Mason and Dandridge were in the midst of their best years career-wise, this seems like a step down...like something that one would do if there was no more quality work.
The story (supposedly based on fact) concerns a ship Captain's (Mason) attempt to thwart a murder for riches scheme envisioned by Crawford and Whitman.
The pair of thugs plan to make the crew seem like they're planning a mutiny so that it will be entered into the Captain's log.
Then they will kill the crew, pretend to be the only survivors and bring the ship in for salvage worth over a million dollars.
Crawford lumbers through the film with his usual style, but does present a threatening persona.
Whitman struts around and poses in the world's clingiest jeans, his hair all '50's Bryll cream.
It's hard to believe he was just three years away from a Best Actor nomination.
Mason is believable as a Captain, but not as an action hero as he is later forced to become.
A dash of feminine sex appeal is supplied by Dandridge who plays the wife of the ship's cook.
She feels the need to serve the men on the boat while wearing snug dresses with deep necklines, which causes it's share of problems.
Eventually, the opposing sides must play a cat and mouse game while running all around the ship.
(And since it is a black and white film, the decks run grey!) The film has going for it some surprisingly stark moments of violence (for that time) and some creative camera-work in the confined bowels of the ship.
Drawbacks include the bland settings, the fact that there's too much talk about what's happening in the story rather than letting the audience see it (crewmen keep coming back to the saloon to tell what's happening outside!) and a feverish, unintentionally hilarious performance by Cross as a third party in the scheme.
Also, Bard, as Mason's wife, gives a bizarre performance, nervously looking at the floor through most of her brief scenes and swallowed up in an ugly coat.
Still, it's a fairly tight little film with some degree of interest.
TV fans may recognize old salt Patterson from "Green Acres"..
Pretty brutal for its time..
These two merchant sailors -- Broderick Crawford and Stewart Whitman -- get a crazy idea aboard a freighter.
They're going to kill every officer and man aboard, waterlog the ship, radio for help, claim there was a mutiny and everyone left the ship but them, and claim the ship, worth a million bucks, for salvage.Granted, the idea is slightly askew, but these guys are snipes, working down in the engine room and the temperature there runs around 116 degrees and sounds like the deepest pits of hell.
That environment will drive anyone nuts.
Besides, it's like the old joke.
"How's your wife?" "Compared to WHAT?" If you put Crawford and Whitman next to the Manson Family or al Qaeda they look like paragons of rationality.
So, okay, let's leave them some leeway, so to speak.I'll skip the plot, I guess, because it doesn't require much in the way of explanation.
The dialog lacks verve and credibility.
"Anything can happen!" "Whoever destroyed the radios must have had a PURPOSE." And when the officers find three corpses in the engine room, someone says to Mason, "Do you realize the ENORMITY of this?" The acting doesn't require much comment either.
Everybody involved delivers about what you'd expect.
Mason is smooth, Crawford plays a junk man, Whitman is a little ratty, and none of the others stand out -- except Dorothy Dandridge.
She can't act very well, but -- wow!
What a dish.
I don't know about "a million bucks" but Dorothy Dandridge could start a genuine mutiny alright.
I vaguely remember seeing this when it was released and, it may be hard for a contemporary viewer to understand but, like "The Sniper," which was released about the same time, it was shocking in its brutality.
The theater suddenly went kind of quiet when Crawford deliberately picked off one of the crew members from a few feet away with a high-powered rifle.
The sexy Dandridge was memorable too, although I don't recall that she quieted down the audience.The Perrys, who produced, had a habit of using real locations for their shoots.
"Cry Terror," another suspenser with James Mason, made good use of New York locations.
And they actually sunk a liner for one of their movies, something like, "The Last Voyage." I'm glad they never made a movie about the end of the world.The story isn't really a grabber and the acting is no more than routine but this is worth seeing, if only because it gives you a chance to feel what it's really like to be on a ship, not a mockup of the kind that John Wayne sails through with such ease.
The ship, by the way, is pretty ship shape and not at all a rust bucket.
She's also high in the water because she's carrying no cargo..
Forget the advertising tagline!.
Forget the advertising tagline (although Dorothy Dandridge is beautiful to look at)!
This is a crisp little thriller, apparently fact-based, about a couple of malcontent seamen (Crawford and Whitman) who try to foment a mutiny against new captain Mason as a cover for a scheme to kill the entire crew and bring in the ship as salvage.
Except for a rather abrupt ending, nicely done by the Stones..
Would like to know what ship(s) were used in the filming..
First time watching and I was captivated throughout.
I'm not sure why attention was given to Dorothy Dandridge as hers seemed like a small part.
Very brutal but believable plot given that anything could happen on the open sea.
I especially liked the scene of the ship intending to ram the lifeboat.
It was a great camera angle and one actor uses sailor jargon like, "she's really got a bone in her teeth".
I was also amused by the hip lingo used by the actors.
Crawford reminds me of a ratpacker no matter what film he is in.
I was wondering if anyone could tell me what ship(s) was used in the film for the interior and exterior shots?
It looks like a Liberty Ship I took a cruise on, the S.S. Jeremiah O'Brien..
Low-key actioner evokes visceral response.
I agree with the previous comments 100%, but I just wanted to add something about the magnificently evil Broderick Crawford and Stuart Whitman (!!).
When Stuart gets his hands on Dorothy the second time, the suspense was so strong that I involuntarily started screaming homicidal epithets at the small screen.
Be sure to watch this one alone so you can let it all hang out without being embarrassed..
Lame, predictable, except for Dorothy Dandridge.
Lame and predictable film with James Mason incredibly miscast as captain of the ship.
you know immediately that Broderick Crawford will be the instigator of trouble as he always was and the outcome shows no surprises.The best part of the film is the voluptuous Dorothy Dandridge who displays her charms that would make any crew mutiny for her.
As as the custom in the 50's, she is married to a man who is twice her age which also makes the film sadly lacking.
Better to see James Mason in his other films in which he portrays a much more realistic person..
Striking Violence and Visuals at Sea. This B-Movie has a Few Things Going.
First it is Off Beat and Surprisingly the Violence is Up Close and Disturbing for a Fifties Film.
The On Location and On Board Filming is Authentic and Adds to the Realism.
Director Stone seems to be Warming Up for His Masterpiece, The Last Voyage (1960) as it has the Same Setting and Crisp Camera Work and Hypertension.The A-Listers James Mason and Broderick Crawford, along with Sexpot Dorothy Dandridge (revealing Her charms more than typical for the Era), are OK, but the Rest of the Cast from Stuart Whitman on Down do some Pretty Bad Acting.This is a Film that is Stark and Quite Different in Tone than Most of the Films from the 1950's and has an Atmosphere of Dread that Works and there are some Scenes at Sea that are Extremely Well Done.
Worth a Watch as a Tense Low-Budgeter and to See James Mason doing some Slumming and Swimming.
Great Title..
Hideous.
Despite Oscar winner Broderick Crawford and nominees James Mason, Dorothy Dandridge, Stuart Whitman, and Jack Kruschen, this 84 minute amateurish production is excruciatingly long and dull and badly acted.
This may be based on a real story but this production is among the worst films I've ever seen---and I've seen thousands of films.
And all the acting is dreadful.
It seems like they're making is up as they go along.
Stupid dialog, ridiculous situations, and dumb characters make this a total waste of time.
Laughable from the very opening, this turkey goes on and on and on until the foolish ending.
I cannot believe such good actors as Mason and Crawford got stuck in this bilge.
Dandridge comes off like a cartoon and Whitman is witless.
David Cross, Hank Patterson, Barney Phillips, and Katherine Bard also appear to no advantage.
This project should have been scuttled before the cameras started..
Full Marks for Shipboard Authenticity, But Somewhat Less for Tension.
A new captain takes command of his first ship only to find himself confronted with numerous problems.
First there is hostility from his Chief Mate, who feels that he has been passed over for command, and from some of the crew who agree.
Then there is the inflammatory presence of a woman steward, signed on at the last moment to replace a crew member who jumped ship.
Worst of all is a somewhat ludicrous mutiny plot perpetrated by a couple of the engine room crew to murder the entire crew and take over the ship.
Although the plot is supposedly based on a true story the tension fails to the level that it might have done, which is probably attributable to the director rather than the cast.
However, give the film full marks for it's shipboard atmosphere, which is certainly highly authentic, thanks to the fact that it was filmed aboard a couple of real merchant ships.
The scenes on the bridge of Matson Line's old SS Mariposa are played pretty much as they would have been in real life, as are the subsequent scenes shot on board the freighter, which is almost certainly a Liberty Ship, of which many were still around at the time this film was made.
Perhaps the only detail of the freighter that doesn't ring true is the fact that she is riding much higher in the water than she normally would have been because, since the ship was being used as a movie prop, she was obviously carrying no cargo or ballast, and very little fuel..
Lame And Impossible, but Dorothy Dandridge Sizzles.
Andrew and Virginia Stone produced this low budget thriller that hung on an unbelievable premise and an impossible turn of events.
No way the good people in the plot should have survived and some didn't.James Mason stars as a professional merchant seaman and gets his first command after serving on passenger liners with the captaincy of a tramp freighter.
It's a beat up old tub with a surly crew and a sizzling Dorothy Dandridge the wife of cook Joel Fluellen who no way in God's green earth should have been on the ship.
Not too many could have controlled their hormones with Dandridge around.Broderick Crawford and Stuart Whitman don't even try to keep things in check and in addition they've got a truly horrible plot to seize the ship and are the instigators of unrest.
Whitman has it bad for Dandridge and he's claiming her as part of the salvage.As this situation is laid out when you watch I have no doubt that you will think it impossible that anyone could have survived.
And the sea would tell no tales.The Decks Ran Red is just lame and impossible, but Dorothy Dandridge is always worth watching.
James Mason didn't think much of this film according to The Films Of James Mason from the Citadel Film Series book on his work.
And Broderick Crawford must have really been on a bender to sign for this one..
audacious.
When the first officer of an ocean liner (James Mason) finally gets a chance to captain his own ship it turns out to be the one on which crew members Broderick Crawford and Stuart Whitman are plotting to kill the ship's entire crew and somehow collect a million dollars in insurance.
Entirely claustrophobic setting of the ship goes well with the plan to kill everyone.
The overall sense of cold-blooded cruelty is a natural fit for Crawford, but Stuart Whitman's character turns out to possess a surprising degree of sliminess.
How the great James Mason deals with this is but one of the great aspects of this under-appreciated masterpiece.
Dorothy Dandridge, the cook's attractive wife, should have never been on the ship in the first place, but her presence is just another bit of the film's overall audacity and quality..
Dreck.
This film is pure dreck.
Obviously made to be beyond the shock (or nausea) level allowed on TV thereby competing to get some viewers into the movie theaters and make the producers a few bucks.
There is no story, no plot.
Just some senseless slaughter that even one of the characters says is not necessary!Its too bad that tired lines like "these men are on the verge of mass hysteria" are typical.
Dorothy Dandridge gives a poor performance, tarnishing her Oscar-nominee status.
And this is definitely one of James Mason's all-time worst films.
His performance is wooden and the lines he is given are embarrassing.
His character is supposed to be courageous but really only calls for an actor (Mason) to feign desperation.
No real acting is required of Mason or anyone else in this.Former Oscar winner Broderick Crawford's role is as one-dimensional and predictable as any ever written.
His character is a cardboard caricature.
No wonder this helped nail the lid on the coffin of his career.A complete waste of your time if you choose to watch.
Don't bother. |
tt1496729 | Aaranya Kaandam | The film opens with the ageing gangster, Singaperumal, forcing himself on a young girl, Subbu. He is unable to perform, and vents his anger by slapping the helpless Subbu. Singaperumal is the grand don of crime in Madras. His lieutenant, Pasupathi, brings a proposal. A large stash of cocaine, worth about ₹ 2 crore, has entered the city. The guy bringing the stash wants to sell it for ₹ 50 lakh. Pasupathi sees the immediate easy profit, as well as the long term benefit (to control the cocaine market with such a large supply) and the recognition that they are able to pull off such a deal. The drawback is that the stash really belongs to their arch-rival Gajendran. Singaperumal knows that Gajendran is a vicious and unpredictable adversary, and the venture is risky and likely to become messy. He decides to pass. Pasupathi dourly suggests Singaperumal is getting old and rusty. He asks Singaperumal to loan him the ₹ 50 lakh so he can do the job himself. Pasupathi is prepared to face the risks, and in return for the loan, he offers Singaperumal a cut of the profits. Singaperumal agrees to the loan, but, instead asks Pasupathi to first get the stash and then think of the profit distribution. The money for the loan is brought to Singaperumal.
The film introduces Kalaya, a now destitute farmer, and his young, street-smart son Kodukapuli. They live in the slums and earn a meagre living staging cock-fights; as a coincidence, Singaperumal loves to watch these cock-fights. One evening, a man arrives to bunk with Kalaya for the night. This man is the cocaine courier. He routinely transports various stashes of drugs in and out of the city, and collects a relatively small fee (₹ 10,000) for each trip. That evening, after a long bout of drinking, he reveals that he has learnt the true value of the stash, and he now intends to sell it himself instead of delivering it to its true owner. He passes out.
Seeing Subbu in tears, Singaperumal asks one of his men, Sappai, to take her out and comfort her "so she is prepared to perform for him at night". Sappai takes her to the beach and tries to console her.
Pasupathi and the men meet with the tipster and drive off to retrieve the stash. En route in the car, one of the men receives a call from Singaperumal, who orders him to bump-off Pasupathi as soon as the stash is acquired. Pasupathi overhears this as the call is on speaker mode and gets into a Mexican stand-off with others. In a desperate ploy he deliberately provokes a cop at a checkpoint, getting arrested and then later making an escape. The other men kidnap his wife, Kasturi, and use her as bait to lure Pasupathi. Singaperumal orders them to bring Kasturi to him.
Subbu hates being a plaything for Singaperumal. She yearns to be free and live life on her own terms. She tries to persuade Sappai to think for himself and realise that Singaperumal is merely using them. Sappai, however, is too fearful and weak to oppose Singaperumal. Subbu and Sappai become unlikely lovers, and Subbu continues to hope for a way out. We learn that Subbu is somewhat educated, and learns whatever she can about the world outside Singaperumal.
Kalaya stages his cock-fight the following day. But this time, his prize cocks get killed. Kalaya is in serious financial trouble. Kodukapuli senses this and immediately goes to see if their visitor, still unconscious, has any money. They find out that the man had overdone his drink and died. Kalaya and Kodukapuli find the cocaine stash and the telephone number of a prospective buyer (Singaperumal and Pasupathi). Kalaya declares that his financial woes are at an end.
Singaperumal is worried. His stash has not arrived, nor has he got word that Pasupathi is dead. He gets an angry call from Gajapati (Gajendran's brother and right-hand man): if Pasupathi seizes Gajapati's stuff, Gajendran will unleash a terrible gang war. The cunning Singaperumal tells Gajapati that Pasupathi has gone rogue, and that Gajapati is free to take out Pasupathi. Singaperumal figures this will benefit him both ways: he will get the stash, and his avaricious general will be killed by Gajendran. Gajendran sends his thugs after Pasupathi. Pasupathi is on the run. Now that Singaperumal has become his enemy, Pasupathi figures that Gajendran could possibly become an ally.
Kalaya calls Singaperumal to meet and make a deal for the stash. While waiting for him, Singaperumal's thugs arrive and kidnap Kalaya at the rendezvous point. After continuous torture, Kalaya is unable to reveal anything as his son Kodukapuli has the stash. Kodukapuli ends up calling Pasupathi's number accidentally, and offers to trade the stash for his father. Pasupathi joins Kodukapuli and offers the same trade to Singaperumal: the stash in return for Kalaya and Kasturi. Pasupathi places a call to Gajendran and offers to reveal the location of the stash.
Gajendran and his gang arrive at the location to make the exchange with Pasupathi. Singaperumal's thugs also arrive at about the same time. Pasupathi pretends to offer the stash to Gajapati, but instead slices his throat right in front of Gajendran. An enraged Gajendran and his gang chase Pasupathi. Pasupathi leads them around the block where Singaperumal's gang lay waiting. Both gangs mistaking Pasupathi's loyalties charge at each other and ensue in a gang-fight. Pasupathi gets out of the fray, and watches as Gajendran and the key generals of Singaperumal's hack each other to bits. Pasupathi's plan to decimate the two strong factions has succeeded. He returns to finish Singaperumal.
Back in his rooms, Singaperumal discovers that the bag with the loan money is missing. He rushes to the conclusion that Sappai took it. When Sappai returns (having been sent by Subbu to fetch fruits), Singaperumal beats him up severely. Sappai's faith is shattered. In his first moment of independence, he grabs a pistol and shoots Singaperumal dead! Subbu emerges from the shadows. She is proud of Sappai, but in a stunning twist, she shoots and kills Sappai! When Pasupathi arrives, he finds Sappai and Singaperumal dead and Subbu in tears. Having always been sympathetic to Subbu's suffering with Singaperumal, he says she is free to go. Subbu leaves. Pasupathi summons the remaining thugs of Singaperumal's gang and assumes command. Kasturi is unharmed. Pasupathi gets the stash and pays Kodukapuli a fair commission.
It is finally revealed that Subbu had planned the whole thing. She sent Sappai with the bag containing the loan money to provoke Singaperumal's temper. She retrieves the bag with the loan money and quietly leaves the city to begin her new life. She remarks that the men basically mistrusted, misused and slaughtered each other. In her view, Sappai, too, was not really an innocent victim. She says Sappai is also a man, but all men are sappai (The word 'sappai' has varied meanings, but in this case, it means insignificant to the point of being contemptuous). The film ends with her line: The best thing about being a woman is that it’s a man’s world. | comedy, neo noir, murder, violence | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0387719 | Astro Boy tetsuwan atomu | Astro Boy is a science fiction series set in a futuristic world where robots co-exist with humans. Its focus is on the adventures of the titular "Astro Boy" (sometimes called simply "Astro"): a powerful android created by the head of the Ministry of Science, Doctor Tenma (aka Dr. Astor Boyton II in the 1960 English dub). Dr. Tenma created Astro to replace his son Tobio ('Astor' in the 1960s English dub; 'Toby' in the 1980s English dub and the 2009 film), who died in a car accident (ran away in the 2003 anime; vaporized in the 2009 film). Dr. Tenma built Astro in Tobio's memory and treated Astro as lovingly as if he was the real Tobio. However, Dr. Tenma soon realized that the little android could not fill the void of his lost son, especially given that Astro could not grow older or express human aesthetics (in one set of panels in the manga, Astro is shown preferring the mechanical shapes of cubes over the organic shapes of flowers). In the original 1960 edition, Tenma rejected Astro and sold him to a cruel circus owner, Hamegg (the Great Cacciatore in the '60 English dub).
After some time, Professor Ochanomizu, the new head of the Ministry of Science, notices Astro Boy performing in the circus and convinces Hamegg to turn Astro over to him. (In a retcon the story becomes far more violent and complicated). He then takes Astro in as his own and treats him gently and warmly, becoming his legal guardian. He soon realizes that Astro has superior powers and skills, as well as the ability to experience human emotions.
Astro then is shown fighting crime, evil, and injustice using his seven powers: 100K horsepower strength, jet flight, high intensity lights in his eyes, adjustable hearing, instant language translation, a retractable machine gun in his hips, and a high IQ capable of determining if a person is good or evil. Most of his enemies are robot-hating humans, robots gone berserk, or alien invaders. Almost every story includes a battle involving Astro and other robots. In one manga episode, Astro takes on the US Air Force, and stops it from bombing some innocent Vietnamese villagers (this was a time-travel episode, in which Astro went back from the 21st century to 1969). | sci-fi | train | wikipedia | Good update, unsure about English version.
Having good memories of the Astroboy series that aired in the 80's, I was excited to hear about a remake.
Overall I'd say the new crew has done a fine job.
There are some changes in the story line (Astro working at a circus, getting his trademark red boots, etc) but these may be revealed later.
It doesn't seem to have as clear allegories for racism and segregation either, but again, there is still time for this to show up.
The show retains a similar look to the original Astroboy with great visuals.
The music captures the style of the show very well.I'm not too keen on some of the voices, though.
I have only seen the English-language dub so I don't have the original Japanese for comparison, but I find Astro's voice to be somewhat out of place.
Another character, Dr. Tenma, is a slender Asian man and has a voice that sounds like James Earl Jones!
Those two aside, the other voices are pretty good.
I also especially like that Astro's rockets still have the same sound as the 80's show!As for editing, a real problem with anime aired in the United States, I can't give definite comment, having never seen the original Japanese series.
I did notice that Astro was told he was based on a real boy without mentioning what happened to that boy (he was killed in a car accident before the series takes place).
A couple characters' names have been changed as well, Dr. Ocha-no-mizu (whom I knew as Prof.
Peabody, others, Dr. Elefun in the last series) is now called Dr. O'Shay.
If they wanted to shorten it, they could've just called him "Dr. Ocha" ("tea" in Japanese).
Astro's sister, Uran (Sarah, Astrogirl), is now called Zoran.
Once again, I'm not sure why.
Once again, I'm not sure why.
Also note, it's now called "Astro Boy" (2 words) instead of Astroboy (1 word).
Maybe to distinguish between the old and new series?Another thing I've noticed is that at least some of the episodes are being aired out of order.
E.g. Astro's first day of school after we'd already seen him there, his sister appearing with no explanation as to where she came from, only to vanish again until her proper introduction several weeks later.
I've learned that this is the distributor's doing and not that of the network that airs the show.
I wonder why companies do this.
Do they think the viewers won't notice?Overall, "Astro Boy" seems to be a decent update of the classic show.
I look forward to the new movie (slated for 2005)..
excellent..
i personally rate this series 9/10.
I have never seen the first ones but i think the sound and graphics are pioneering, like those of star wars in the 70s and 80s.
The backgrounds could beat poke'mons in two seconds, and i love the way that the animation rolls nicely.
The characters i am undecided on.
For two reasons, one, some i hate utterly, and two, some i really like.
The robot astroboy himself certainly is a great character, but his voice reminds me of a squeaky ballerina.
I expected more of a gruff voice.
Tenma certainly is well played, and while some of the plots deserve to be stuck onto he first doctors plots in the sixties, others are unbelievable but fit well.
Skunk, the criminal, certainly contains good villain style.
Id recommend this cartoon to any body who likes good anime shows, or robots and technology..
An underrated animated television series that deserves more attention.
Astro Boy Mighty Atom is such an underrated series I have a bit of a soft spot for.
I say "a bit" since I watched the English dub of the series in my childhood, and I do not like the English dub that much anymore.
The domestic bias is so annoying to the point that the only way to watch the original Japanese version is to either watch it online on KissAnime or order the DVDs from Japan.
I am from Australia, so that is why I said it.
The animation is not the stereotypical style used in Japanese animation, which is a good thing.
The voice acting by Makoto Tsumura as Atom, Hisashi Katsuta as Professor Ochanomizu, Shinya Owada as Doctor Tenma and Shadow, Miki Maruyama as Uran, Banjo Ginga as Officer Tawashi, Koji Ishii as Acetylene Lamp, Kosei Tomita as Higeoyaji, Akiko Kawase as Yuko Kisaragi, Kazuki Yao as Skunk, Hideyuki Tanaka as The Blue Knight, the list goes on, is fantastic.
The music by Takashi Yoshimatsu is great and gives that orchestral composition that the English dub lacks, which is generic electronic music.
The writing is great, which is a delicate balance of being epic and episodic, which is thanks to Chiaki Konaka, Ai Ohta, Keiichi Hasegawa, Sadayuki Murai, Kenji Konuta, Pamela Hickey, Dennys McCoy, Marc Handler, Hirotoshi Kobayashi, and Larry Biscof cooperating into the production of this series.
The American writers must be fluent in Japanese, so much so they wrote the episodes in said language in a studio in Japan..
Great 21st century remake of a classic!.
This new cartoon "Astro Boy" (two words) is the 21st century remake of the popular 80's cartoon "Astroboy" (one word).
"Astro boy" is a pretty good modernization of the Astroboy we know and love.
It is obviously set in the future which looks more futuristic than in the 80's "Astroboy".
The animation is improved, which is obviously done with computers in some parts whereas the original "Astroboy" was all hand drawn.
But story-wise, "Astro Boy" is not quite as good as the original 80's "Astroboy".
Where "Astro Boy" is pretty good, the original "Astroboy" is excellent!
But the new "Astro Boy" is still recommended viewing for all Astroboy fans out there.
The new "Astro Boy" gets a 9 out of 10.
The original "Astroboy" gets 10 out of 10..
Astro's stab at the 21st Century.
Out of all three of the versions, I'd have to say this one is by far the best version of the Astroboy cartoons.
It's structured, its well animated, its got a great storyline with some well developed characters and it's generally a fun watch for adults and children alike.
Again there are some gripes and some changes between the Japanese and American dubs, mainly being the lack of an episode here and there as well as the removal of many scenes which link back to Astro's past as Tobio, the son of Tenma.
Because American Children's TV is more censored than Japanese Children's TV, a large number of scenes involving the death of the real Tobio and the creation of Astro are removed so as not to seem disturbing, these scenes however do appear in the Japanese Original Version, so if it's story you're looking for, you'll find it there.
It also attempts to try and appeal to the more modern audience with catchphrases such as 'Let's Rocket' and other things that make it more like a Pokemon Cartoon, dampening down the more serious story.
Thankfully, these unnecessary pieces of silliness are reduced to only two or three episodes which have little to no impact on the overall story.
This series also has probably the best version of Dr Tenma.
In the 1963 version he was a loud mouth and obnoxiously silly character which wasn't fun to watch, he just seemed really insane.
As for the 1980 version he wasn't as mad, but he was still quite a stroppy and unenjoyable character.
This version, he is subtle, calculative, manipulative and generally just down right evil.
The character behind Tenma is much more developed, as is seen in the final few episodes of the series where Astro's past is revealed.
Instead of getting rid of Astro because he was clumsy or couldn't grow or something stupid like that, instead he removes Astro because Astro starts to develop the same defiance as the original Tobio did, sort of a Totalitarian type father who doesn't take questioning of his authority well.
Although quite clee- shee with the dark gloomy castle and the organ playing, he truly is a fantastic villain.
There are also some more light hearted tones with Astro's silly sister Zoran and his friends who keep getting into mischief.
Overall, a really fun series and definitely worth a watch. |
tt0120670 | Firestorm | A storm is heading to the city of Hong Kong, and with it comes another occurrence so destructive, it vows to bring down everything it touches.
A crew of seasoned criminals led by the notorious Cao Nam (Hu Jun), armed with high-powered weapons, pulls off another smooth and violent armored car heist in broad daylight in a crowded street. Whoever tries to get in their way, they will show no mercy. This puts the police force to shame and humiliation.
A hardboiled senior police inspector Lui Ming-chit (Andy Lau), hot on the trails of Nam and his tight crew, determines to put an end to this madness that causes the lives of innocent people. But he soon comes face with the cruel reality that the usual police tactics are too futile to send these armed thieves behind bars. Extreme crime requires extreme justice, even if it means crossing his moral line. To Shing-bong (Gordon Lam), an ex-con desperate to leave his criminal past behind, volunteers to be Lui’s informant in exchange for a fresh start with his girlfriend Yin Bing (Yao Chen). But little does he know what hellish situation he is getting himself into.
While Nam is putting together his next big score, the two colliding forces from both sides of the law, each at the top of their games, will soon face their archenemies. As Lui’s hunt heats up, their ultimate confrontation is about to take place on the streets.
As the storm passes through and the dust settles, whoever survives can hardly cope with its horrifying aftermath. | suspenseful, murder, violence | train | wikipedia | This is kind of a Class B action film and it stars an ex-pro football player (Howie Long) making his debut in the movies.
It's actually a good adventure story and Long was capable in his acting.
He was aided by three fine actors who usually are interesting in whatever roles they play: Scott Glenn, Suzy Amis and William Forstyhe.
Forsythe was good at playing what he does best: the nasty villain.This movie was also well-filmed with some nice closeup and camera angles.
Otherwise, for a no-name movie starring a rookie actor it was better than I anticipated..
It was just what I expected, a cheesy action movie, with "witty" lines and a totally off the wall villain.
You still alive?" If you're looking for a B movie that has pretty good action scenes and bad dialogue, this is the one for you.
Great improbable stunts too.Too bad Howie didn't take his shirt off, I would have given it another star..
firestorm is a cliffhanger type thriller starring Howie Long as Jesse Graves a heroic fire fighter who is up against a group of escaped convicts led by the Psycotic Randell who has kidnapped a bird watcher played by Suzi Amis and has caused a giant fire that is turning into a firestorm.now Jesse must now save the hostage stop the fire and take care of Randell.
firestorm is quite a fun little thriller Howie Long was quite a good hero shame he didn't make anymore action films after this.William Forsythe was absolutely brilliant as the main bad guy Randell William normally plays decent bad guys anyway like in out for justice and stone cold.even Scott Glenn is in it.
to end the review firestorm is a well made action thriller a bit clichéd but still cool 7 out of 10..
Hokey, instantly forgettable action movie which seems to be trying to cash in on moviegoers fascination with disaster flicks.
William Forsythe made the best performance of he actors but none of them really convinced me."Firestorms" plot seemed to be a mix from "Cliffhanger" and Ron Howards "Backdraft".
It´s just to bad that "Firestorm" doesen´t manage to be anything like either of this good films.
Don´t gett me wrong, "Firestorm" was an OK film in some ways.
One of those films that doesn't go anywhere, is predictable in what's going to happen, but at the same time, Firestorm is fairly harmless and one to watch with a delivered pizza.Definitely TV movie fare - whether intentional or not.A silly story of a felon who gets a forest fire started so he can escape with $27million.
I think this film had a lot of great action sequences, because it all seemed pretty realistic.
If he would just work at it, Long would make an excellent action hero.
Firestorm really reminded me of a lot like Cliffhanger, because they similar plot tones.
Let's face it, this film is no Ben-Hur, but if you like action films that don't require a high IQ, Firestorm is your right choice..
If you take it any other way of course it's going to become an awful movie in every aspect.I think everyone has said their piece about this film but I'd have to say the most notable scene in the entire movie, the one scene that had me laughing my head off, was when the bad guys pretended to be Canadian Fire-fighters.
Sometimes I just want to watch a movie for its entertainment value not its artistic content.
Don't try to rip off little bits of other action movies and do them with less panache.
With very little Firestorm.Many people have said that Howie Long's performance in this film is quite poor.
You can't call a film FIRESTORM and have only a few seconds worth of fire in it.
This in of itself makes the movie entertaining to watch, which is OK for a film that's really only intended to be a basic action flick.
Forsythe, Amis and Glen do a good job helping Howie Long through the scenes.
Even though he can't really act, Howie's likability and physical prowess make him fun to watch.
Firestorm is a fun little action flick with great visuals you can watch on a rainy day.
Toasty, by-the-numbers b-grade natural disaster action joint which has a stout-hearted Howie Long playing a smoke-jumper that has to tackle firestorms and William Forsythe's gleefully hammy bad guy persona.
Simple-minded writing makes sure that the bubblegum action flows with the blatant heroics coming to the forefront, which is led by Long and Glenn.
The probability of the stunts and action was even worse, and the fact that someone actually thought up this movie was the worst of all.
The best actor in the movie was the axe.
Stupid plot, stupid characters, stupid lines ("I hate it when you jump out of my airplane!"), and a Guinness record for saying the title 14,000 times throughout the movie earn it recognition to being one of the most laughably terrible movies in years.
One of the best scenes in the movie is when a house falls on Scott Glenn's leg.
Firestorm seems to be trying to put me over on how cool fighting forest fires are.
I think what I am trying to say is that Firestorm seems a bit of a stretch.Now, I am not saying that the men and women who fight forest fires in real life don't put themselves in danger while trying to save lives, homes, and peoples lifestyles.
Riding dirt bikes over cliffs, wrestling in a burning building and smashing peoples heads through boats to burn their faces off during a "firestorm" almost push this movie into so bad it's good territory.
It's almost the "Stone Cold" of fighting forest fires.I'd say Firestorm is the type of movie you shut your brain off and enjoy, but I don't think the movie gets to the point where your brain ever turns on.
Star rating side, this movie is entertaining, just not for the right reasons..
It is almost like someone took "Cheesey Movie Making 101." The casting is surprisingly good, the acting itself isn't bad, but script is humorously appalling and the characters are incredibly predictable and shallow.
(To name a few errors, you light a backfire to eliminate the fuels-not the oxygen, we do not fly aircraft at night, and, trust me on this one, EVERYONE wears sunglasses.) This is actually quite successful as a satire on action films.
I wasn't expecting too much just a shot 'em up flick but Howie Long surprised me.
The main spot where I had a problem was where you were supposed to figure out that Scott Glenn was the bad guy.The dialog there just didn't work.
I've seen it several times and it still never made sense, but if you can forget that it makes a great beer and popcorn movie..
Just knowing that Howie Long was actually trying is enough.
Aside from the movie's unforgivable flaws (bad script, weak melodrama, PLOT HOLES, half hearted acting, etc.) it does have a redeeming factor or two: the fire scenes were extremely well done, and I really enjoyed the mountain scenery.
I think that if there were a decent actor in the lead and had the script been tweaked just a bit (or a lot) this film might have been better.
STAR RATING:*****Unmissable****Very Good***Okay**You Could Go Out For A Meal Instead*Avoid At All CostsFirestorm is an intently dire actioner,which worst of it's many hinderances are it's cliched,tacky dialogue ,and listless,nigh on gormless,acting.Howie Long hardly has a Dolph Lundgren future in action movies,William Forsythe is hardly at his Out For Justice best here,whilst Scott Glenn merely reflects himself as a grumbling old timer,and Suzy Amis is placelessly over bearing as Long's birdwatching sidekick.Concoct into this lame brained mix a leadenly cardboard story,picketed from the least involving aspects of Stallone's Cliffhanger,and some from The River Wild,and it's all the more frustrating just to see an involving and intriguing premise about forest fire fighters,and the terminology involved in their jobs,wasted on such clunky fodder as this.Not worth watching.*.
It really is nothing more than a hunted in the woods movie, with really bad c.g.i. fires everywhere.
Howie Long and especially Scott Glenn, are totally wasted by a script that pulls one implausible stunt after another as our heroes escape cliffhanger after cliffhanger.
If you like films that insult your intelligence, then "Firestorm" is for you.
The movie is just some loosely connected action scenes that are made with unimpressive staging and mediocre special effects.
It can't make a movie by itself.Re-watch Twister for a relatively plot-less disaster/action movie done right.
Firestorm is a rather standard action yarn with the hero (H.Long) one of those fearless firefighters who specialize in parachuting into the danger zones.
All that shows is he should have walked in like a normal human being.The fire scenes themselves are pretty impressive, as the pic needs to show a forest on fire.
I enjoy a deep, intelligent thought provoking movie but for pure entertainment i like to turn to the likes of Firestorm because it is hilarious, pure camp.
Howie Long's performance makes any of Segal's look Oscar deserving.
As a fan of Howie Long's (i.e., as a T.V. sports commentator/announcer and a football player) I enjoyed the movie.
I thought that the movie was as good any of the many other mindless action adventures that I enjoy watching.
Fun Action film for the Fans.
Firestorm is one of those movies in which the moviegoer should be able to have fun watching this movie.
Firestorm has good special effects, excellent action scenes, and a star who in my opinion is one of the coolest men in America.
Firestorm has good actors, such as Scott Glenn and William Forsythe, who have the experience to make a meaningless character much more than that.
Howie Long does an exceptional job in Firestorm.
Hopefully, we'll be seeing a lot more films with Howie Long..
I only watched this movie because it had Scott Glenn in it and I can safely say he is by far the best thing about it.
Surprisingly enough, the worst thing about Firestorm was not Howie Long.
I wasn't ever sure what William Forsythe, who has been brilliant in his other films, was trying to do.
Very good movie!.
Firestorm is an good action film that casts Howie Long, Scott Glenn, William Forsythe, Suzy Amis, Barry Pepper, and Vladimir Kulich!
Long was very good in the film.
The action is really good and the fire scenes are really are really excellent.
If you like Howie Long, Scott Glenn, William Forsythe and the rest of the cast I've mentioned above and exciting non-stop action films then I Strongly recommend this film!.
The actors are generic stereotypes or look-a-likes (Janeane Garofalo laughed at your offer, eh?), the script is a random cut-and-paste from various other films, the plot is irrelevant, but the cinematics and score are suprisingly good.
Howie Long delivers the performance he was destined for!.
Jesse Graves (Howie Long) and Wynt Perkins (Scott Glenn) are firemen from a special force dedicated to extinguish fire in forests.
This is another average and full of clichés action movie.
This is another average and full of clichés action movie.
William Forsythe acts well as a sadistic criminal, but most of the plot is so ridiculous that makes laugh.
Therefore, a forgettable action movie.
Firestorm is a movie that people who are 15 and older might enjoy to watch.
The acting in the movie truly gives the film its cohesiveness.
Firestorm is not the best nor the worst film ever.
Firestorm is a movie which helps to humanize firefighters.
Standard, innocuous, and incendiary this rather enjoyable Action Movie is light entertainment with a soft R rating.
Pretty tame as these things go, it has some death defying dumb stunts and the whole thing is a notch above a TV Movie and can be quite enjoyable in a humdrum sort of way.If you don't expect your leading Actor to act or can tolerate a script that is dampened by a standard re-write of a glutted genre, then settle in for a Movie that doesn't ask much and is a jump into a not so hot Movie, but it doesn't leave you cold either.William Forsythe (has he ever disappointed) once again is a force to be reckoned on screen and steals the show with his Evil stare and detached dementia.
Some of the worst computer graphics ever seen, a "performance" so wooden from Howie Long it makes Stallone look like Ben Kingsley, and scenes that are so unrealistic Ed Wood would not have filmed them.
And poor Suzi Amis; You'd think James Cameron might have helped his gal get better movie roles..
Watch Howie Long on the NFL on FOX Instead..
Former NFL star Howie Long tries to make leading man status with this silly and really ridiculous would-be-action-thriller that is little more than a long puff of smoke.
Long stars as a fire-fighter in the forest who believes that some fellow fire-fighters are trapped in the wilderness, but really it is just an elaborate trick by some escaped convicts led by William Forsythe.
All the characters take illogical decisions to move the plot forward; plot twists are sketched out but never fully developped; and this movie can win competition in "density of stupid lines on a square meter of film" category.
Why on hell studio took Howie Long as leading man in the film, where Scott Glenn, Susy Amis and William Forsythe all play second fiddle, is not quite clear, but hopefully nobody will make the same mistake twice.
Long who looks like parody on superhero.
It really disappointed me.I was looking forward to seeing it for a while and when I finally rented it I was expecting an action-packed thrill ride.Instead I got a dull,cheesy,poorly-acted waste of time.There wasn't enough action for me,plus it was kind of boring.I felt like fast forwarding through most of the movie.The effects at the end were just pathetic.Normally I can tolerate bad acting and effects but not in this movie..
Howie Long stars as the smokejumper named Jesse, who "hates water," so to speak.
Despite his illustriouscareer as an NFL game commentary, Long's acting in the movie was atrocious.
However, thanks to his buff physique and his reputation as a pro-football player, Long does manage to pull off as a decent action hero.
He just needs to work on his lines!Sadly, the other actors in "Firestorm" aren't exactly Oscar- caliber either, because they all seem bored and unenthusiastic on what's going on.
Even the usually talented Scott Glen andWilliam Forsythe (looking a lot like a fat John Malkovich in the movie!) failed to stir up any interest for the viewer.But of course, the real attraction is the awesome special FXfound in this movie.
Too bad the performances andthe droll script (especially by our hero, Long!) weren't big enough to topple the larger-than-life effects!.
"Firestorm" got some nice special effects, and even some good ideas.
But it suffers greatly due to bad acting (especially from Howie Long), and bad script writing.
Howie Long as an actor..incredible..the scenes of the supersonic flames...deserve an Oscar for funniest SF.
Never before in my life have I wanted the villains to kill off the heros more than in this movie.
Howie Long is just laughable - he's trying, he really is, poor guy - as are the semi-attempts at character development that happen in the first half hour or so.
You cannot see the trees for the testosterone in director Dean Semler's synthetic outdoors action saga "Firestorm," starring sportscaster Howie Long as a stalwart smoke jumper who parachutes into raging Wyoming forest fires to rescue little gals and grown-up gals from getting cremated.
Any sparks that Howie ignited as an actor in John Woo's "Broken Arrow" sputter in "Firestorm" with Long's pulp diction performance.
Chris Soth's one-dimensional script doesn't help Howie much as escaped convicts and flaming infernos challenge his physical prowess.
Shaye's comeuppance is horribly graphic but richly deserved for his murderous demeanor."Firestorm" follows clench-jawed Jesse Graves (ex-Raiders football star Howie Long) as he thwarts Shaye's escape.
Matching fists and wits with Shaye's motley crew, our brawny firefighter hero sneaks off with Jennifer and they evade Randy Earl until a climactic fight on a lake about to be engulfed in a withering blaze."Firestorm" derives its title from the phenomenon which occurs when two fires collide and suck all of the oxygen out of the air, creating one of Mother Nature's nasty nuclear-style blasts which destroys everything in it.
Sentimentality drips off the script at points, especially at the end when Jennifer learns that she has been incubating two bird eggs during this maelstrom of action."Dances with Wolves" Oscar-winning photographer Dean Semler makes his less than inflammatory directorial debut with "Firestorm." When he takes his cameras up for aerial shots of British Columbia, you find your breath catching in your throat.
Howie Long should be promoted to Master Actor.
I wish I could throw an axe like Howie Long.
I really love how the whole plot was summarized in about 10 minutes during the entire feature, this allowed for more Howie Long content.
If I could make one wish for anything in the whole world, it would be for Howie Long to restart(or start) his film career..
So much for internal continuity .Maybe I shouldn`t be so harsh because FIRESTORM isn`t a film that`s supposed to make you think .
This Film Belongs in a Firestorm.
Firestorm (1998): Dir: Dean Semler / Cast: Howie Long, Suzy Amis, Scott Glenn, William Forsythe, Barry Pepper: Dense project seen dozens of times with all of its dull clichés.
Howie Long plays a firefighting hero who battles the villains and gets the girl.
Long is there to appear big and beat up criminals and looking bad doing so.
William Forsythe is laughable as the villain who makes nasty remarks but ultimately it is obvious that Long will kick his ass up over his head. |
tt0079588 | The Muppet Movie | The Muppets have gathered in a theatre, in a Hollywood film studio, to screen their new biographical film, The Muppet Movie.
In the film-within-a-film, Kermit the Frog enjoys a relaxing afternoon in a Florida swamp, strumming his banjo and singing "The Rainbow Connection", when he is approached by Bernie, a Hollywood agent who encourages Kermit to pursue a career in show business. Inspired by the idea of "making millions of people happy", Kermit sets off on a cross-country trip to Los Angeles, but is soon pursued by entrepreneur Doc Hopper and his shy assistant Max in an attempt to convince Kermit to be the new spokesman of his struggling French-fried frog legs restaurant franchise, to Kermit's horror. As Kermit continuously declines Doc's offers, Hopper resorts to increasingly vicious means of persuasion.
Meeting Fozzie Bear, who works as a hapless comedian in the El Sleezo Cafe, Kermit invites Fozzie to accompany him. The two set out in a 1951 Studebaker loaned to Fozzie by his hibernating uncle. The duo’s journey includes misadventures which introduce them to a variety of eccentric human and Muppet characters, including Dr. Teeth and the Electric Mayhem and their manager Scooter, who receives a copy of the script from the pair (one of a number of self-references) at an old Presbyterian church; Gonzo, who works as a plumber, and his girlfriend Camilla the Chicken; Sweetums, who runs after them after they mistakenly think that he has turned them down at a used car lot; and the immediately love-stricken Miss Piggy at a fair.
While Kermit and Miss Piggy form a relationship over dinner that night, Doc Hopper and Max kidnap Miss Piggy to lure Kermit into a trap. Using an electronic cerebrectomy device, scientist Professor Krassman decides to brainwash Kermit in an attempt to force Kermit to perform in Doc’s commercials until an infuriated Miss Piggy knocks out Doc Hopper's henchmen and causes the scientist to be brainwashed by his own device. After receiving a job offer, however, she promptly abandons a devastated Kermit.
After an incident in the theater where the projector briefly breaks down, with film tangled around the Swedish Chef, who was the projectionist, the film starts up again. Having been joined by Rowlf the Dog and reunited with Miss Piggy, the Muppets continue their journey. Fozzie's 1946 Ford Woodie station wagon trade-in breaks down in the New Mexico desert. During a campfire that night, the group sadly considers that they may miss the audition tomorrow, and Kermit wanders off, ashamed of himself for seemingly bringing his friends on a fruitless journey. Upon consulting a more optimistic vision of himself, Kermit remembers that it was not just his friends' belief in the dream that brought them this far, but also his own faith in himself. Reinvigorated, he returns to camp to find that the Electric Mayhem and Scooter have read the script in advance, and arrived to help them the rest of the way.
Just as it seems they are finally on their way, the group is warned by Max that Doc Hopper has hired an assassin named Snake Walker to kill Kermit. Kermit decides he will not be hunted down by a bully any longer and proposes a Western-style showdown in a nearby ghost town occupied by Dr. Bunsen Honeydew and his assistant Beaker, who invent materials that have yet to be tested. While confronting Hopper, Kermit explains his motivations, attempting to appeal to Hopper’s own hopes and dreams, but Hopper is unmoved and orders his henchmen to kill him and all his friends. They are saved only when one of Dr. Bunsen's inventions, "insta-grow" pills, temporarily turns Animal into a giant, causing Hopper and his men to flee.
The Muppets proceed to Hollywood, and after getting by his secretary, Miss Tracy, via causing her allergic reactions to their dander and fur, are hired by producer and studio executive Lew Lord. The Muppets attempt to make their first movie involving a surreal pastiche of their experiences. The first take goes awry when Gonzo, holding pastiche versions of the balloons he flew away on earlier, crashes into the rainbow, breaking it in half and sending it falling onto the rest of the set, bringing it down as well, then Crazy Harry pulls two levers in the control room, which overloads the electricity circuits and causes enough of an explosion to blow a hole in the roof of the studio. However, in their stunned silence of the whole chain of events, a rainbow suddenly shines through the hole into the studio right onto the Muppets. The Muppets, joined by the characters from The Muppet Show, Sesame Street, Emmet Otter's Jug-Band Christmas, and the "Land of Gorch" segment of Saturday Night Live, sing the final verses of "The Rainbow Connection".
As the screening ends, Sweetums jumps through the theater's screen, having finally caught up with the other Muppets. | good versus evil, entertaining, sadist | train | wikipedia | Throughout the film, we are shown the down side of show business, even before the Muppets have 'made it': Piggy abandons Kermit without a second thought at a phone call from her agent, Gonzo expresses the loneliness and regret of a performer's life on the road in his haunting 'I'm Going to Go Back There Someday,' and, worst of all, Kermit is continually tortured and tested by Doc Hopper, who wants him to commercialize his art for the unholiest of purposes.
In essence, the travails of the muppets boil down to the finale song of the movie: "Life's like a movie, write your own ending, keep believing, keep pretending." They create their own reality, which has all the trappings of every epic tale: a lofty goal at the end of what is necessarily a obstacle-laden journey; an ever-increasing group of like-minded individuals for camaraderie; a nasty set of villians who are not beyond all redemption; and a big-budget Hollywood ending because, darn it all, they CAN.Only Jim Henson could pull this off.
Kermit (Henson's alterego) says `I hope you appreciate I'm doing my own stunts.' Think about it.The songs, themselves self-referential, are important frosting: `why are there so many songs about rainbows?'`Life is a movie, write your own ending, keep believing, keep pretending...' You don't get that in common fare.
Jim Henson as Kermit, Dr.Teeth, Rowlf and Waldorf.Frank Oz as Fozzie, Piggy and Animal.Jerry Nelson as Floyd Pepper, Robin the Frog, Lew Zealand and Crazy Harry.Richard Hunt as Janice, Statler,Beaker and Scooter.Dave Goelz as Gonzo, Dr.Hunnydew and Zoot.Charles Durning and Mel Brooks.cameos by Steve Martin, Carol Kane, Orson Welles, Bob Hope, Richard Pryor and others.This is the first Muppet movie of the billion others that came out, and is also the best, by far!
This movie, along with being already good, has excellent songs performed by the Muppets, including Rainbow Connection, Can You Picture That?, Moving Right Along and others.
I'm a great fan of puns, and this movie has them quite well placed, but one of the amazing aspects of it is its pacing: it's not really high-speed children's pacing where the filmmakers just randomly decide to move the story along without giving the character's depth, it's just kind of moves along with the characters wherever they want to go.Kermit the Frog is just an awesome character.
Jim Henson's The Muppet Movie is a charming, funny and brilliant film that can be watched AND enjoyed by adults and kids.
Unsurprisingly, I liked it at the time, and revisiting it in recent years hasn't exactly been disappointing.One day, while Kermit the Frog sits in a swamp with his banjo after singing "Rainbow Connection", a Hollywood agent named Bernie comes by in a boat and urges him to pursue a career in Tinseltown.
There is, of course, the Oscar-nominated "Rainbow Connection" at the beginning, and more good tunes follow, such as Kermit and Fozzie's catchy road song, "Movin' Right Along", and "I'm Going to Go Back There Someday", a poignant ballad sung by Gonzo.
The Muppets in this movie are generally lovable, just like they are on TV, and some of them provide a lot of the humour, including Fozzie, making his first appearance in the film hopelessly trying to entertain people in a restaurant with his stand-up, and, well, if you're familiar with these famous Muppets, you should know what to expect from each of them.
I highly doubt there's much left to say about "The Muppet Movie" that hasn't been said at some point in the past thirty years, but today, it remains good family entertainment..
An inspired combination of slapstick, music, vaudeville and charm, The Muppet Movie takes all the now familiar characters away from the Muppet Theatre where humans were the minority, and plonks them right among the (almost) real world.We meet Kermit alone in his swamp singing beautifully to himself, and after a chance meeting with the frog, a crocodile and a movie agent – yes it's that kind of film – Kermit is inspired to try to forge his own path in showbusiness.Along his journey to Hollywood he meets aspiring stand up comedian Fozzie, amateur stunt man Gonzo and a group of zany musos known as The Electric Mayhem.
He takes a shine to Kermit's pins and decides that he simply must have them to promote his wares, whether Kermit agrees or not.The remainder of the film is essentially an extended chase sequence as Kermit and the gang hightail it towards Hollywood with Doc Hopper and his toadying (no pun intended) assistant close behind.And this to me is the problem with the initial Muppet Movie, the best parts are the simple times, Kermit sitting on the log singing Rainbow Connection without a care in the world, the awkward but undeniable chemistry between pig and frog, the stoner-ish hep dialogue between the members of the Electric Mayhem, the stand-up bear who is terrible at stand up.They kinda lost me when the film veered into 'eating the primary character's legs' territory.
(I really didn't remember these things from my previous viewings.) Despite these depressing and out of place sequences there is still a lot to love about the first Muppet Movie, the constant breaking of the fourth wall is already obvious, the general funkiness of the Electric Mayhem and the timelessness of Kermit's tunes, the cheesy jokes that are so bad that you can't help but smile – especially when delivered with such innocence and charm by a handpuppet
the inclusion of several big name cameos, none of whom for a moment let on that they are conversing with a sock, yet some of whom still manage to out-ham the very same talking puppets.The Muppet Movie finds a bunch of frogs, pigs, bears and whatevers coming to terms with their own existence, growing into their own skin and fur.
My favorite line of all time is actually from this film, it's the last line spoken by my green, goggle eyed hero Kermit "Life's like a movie , Write your own ending".
Kermit the Frog leaves the swamp and heads to Hollywood, and naturally his lone journey becomes a giant group trip as he acquires a bear named Fozzie, a thing named Gonzo, a glamorous hog we all know as Miss Piggy, Rowlf the Dog, a big scary monster with a giant heart (Sweetums), and the greatest foam-based rock'n'roll band ever built, Dr. Teeth and the Electric Mayhem.
along with the awesome friends he meets on the way comes a couple of the greatest songs ever made that are bound to become classics, including "the rainbow connection"in conclusion i would like to say that watching this movie was the greatest thing EVER!.
Filmed as an allegorical story about how Henson came to work in children's television as a puppeteer and ended up with a half-hour show of his own on primetime television, The Muppet Movie ends up an affirmation of everything more progressive, understanding sorts would say to children who did not quite meet the expected norm during the 1980s.
A great light in the world went out the day Jim Henson died.The Muppet Movie begins with its cast sitting down to see the premiere of what were about to see for the next eighty or so minutes.
The only thing that is sadly aged is the cameo appearances of movie stars of the time, none of which my children recognize or have any idea who they are (okay, they know Steve Martin from the "Pink Panther" films and Mel Brooks as "Yogurt", but most are unknown to them).
And what a brilliant human cast- from Bob Hope to Orson Welles, from Madeleine Kahn(the same wonderful actress who brought us hilarious movies like What's Up Doc?, Blazing Saddles and Clue) to Cloris Leachman, from Steve Martin to Richard Pryor, all of whom made memorable guest appearances, if careful not to overshadow the Muppets in a fantastic film.
"Why are there so many songs about rainbows, and what's on the other side?" Kermit poses this relatively simple double interrogative near the beginning of "The Muppet Movie" while singing his signature song, "The Rainbow Connection." As time goes by, the question and the movie only gain profundity.I'm going to forgo the review of this movie as a children's comedy, but look at it instead as a classic for every generation to love with serious ideals and a heartwarming message that gains more warmth with each passing year.As the milestones in my own life come creeping up on me, I hear more and more the evocative strains of that elementary ditty, and realize that it can fit the soundtrack to anyone's life, because we all dream.
Featuring classic comedians and guest star cameos, keeps to a simple but original plot, classic Muppet lame jokes, Paul Williams genius in song writing, and Electric Mayhem madness, and comes off with an amazing movie especially when you realize that the major cast are puppets.
Seeing the Muppets (at the height of their popularity) heading Hollywood, singing and dancing, with Miss Piggy googely-eying her beloved Kermit, Fozzie Bear doing his best as everyone's manager, and a generous cast of "extras" delivering a film that turned out to be "okey dokey".Kermit's melancholy ukulele number "Rainbow Connection" was nominated for an Oscar that year, but was beat out by Norma Rae's "It Goes Like It Goes".
The Muppet Movie is a fantastic movie with a very well developed storyline that is sweet,very funny and filled with lovable characters.The film is packed with a ton of fun and laughs that the whole family will enjoy and also has many beautiful music numbers,of course the Rainbow Connection is a great song.The movie is the first of the many films starring the Muppets that follow,they are great films that have never failed to entertain me and bring me joy.
The film is also packed with many well known celebrity cameos,and all of them are gold,my favourite would have to be Mel Brooks.Fans of the Muppet Show should definitely watch and will love the Muppet Movie.Kermit recalls how he decided to try and make it big in Hollywood and how he met all his friends who end up coming with him along the way..
Well, after 27 Muppet-free years, Marc swayed me into finally taking the plunge, and, I'm happy to say, The Muppet Movie was an amazing experience, and one that made me feel like I'd known the vast array of characters for years.After a chance meeting with a Hollywood agent, Kermit the Frog leaves the comfort of his swamp in order to travel to Hollywood for an audition.
Further down the road he picks up more eager passengers, such as Dr. Teeth and the Electric Mayhem, the Great Gonzo, and Miss Piggy, who falls in love with Kermit after winning a beauty pageant.While the 'origin' movie is quite often the route that TV series take when taking the leap into movies, The Muppet Movie benefits from taking an almost classical take on the road movie.
The Muppets always appealed to all ages, and adults have the pleasure of enjoying many self-reflexive moments and audience awareness (Kermit turns to camera and says "I hope you appreciate I'm doing all my stunts!"), as well as cameos from the likes of James Coburn, Mel Brooks, Bob Hope, Steve Martin, Richard Pryor, Madeline Kahn, Elliot Gould, and Orson Welles.Amongst all the mayhem, there is also a quite beautiful moment in Gonzo crooning "I'm Going to Go Back There Someday", recollecting his past in the sky and desire to return someday.
"Rainbow Connection" is also a great song, but my favourite musical moment has to be "Movin' Right Along", gleefully sang by Kermit (on his banjo) and Fozzie - the movie really came to life for me here.
Besides the mostly hilarious screenplay by Jerry Juhl and Jack Burns, there were also wonderful songs by Paul Williams and Kenny Ascher of which the most inspirational was "The Rainbow Connection" as performed by Kermit the Frog at the beginning and which was later Oscar-nominated but lost to "It Goes Like It Goes" from Norma Rae. Oh, and Charles Durning was a hoot as the villain.
This is one kid's movie the adults love even more...it's got great songs, tons of humor, more celebrity cameos than can sanely be believed, and lots of wordplay, horseplay, and froglegs.
All the cameo appearances are great, especially Orson Welles and Steve Martin "Finest Wines of Idaho...excellent choice." And all the origonal muppets are great too: Kermit, Miss Piggy, Gonzo, Scooter, the Electric Mayhem, Rowlf, Sam the Eagle, Lew Zealand, and most of all, Fozzie Bear, "Would you consider a bear in a frog suit?" The movie also has wonderful catchy tunes (whenever I go on a road trip I always sing "Moving right along!") I love this movie..
50 screenings later, it still works for me on so many levels; as a musical with excellent Paul Williams numbers; as a comedy with very impressive (and personal) cameo appearances; as a philosophical 'Hero's Journey' (Henson & Juhl deserve 'Joseph Campbell kudos' just as much as George Lucas!); and it is a wonderful touchstone to Jim Henson's career & life.Whenever I'm sick, or sad or need a little lift this film guarentees a smile and the hope for sunnier days ahead..
Many Great Cameos, But the Movie Has Dull Spots, Too. Kermit and his new found friends trek across America to find success in Hollywood, but a frog-legs merchant (Charles Durning) is after Kermit.I am not quite sure on how to rate this film...
Still, it's fun to watch Kermit elude the lascivious Doc Hopper (Charles Durning) and the Doc's meek assistant Max (Austin Pendleton) while meeting the rest of the Muppets on the way to Hollywood, and to spot the seemingly endless number of comedians in bit parts.OK, so we could be cynical and note that Jim Henson's work got excessively commercial after he died.
With the Muppet Show being a big hit on television, The Muppet Movie quickly followed but a non Henson company man (James Frawley) was tasked to direct which led to creative differences and a film that is a little distant from the hit television show.After meeting a Hollywood agent (Dom DeLuise) by chance, Kermit the Frog leaves his swamp to go to Hollywood.
He is pursued by fast food mogul Doc Hopper (Charles Durning) and his henchman (Austin Pendleton) who wants Kermit to promote his failing frog legs business.What is essentially a road movie Kermit meets other Muppet characters such as Fozzie Bear in El Sleezo bar, Dr Teeth and the Electric Mayhem, the Great Gonzo and Miss Piggy.In a sense the film maps out how the Muppets formed and the film is a mixture of slapstick, star cameos, songs, comedic set pieces as well as taking satirical swipe at the commercialisation of modern times.
The film has a surreal even Pythonesque appeal with humour directed at kids and adults but it does not always quiet come together but is still better than some sequels which had more direct control by the Henson clan.Lord Lew Grade pulled some favours as he enticed stars such as Telly Savalas, James Coburn, Milton Berle, Mel Brooks, Cloris Leachman, Steve Martin, Richard Pryor, Madeline Kahn, Elliot Gould, Carol Kane, Bob Hope and even Orson Welles..
The first feature-length adventure of Jim Henson's beloved muppet characters is a very competent musical comedy vehicle as Kermit The Frog leaves his carefree, swampy surroundings for the bright lights (egged on by stranded Hollywood agent Dom DeLuise who overheard him singing); on the way, he meets Fozzie Bear (a pitiful stand-up comedian at James Coburn's El Sleazo Café who has Telly Savalas for a bouncer and Madeline Kahn a patron!), the piano-playing dog Rowlf, bestial drummer Animal and his laid-back, funky band, egomaniacal beauty queen Miss Piggy (in a ceremony presided over by Elliott Gould and Edgar Bergen), etc.
It also boasts the classic song 'The Rainbow Connection', which continues to be as profound today as it was then.I think the film is quite slow in places and obviously the big name cameos at the time are less impressive today for younger viewers.However it's fun and enjoyable enough viewing and is certainly one of the better outings for Kermit and the gang..
I always responded to this as a kid, and it's what makes the Muppets still enjoyable to me as an adult when other material aimed at children drives me crazy.A huge cast of big names appearing in cameos makes this film feel like a kiddie-sized version of "Around the World in 80 Days," except that it's about 80 times better.Grade: A.
This wonderful movie captures so many elements of what makes a family comedy funny, entertaining, sweet and memorable, it's difficult to decide where to start.From the opening number, "Rainbow Connection," Paul Williams's excellent score sung with gusto by Kermit D.
Cameos all over the place and the amazing theme song, "The Rainbow Connection" (which even received an Oscar nomination for that year), continue to make "The Muppet Movie" one of the more memorable fun trips to the theater in the late-1970s.
The Muppet Movie is just not for kids but adults as well.It has a lot big stars in the film.I was amazed by how the muppets were like Kermit riding a bike and Fozzie driving a car.The film is funny and very entertaining and I think this is a movie for everyone to enjoy!.
Kermit the Frog enjoys his life in the swamp, but begins riding his bike to Hollywood after an agent tells him he should go and "make millions of people happy." From there, he runs into a number of characters who have the same dream of making it big in Hollywood: Fozzie Bear, The Electric Mayhem, Scooter, The Great Gonzo, Camilla the Chicken, Miss Piggy, Rowlf the Dog, Dr. Honeydew and Beaker, and others.
The movie is about Kermit The Frog showing us a film about how the muppets not only met but got their start. |
tt1476425 | Turnabout | Tim and Sally Willows (John Hubbard and Carole Landis) are a spoiled well-off couple who constantly bicker and cannot agree on anything.
Tim Willows is considered to be the main cog in the machinery of his own advertising company Manning, Willows, and Claire. His wife Sally is his exact opposite, pampering herself in their home all day. And when Tim gets home, they start arguing, constantly watched by a strange Indian idol they got from a distant relative of Tim's. They call it Mr. Ram.
After one extraodinarily stressful day at the office, Tim comes home to find Sally in the bath, and they start arguing like never before. In the heat of the moment, Tim expresses a wish to switch places with his lazy wife, to see how she goes about her days at nearly half speed. Sally also makes the same wish, seriously doubting the strain of running the advertising firm, having fun all day long. The Indian idol on the wall overhears their respective wishes and makes them come true, speaking loudly from its place on the wall.
When the couple wake up the next morning they have indeed switched places and bodies with each other. Chaos ensues, as active Tim stays home with the servants and wives of his colleagues all day, in Sally's body, while she goes to work and manages to be rude to the firm's biggest client. Sally also succeeds in landing another client that Tim had denied business before.
When the couple finally meet again in their home at night, they both beg on their bare knees to switch back into their regular bodies again. Their wish is granted this time too, and life goes back to normal. Tim has to clean up the mess Sally made at the firm, and she apologizes to all their friends. They blame everything on the fact that Sally is pregnant.
When everything seems to be just fine and dandy again, Mr. Ram explains that he made a mistake when changing them back into their ordinary bodies, and as it now happens, Tim is the one who is pregnant. | murder | train | wikipedia | Just a mediocre crime film..
"I can't believe you.
You haven't seen or heard from this guy in ages,and he calls out of the blue and you're off to his rescue?"Perry's (Waylon Payne) wife sounds surprised when he stops his nightly activities with her in bed to help his friend Billy (George Katt).
I was also as much surprised about some developments in this crime-con indie movie.
The story didn't impress me.
However, the performances of both the leading actors was of such high level, they deserve a new collaboration in another film with a better and well-thought-out script.
Here the story was so weak and predictable that even their acting performance couldn't tip the scales to the positive side.Perry and Billy are old schoolmates and haven't seen each other for 15 years.
Both have taken a completely different direction in their lives.
Perry ended up as a (seemingly) happy married family man who earns his living as an optician.
Billy on the other hand has chosen a criminal and dissolute life.
No steady job and no place where he settled.
As the story goes on, you can conclude that a nightlife full of liquor, drugs and women is his territory.
And then there's that particular night.
He's standing in front of a lake and tries to commit suicide.
It might be that he stumbled across a stone while watching the two nighttime fishermen.
Who knows.And yet, Perry leaves in the middle of the night, to help his long forgotten friend.
So maybe Perry wasn't happily married.
Or he's suffering from insomnia.
Or did he just want to take a step in the unknown.
After an awkward, hesitant conversation in a road restaurant and an argument with a couple of youngsters, Billy can convince Perry (in an easy way just by making him feel guilty about the situation) to have another drink in a local strip club.
And before they know it, the night ends in a shabby motel, accompanied by two busty, handsome strippers.The movie isn't really bad.
Although the budget wasn't so big, the made images generally look really professional.
The interaction between Wayne and Katt is magnificent and at times extremely enjoyable.
And you have to admit that the strippers Sherri (Rosebud Baker) and Candy (Sayra Player) are pleasant to look at.
Particularly Rosebud Baker.
With her charming and lovely smile she can melt any guy's heart effortlessly.
But still there are some facts that really amazed me.Billy drank a lot of alcohol and took a lot of sleeping pills at the beginning of the film.
So it's likely that's the reason why he ended up in the water.
But what a surprise.
After a while you see him acting as if nothing happened.
Astonishing.
Also Perry's behavior is kind of strange.
According to him, his drink at the club was spiked.
However, when burying his face in between Sherri's Big 'Uns, I guess his condition miraculously got better.
And the way he's being hustled in the end although he's an intelligent, realistic man, was rather laughable.
And finally, I thought that the scenes in the strip club and the motel were a bit too monotonous.Anyway, if someone would call me in the middle of the night, who I haven't seen for over 15 years, asking for help, I would hang up after shouting "wrong number".
And when you're planning on watching this mediocre crime film, I recommend you not to watch the trailer.
To be honest, the trailer is the complete movie in a nutshell!More reviews here : http://bit.ly/2qtGQoc. Fascinating, thought provoking gem of an indie.
I'm not sure what the last reviewer expected, but this movie was flat out perfect on all levels.
First off, the photography was beautiful, like the reviews I read, it looks like a million dollar budget.
The two leads are awesome.
I remember seeing Waylon Payne as Jerry Lee Lewis in WALK THE LINE, and George Katt is an actor you can't take your eyes off.
Also the female leads are terrific.
It's what I would call a slow burn - film noir.
You don't see what's coming, and every plot device is lined up neatly - like a puzzle.
Credit that to writer/ director- E.B. Hughes.
This guy is one to watch for.
I don't know about you, but I've scoured Netflix and Amazon late at night, and I'm drawn to indies, and I'm always let down.
This movie will not let you down- not in the least.
It keeps you guessing, and keeps you coming back for more.
AND YES- Peter Greene is great and creepy as hell.
Beautiful indie.
What an absolute gem of a movie.
Reminds me of the old school slow burn style film noir.
Beautifully shot, beautifully directed, and paced perfectly.
I was lucky enough to see it at a film festival in New York, and no-one saw the ending in sight.
Waylon Payne plays Perry, and his performance should get an Indie Spirit award- he was amazing, as is NY actor George Katt.
Everyone in this film does their job, and director E.B. Hughes is a force to be reckoned with.
The locations are great, the writing exquisite, the photography is amazing.
The tones and hues fit the film perfectly, and I love the fact that there is no soundtrack.
It adds to the realism of the story.
I can't wait for his next film.
Movies like this don't come around often..
Big Gulp Fiction.
A glorified student film that looks new and crispy but seems to want that old school celluloid grain instead, and is also begging to be taken seriously i.e. as a serious crime neo noir thriller of some kind...But the two leading actors lack what's in the eyes of this labor-of-love's intense and genuine-acting ringer, Peter Greene (Zed from Pulp Fiction)...
Had he starred with, say, someone else who really looked like they've been through more than through-the-motion rehearsals, then...This might pass for an actual theatrical-style experience as opposed to something someone pulled-off on a dime or two, which the director should be given some credit for...
But credit ain't dues, and no real dues are being paid here for the characters, or the audience...
What you wind up watching is a project, not a vehicle....
Extremely average.
Unfortunately, not much left in the movie once you've watched the trailer.
A slow mover which lures the viewer in on the pretence of a big reveal.
But there isn't one.
The unveiling is exactly as you might predict if you've seen any of the great thrillers or dramas.
If, like me, you're pulled in by the presence of Peter Greene, I'd suggest you don't waste your time.
He plays a great role (albeit one he's played many times before), but doesn't get much screen time.
On the whole, the acting was OK (which is why I've rated it a generous 4), but the story could have been much better.
The writer/director has potential; this is certainly not his masterpiece. |
tt0103241 | What About Bob? | Bob Wiley (Bill Murray) is a good-natured man with great work ethic, but he suffers from multiple phobias and is divorced. He feels good about the results of an initial session with Dr. Leo Marvin (Richard Dreyfuss), a New York psychoanalytical psychiatrist with a huge ego, but is immediately left on his own with a copy of Leo's new book, Baby Steps, when the doctor goes on vacation to Lake Winnipesaukee, New Hampshire for a month. Unable to cope, Bob follows Leo to his vacation home. Leo is annoyed because he does not see patients on vacation but, seeing how desperate Bob is, he gives Bob a prescription telling him to "take a vacation from his problems." Bob seems to have made a breakthrough, but the next morning shows up at Leo's house again and says that he decided to take a vacation both in spirit and in fact. He is staying on at Lake Winnipesaukee as a guest of the Guttmans, a couple who own a coffee shop and are more than happy to have Bob as their guest and encourage him to be around Leo, as they hold a grudge against Dr. Marvin for purchasing the lakeside home they had been scrimping and saving for years to buy.
Bob suggests that they start a friendship, although Leo thinks being friends with a patient is beneath him and attempts to avoid any further contact. However, Bob swiftly ingratiates himself with Leo's family, who think Bob may have some foibles, but is otherwise a balanced and sociable man. Leo's children: Anna (Kathryn Erbe) and Sigmund (Charlie Korsmo) find that Bob relates well to their problems, in contrast with their father's clinical approach, while Bob begins to gain an enjoyment of life from his association with them. Bob goes sailing with Anna and helps Sigmund to dive into the lake, which Leo was unable to help him with. Leo then angrily pushes Bob into the lake and Leo’s wife, Fay, insists on inviting Bob to dinner to apologize, which Bob accepts (as he views Leo's slights against him as accidental and/or part of his therapy). At dinner, Bob's comment on Baby Steps causes Leo to choke, and Bob saves his life by repeatedly and violently landing his full weight on the doctor's prostrated form. A thunderstorm then forces Bob to spend the night. Leo wants Bob out of the house by 6:30, as Good Morning America is arriving at 7 to interview him about Baby Steps. The next morning, however, the television crew shows up early and, oblivious to Leo's discomfort, suggest having Bob on the show as well. Leo is tense and makes a fool out of himself during the interview while Bob is relaxed and speaks glowingly of Leo and the book, unintentionally stealing the spotlight.
Outraged, Leo throws a tantrum and then attempts to have Bob committed, but Bob is soon released after telling the staff of the institution therapy jokes, easily demonstrating his sanity. Forced to retrieve him, Leo then abandons Bob in the middle of nowhere, but Bob quickly gets a ride back to Leo's house while a variety of mishaps delay Leo until nightfall. Leo is then surprised by the birthday party that Fay has been secretly planning for him, and he is delighted to see his beloved sister Lily. But when Bob appears and puts his arm around Lily, Leo becomes completely enraged and attacks him. Bob remains oblivious to Leo’s hostility, but Fay explains that Leo has been acting unacceptably as a result of an inexplicable grudge against Bob, and he agrees to leave. Meanwhile, Leo breaks into the town's general store, stealing a shotgun and 20 pounds of explosives. Bob becomes terrified while walking through the dark woods and is kidnapped at gunpoint by Leo, who leads him deep into the woods, ties him up, and straps the explosives onto him, calling it "death therapy." Leo then returns to the house, gleefully preparing his cover story. Believing the explosives to be props and used as a metaphor for his problems, Bob applies Leo's "Baby Steps" approach and manages to free himself both of his physical restraints and his fears; he reunites with Leo and his family, praising Leo for curing him with "death therapy." A frantic Leo asks Bob where he put the black powder, to which Bob replies "in the house" just before the Marvins' vacation home detonates. The shock leaves Leo in a catatonic state.
Some time later, the still-catatonic Leo is brought to Bob and Lily's wedding. Upon their pronouncement as husband and wife, Leo regains his senses and screams, "No!" but the sentiment is lost in the family's excitement at his recovery. Text at the end reveals that Bob went back to school and became a psychologist, then wrote a best selling book titled Death Therapy, and that Leo is suing him for the rights. | psychedelic, psychological, humor | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0101698 | Defending Your Life | Daniel Miller (Albert Brooks), a Los Angeles advertising executive, dies in a car accident on his 39th birthday and is sent to the afterlife. He arrives in Judgment City, a Purgatory-like waiting area populated by the recently deceased of the western half of the United States, where he is to undergo the process of having his life on Earth judged. Daniel and the rest of the recently deceased are offered many Earth-like amenities and activities in the city while they undergo their judgment processes—from all-you-can-eat restaurants (which cause no weight gain and serve the best food), to bowling alleys and comedy clubs.
His defense attorney, Bob Diamond (Rip Torn), explains to Daniel that people from Earth use so little of their brains (only three to five percent) that they spend most of their lives functioning on the basis of their fears. "When you use more than five percent of your brain, you don't want to be on Earth, believe me," says Diamond. If the court determines that Daniel has conquered his fears, he will be sent on to the next phase of existence, where he will be able to use more of his brain and thus be able to experience more of what the universe has to offer. Otherwise, his soul will be reincarnated on Earth to live another life in another attempt at moving past his fears.
Daniel's judgment process is presided over by two judges (played by Lillian Lehman and George D. Wallace). Diamond argues that Daniel should move onto the next phase. His formidable opponent is Lena Foster (Lee Grant). Diamond informs Daniel that she is known as "the Dragon Lady." Each utilizes video-like footage from select days in the defendants' lives, shown to the judges to illustrate their case.
During the procedure, Daniel meets and falls in love with Julia (Meryl Streep), a woman who lived a seemingly perfect life of courage and generosity, especially compared to his. (She died after slipping on the ground and falling into her pool and drowning.) The proceedings do not go well for Daniel. Foster shows a series of episodes in which Daniel did not overcome his fears, as well as various other bad decisions and mishaps. The final nail in his coffin, it seems, is when Foster, on the last day of arguments, plays footage of his previous night with Julia, in which he declines to sleep with her, for what Foster believes is his same fear and lack of courage. It is ruled that Daniel will return to Earth. Meanwhile, Julia is judged worthy to move on. Before saying goodbye Diamond comforts Daniel with the knowledge that the court is not infallible and just because Foster won it doesn't mean she's right. Daniel remains disappointed.
Daniel finds himself strapped to a seat on a tram poised to return to Earth, when he spots Julia on a different tram. On impulse, he unstraps himself, escapes from the moving tram, and risks electrocution and injury to get to Julia. Although he cannot enter her tram at first, the entire event is being monitored by Foster and Diamond, who convinces the judges that this last-minute display of courage has earned Daniel the right to move on. The judges agree and open the doors on Julia’s tram, allowing Daniel in, reuniting him with Julia, and allowing them to move on to the next phase of existence together. | alternate reality | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0455663 | Nuvvostanante Nenoddantana | Santosh (Siddharth) is a rich, city boy, born to billionaire parents and brought up in London. On the other hand, Siri (Trisha) is a traditional, simple, rural girl from Andhra Pradesh who is brought up by her only brother, Sivaramakrishna (Srihari). He is heartbroken when their father marries another woman and throws them out of the house, humiliating them on the way. Their mother dies and her tomb is built on the small land which they own until the zamindar tells them that it is his land, since their mother had taken a loan from the man. Sivaramakrishna volunteers to work day and night, to pay off the loan as long as they don't tear down his mother's tomb. The Zamindar agrees and the local station master helps them. Slowly Sivaramakrishna and Siri grow up. One day, Lalitha, Siri's best friend, comes to their house to invite Siri to their house as she is getting married. Lalitha's cousin, Santosh also arrives on the same day with his mother, Janaki (Geetha).
Slowly Santosh and Siri fall in love but Santosh's mother does not bear it as Siri is not as rich as them, and is thus not to their standards; Santosh is also to be married to Janaki's brother's business partner's daughter, Dolly. Janaki humiliates Siri as well as Sivaramakrishna, who arrives a minute before, and both are thrown of the house after Janaki accuses them of trying to entice and trap Santosh. When Santosh learns of this, he goes to Siri's house and pleads to her brother to accept him. Sivaramakrishna gives him a chance, just like he was given a chance by the Zamindar when he was little. Santosh is tasked to take care of the cows, clean up after them and grow more crops than Sivaramakrishna by the end of the season; if he does not, Santosh will be thrown out of the village and can never see Siri again. The Zamindar and his son is not happy as the Zamindar's son wanted to marry Siri. With them and Dolly and her father trying to get Santosh to lose the competition, Santosh has to work hard for his love, eating red chillies and rice everyday, even though he can't bear it. Through many antics from the Zamindar's side and Dolly's side, Santosh eventually proves his love for Siri to Sivaramakrishna, and succeeds in growing more grains. However, Zamindar & his son kidnap Siri and then later tries to rape her. A fight takes place in which Santosh kills the Zamindar's son. Sivaramakrishna, after realizing that Santosh and Siri should be together, takes the blame for this and spends 5 years in prison. The movie ends with Sivaramakrishna's release from prison which is also when Siri and Santosh get married, in everyone's presence. Janaki then accepts Siri to be her daughter-in-law. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0027214 | The Whole Town's Talking | Arthur Ferguson Jones (Edward G. Robinson) and Wilhelmina "Bill" Clark (Jean Arthur) work at the same advertising firm. Jones turns out to look exactly like the notorious bank robber "Killer" Mannion (also Robinson) and is apprehended by the police.
After his true identity is confirmed, the district attorney gives Jones a letter identifying him, so that he can avoid the same trouble in future. Jones becomes a local celebrity and, at the behest of his boss (Paul Harvey), begins ghost-writing Mannion's "autobiography", with good-natured but street-wise Wilhelmina voluntarily acting as his "talent agent" to see that he gets paid.
Mannion decides to take advantage of his mild-mannered doppelgänger and, ultimately, leave Jones "holding the bag" for Mannion's crimes. He kidnaps Wilhelmina, Jones' visiting aunt, and a few others, and takes them back to his hideout. He instructs Jones to make a large deposit for Mannion's mother's benefit at the First National Bank, where police detectives are expecting Mannion to make another robbery attempt. Fortunately for Jones, he forgets to bring the check and unwittingly leads the police back to Mannion's hideout.
Upon his arrival, Jones is mistaken for Mannion by the waiting henchmen and quickly realizes that he is meant to be the fall guy. When Mannion returns unexpectedly, Jones orders the men to shoot Mannion. The police arrive in time to capture the rest of the gang. With Mannion dead, Jones collects a reward and takes a long-desired cruise to Shanghai with Wilhelmina. | murder | train | wikipedia | Jean Arthur is funny as Eddie's wise cracking co-worker(check her out playing the "gangster moll"!) The other supporting characters are good too.
The movie boasts an assortment of caricature like characters like no other movie I know, beside Robinson I would like to mention Jean Arthur, of course, and the two funny little guys, Donald Meek and, even more memorable, Etienne Girardot as the pedantic office overseer who urges Robinson to get on with the Macintyre account.In its social comment The Whole Town's Talking reminds me of the work of Preston Sturgess.
Robinson has been stereotyped to the nth degree asTHE "gangster" (even in Bugs Bunny cartoons!), so it's quite a surprise to see him in the role of a mild, meek clerk (who just happens to be a dead ringer for a gangster!).The split-screen scenes (where he plays both parts) are excellent & "seamless", and the comedy is heightened by the utterly ridiculous lengths the police go to to catch the gangster!
In one scene, he (as the clerk) is eating lunch in a restaurant, is "spotted" as being the gangster, and within a matter of MINUTES the restaurant is surrounded by HUNDREDS of policeman, riot squads, & machine guns -- all to get the (wrong!) person!A refreshing comedy; you've got to see this film, if only for Robinson's acting!.
He played the meek clerk and the tough gangster equally well.This is a comedy, so one expects a happy ending; still, I couldn't tell how the plot was going to turn to make this work out well.
Even ten minutes before the end I was still wondering.This comedy is very well worth seeing for the acting by Robinson, the great character actors, and Jean Arthur in the role that Katz' Film Encyclopedia says was the first to show that she had comedic range.
Robinson who would make his second and last appearance in a Ford film 34 years later in Cheyenne Autumn, plays a dual role.
He plays Killer Mannion in the tradition he established as Little Caesar and also A.L. Jones a meek, mild mannered clerk a type Robinson would play later in Mr. Winkle Goes to War. Mannion's escaped from prison and there's a manhunt on for him, similar to the kind that was on for John Dillinger a year earlier.
Bad luck for a guy that looks like Mannion and worse luck when Mannion finds out about his doppleganger and tries to make use of him.Robinson is fine in his dual performance, but the film was a milestone for Jean Arthur who plays Robinson's fellow employee and despite his being a milquetoast, she sees something in him.
Of course a year later, Harry Cohn did team her with Frank Capra and they certainly made some cinematic history.My favorite two supporting parts are Etienne Girardot as Robinson's officious little office manager and Donald Meek another milquetoast who originally mistakenly turns in the clerk as the gangster and stays on the 'case.'Though he's not in his element John Ford serves a nice piece of entertainment..
He is outstanding in the dual role of a mild, working class office clerk Arthur Ferguson Jones who is mistaken for a ruthless mobster Mannion (the role he perfected in "Little Caesar").
It was closer to Dr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde, as he played good guy wimp Arthur "Jonesy" Jones and public enemy # 1 Killer Mannion.
Jones finds his job at jeopardy, his safety at jeopardy, and his girl friend "Bill" (Jean Arthur) possibly at jeopardy.There are some choice moments in the film - Ed Brophy, as the chief witness against Mannion, wandering away to his doom accompanied by "Jonesy" (or was it "Jonesy"), and the antics of two particularly dull comic cops (James Donlon and - surprisingly bright in the role - Arthur Hohl).
But will he succeed...or will "Jonesy's" ineptitude and timidity upset his plans.The director of the film was John Ford - it was his first film with either Robinson (who only showed up again in a supporting part in CHEYENNE AUTUMN)and his only one with Arthur.
She brings fun and realism to each role she plays.The film had all guns loaded going into it with the screenplay written by Robert Riskin & Jo Swerling based on a story by W.R.Burnett and directed (& co-produced) by John Ford.I thoroughly enjoyed this film!!.
Robinson plays a duel role as Arthur Ferguson, (Jonesy) and Killer Mannion.
Unfortunately, Ferguson looks just like a gangster named Killer Mannion who is a harden criminal and they both seem to have the same facial appearance.
There is a split screen between Arthur Ferguson and Killer Mannion and Edward G.
Here Robinson plays the role of a mild-mannered bookkeeper, that of a body double in the person of a murderous gangster on the run - Killer Mannion, and he also effectively plays two other roles - that of the bookkeeper pretending to be the gangster, and the gangster pretending to be the bookkeeper.
However, you'll still be bowled over by the subtlety of Robinson's performance - I know I was.Jean Arthur plays Jones' (Robinson's) would-be girlfriend.
When the police first pick up and arrest Jones, believing him to be Mannion, they pick up Arthur too, thinking that she is his "gun moll".
She has some fun with this and starts using gangster slang and mannerisms and confessing that Mannion committed every crime that the police ask her about.One of my favorite supporting players of the 30's shows up here too - Ed Brophy, who was an assistant director over at MGM until Buster Keaton put him into a small but important role in "The Cameraman" in 1928.
Brophy's character is brave whenever he thinks Manion has been captured and a blubbering coward whenever he realizes Mannion is still free.Highly recommended as a great screwball comedy that shows the versatility of not only Edward G.
John Ford directed this 1935 comedy.Edward G.
Robinson has an absolute field-day in a double role portraying a plain, introverted office worker who is mistaken for a major gangster.The fun begins when the gangster breaks out of jail and the usually hilarious Donald Meek identifies our poor worker.
John Ford seems an unlikely choice to direct a screwball comedy starring EDWARD G.
ROBINSON in a good guy/bad guy dual role as a meek accountant who is mistaken by the public (and the police) for hardened criminal Killer Mannion.
Robinson is great in both roles, timid and ineffectual as the meek clerk (Edward Jones) and rough and tough as the crime boss.
DONALD MEEK has an enjoyable supporting role as a restaurant patron who spots innocent Robinson at a nearby table and reports the find to the police, hoping to get the award money for Killer Mannion's capture.JEAN ARTHUR is the bouncy office co-worker who becomes friends with Robinson and has a scary encounter with Killer Mannion, after which she tips off the police as to his whereabouts.
There are plot turns involving Killer Mannion switching places with clerk Jonesy in order to manage the prison killing of another thug (EDWARD BROPHY).
Cozy, eh?Nicely paced comedy/drama still works thanks to the expert direction and fun performances from JEAN ARTHUR, EDW.
Robinson is also great in his second role as the gangster as he's as tough as ever and does manage to come off quite demanding and threatening.
Jean Arthur is wonderful as well and adds many great comic scenes including her own interrogation where she keeps admitting to crimes that she has nothing to do with or even knows about.
Again, I didn't care for the final act of the film as the comedy starts to not happen but that doesn't take away from everything at the start of the movie.
Robinson has never gotten the credit he deserves as an actual actor, which is a real shame but this film allows for both sides of him to be highlighted and to great effect..
Highly enjoyable comedy about meek clerk Arthur Jones (Edward G.
John Ford directs this comedy/crime yarn about a mild mannered office clerk(Edward G.
There is a talented supporting cast that includes: Jean Arthur, Wallace Ford and John Donlan..
It's o.k., but it's certainly nothing special, and fellow Jean Arthur fans should be warned that her credit is a bit of a tease -- she drops out mid-way through the film and is barely even seen in half of it.Edward G.
Robinson gets to have some fun playing two characters -- a criminal mastermind and the meek officer worker who just happens to look exactly like him.
In particular I remembered Edward G Robinson's meek Arthur Jones character's line, emboldened by his first experience of alcohol and a cigar, that a woman was just a woman but a good cigar was a smoke, great stuff!The inventive plot has Robinson's timid office worker sharing the face of a notorious gun- toting gangster, Killer Mannion, causing initially confusion but later consternation amongst the local police and press as Mannion forcibly takes possession of the pass-letter given to Jones by the D.A. to differentiate them, to rub out a rival gangster in prison, almost literally a licence to kill.At Jones's side, egging him onto acts of valour, is the vivacious Jean Arthur before she unwittingly falls into Mannion's hands but in a final twist, the mouse roars and all is resolved happily for ever after as Jones gets the girl, his life back and his long-desired trip to China before the end credits.Robinson is wonderful in the twin parts, firstly parodying his hard-nosed gangster roles of earlier years, most notably as Rico in "Little Caesar", with the lily-livered accounts clerk Jones before effortlessly turning into the hard-nosed murdering crime-lord of Mannion.
The film is relatively untypical of John Ford, being a fast-moving screwball comedy but he directs with verve and timing and helped by the fine playing of his cast, particularly the leads, makes it a winning movie all round..
Robinson; a great director, John Ford; and the studio, Columbia, that produced "It Happened One Night."Arthur is more gorgeous than she's ever been onscreen.
The film desperately needs more zip and here he's either unable or unwilling to supply it.Arthur's gangster moll put-on while under police interrogation is a highlight, but personally I felt the film was stolen by two delightful character actors: Etienne Girardot as a diminutive, dutiful office manager obsessed with the "McAntire Account" despite all of the wild events unfolding around him; and Donald Meek as a clueless, high-voiced gentlemen who keeps getting in the way of the police.
It turns out that Arthur is a dead ringer for escaped gangster, Killer Mannion, so after mistakenly being arrested, Arthur is issued with a special identity pass by the police, something which the real Mannion is very very interested in!John Ford is of course one of cinema's leading lights, notable films fill out his CV at regular intervals, yet I wonder just how many a film fan would associate the great man with screwball comedy?
Yet as great as these dark undertones are, I personally have come away from the film feeling deprived of a bona fide comedy classic, it feels to me like it got confused within its intentions.Edward G Robinson is sublime in the dual roles of Killer and Arthur, a very special actor that had more in his armoury than merely playing famous thugs.
Jean Arthur is delightful as Wilhelmina, husky voice and smoking a cigarette like no babe from the 30s did, while Arthur Hohl, Wallace Ford & Donald Meek all earned their money with solid performances.
Here you get two Robinsons for the price of one playing the dual role of the lovable, naive Jonsey and the notorious gangster Mannion.
Robinson has never been truly celebrated for just how versatile he is; going far beyond the gangster roles he is most famous for.Jean Arthur's Miss Clark is one of the coolest, craziest and more carefree characters ever.
Everything she does is so laid back and without a care in the world; I love this character!The only minor complaint I have with The Whole Town's Talking is the possible plot hole at the beginning of the film in which Jones rushed out of his apartment after the realisation he is late for work he leaves the bath running.
Robinson, who plays both major roles in this film.
Robinson stars in "The Whole Town's Talking" along with Jean Arthur, Wallace Ford, and Donald Meek.Edward G.
Here he has a dual role - that of an escaped criminal, Mad Dog Mannion and that of Arthur Jones, clerical worker, a shy man with a crush on a coworker (Arthur).
When Mannion escapes from prison, his face is on the front page, and he looks so much like Jones that someone who sees him in a restaurant turns him into the police.
When fingerprint ID verifies that he is not Mannion, he's given a letter by the police chief stating that he's not Mannion and should be left alone and even gets a job writing for the local newspaper about his experiences being mistaken for Mannion.Unfortunately for poor Arthur, Mannion shows up and wants to use the pass, which he does, raising complete havoc.
He also starts giving Arthur info for the news stories - and the police wonder how it is Arthur knows so much.One of the funniest parts of the film for me was the newspaper description of Mannion - a cruel mouth, a Neandrathal face, etc., and poor Jones looking at himself in the restaurant mirror trying to look evil.Robinson is fabulous - so sweet, so gentle, such a hard worker as Arthur and a ruthless killer as Mannion.
Jean Arthur, as the outspoken Miss Clark is great - when she's questioned by the police, they assume she's Mannion's accomplice, so they keep asking her questions - who did this, who robbed that, and she keeps saying, using a tough, gun moll voice, "MANNION!" Then they find out it's not Mannion they caught after all.I thought the movie went on just a tad too long, but otherwise, it was quite good, with fun performances, well directed by a man known for his westerns and bigger films, John Ford..
This movie is (correctly enough) billed as a "crime comedy" but that tone is not entirely maintained throughout the film, and to good effect.
For one thing, Robinson (as "Jonesy") emanates a very palpable feeling of repression and yearning for a more romantic existence throughout the film, and this is underscored by his poetic ambitions, and the fact he named his cat "Abelard" for just two examples.But the most powerfully emotional scene in the film - and the one which most breaks the comedy constriction - is when Mannion is finally gunned down by his own men, entirely at "Jonesy's" direction.
It is a great sequence, possibly entirely a matter of Robinson's skill and feel for the character.The comedic moments go down easy, Jean Arthur is at her tough girl best, and the film abounds with the "usual suspects" of Hollywood character actors.
Robinson gives a winning performance in this excellent comedy, in which he flawlessly plays dual roles.
I loved his portrayal of Arthur Ferguson Jones, a meek and gentle law abiding office clerk, who has a crush on his beautiful co-worker, the always delightful actress Jean Arthur.
Problem is, kind-hearted Jones is an identical dead ringer in looks to a ruthless gangster, " Killer Mannion, " and one day big trouble begins for Jonesy as he is mistaken for the callous mobster.
But all isn't funny for Arthur Jones when the gangster takes advantage of his identical twin, putting poor Jonesy in some tense situations.
It also gave him an opportunity to show he could convincingly play a sweet natured, cultured law-abider, who wins the girl, not by force but through the girl's admiration of his character.A hard working mild mannered clerk, Arthur Ferguson Jones (Edward G.
After innocently ordering lunch in a diner he is identified as Mannion and literally gets the whole town talking!!After the police end up with egg on their faces he is syndicated to write the story of Mannion from the point of view of the man who looks like Mannion of course.
Meanwhile the real Mannion shows up and it is to Robinson's great ability as an actor that there is a difference in the way he plays each of them - you definitely can tell them apart - even at the end.
****SPOILERS******A good movie with a reasonably fun "genius" (writer Burnett's term for gimmicks, of which his films are full) -- Robinson is a clerk in the city who's mistaken for the hoodlum he strongly resembles.
The mistake is straightened out and even seems to be working out to his advantage -- he's been given the chance to write a series of articles and he's impressed the girl of his dreams (Arthur, charming as always) -- but then the real hood (Robinson, relishing the opportunities of the dual role) appears to take advantage of the situation.Unconvincing plot barely holds up for the running time, but the stars shine and the pace and photography are good..
A masterful comedy/drama from Director John Ford filmed during his non-western period.
Robinsons.The violent aspects of the story take place for the most part off screen such as Mannion's revenge on fellow gangster "Slugs" Martin (Edward Brophy).
There are no comedic aspects to Robinson's Mannion character whatsoever.Jean Arthur was just coming into her own with this film and so would go on to greater fame with Director Frank Capra in "Mr. Deeds Goes to Washington" (1936).Ford as ever, injects a little Fordian humour into the story through the detectives Boyle and Howe (Arthur Hohl and James Donlan).
My local TV channel back then gave me a double dose, not only of Robinson in this movie, but Jean Arthur as well, having played this back to back with "Mr. Deeds Goes to Town". |
tt2535470 | Wyrmwood | Mechanic Barry lives in the Australian outback with his wife Annie and daughter Meganne. During a meteor shower, Barry's sister Brooke is attacked in her Bulla, Victoria studio by her model and her assistant, who have suddenly become zombies. She calls Barry and warns him to get out of the city. He, Annie, and Meganne don gas masks and fight their way to the family car. When Meganne and Annie remove their gas masks they become infected and zombify, and Barry is forced to kill them with a nailgun. He runs out of nails before he can kill himself.
Chalker, another survivor, finds Barry and knocks him unconscious when Barry attempts to kill himself with Chalker's gun. Barry asks Chalker to take him to Brooke's studio, unaware that a paramilitary group has taken her captive in the back of a truck that serves as a mobile lab for mad scientist Doc. While Doc experiments on the zombies and Brooke, Chalker's truck stops working. Chalker and Barry continue on foot, and Benny, another survivor, mistakenly kills Chalker. Benny, who previously had to kill his infected brother, and Barry team up and come upon a garage staffed by Frank and his assistant. Frank explains that all flammable liquids have become useless. However, the group accidentally discovers zombie breath and blood are flammable, and they devise a zombie-powered engine. During their escape, Frank's assistant becomes infected and is used as fuel.
Barry, Benny, and Frank discover zombies stop breathing flammable gas at night, enabling them to run faster. As they hole up in the truck overnight, Frank says he believes the zombies resulted from the meteor shower; as told in the Bible, a star called Wyrmwood has fallen, making part of the world bitter. After waking up from a nightmare, Barry catches a zombie on fire and accidentally sets the truck's compressor alight. While putting out the fire, Frank is bitten and asks Barry to shoot him; Barry does. The next day, Barry and Benny encounter paramilitaries in a electric-powered truck. The two drivers, after revealing that those with an A negative blood type are not affected by the disease, offer to lead Barry and Benny to Brooke, who they claim is in custody nearby. Meanwhile, Brooke learns she can now telepathically control zombies as a result of the experiments. With the help of several zombies, she kills Doc, escapes the truck, and joins Barry and Benny.
Barry's truck stalls after the soldiers accidentally kill the zombie powering it. While taking a pit stop for Brooke to fetch them a zombie, Benny is shot in the stomach. When they later pull over to take care of Benny, the soldiers catch up and subdue them. The soldiers reveal their plan is to decapitate Brooke and take her head to their commanding officer. Barry plans to kill them all in an explosion, but Benny instead sacrifices himself to turn into a zombie so Brooke can control him to overpower the soldiers. He kills two of the three soldiers, but the captain kills him and shoots Brooke in the chest. Barry challenges him to a fistfight but ends up shot when the captain retrieves his pistol. After shooting a zombie, the captain's face is splattered with zombie blood, and Barry ignites his head with the matches. Before Barry can shoot him, Brooke rises and commands a horde of zombies to eat the captain alive.
Barry and Brooke, back on the road, come across the lab truck again. They ask the soldiers what they have in the back of the truck; when they refuse to answer, Brooke commands a new group of zombies to attack them and tear them apart. | violence, murder | train | wikipedia | Some of these work better than others, though to be fair the film has a somewhat playful dynamic so the unorthodox creative liberties will be appreciated fans who enjoy a bit of silliness.The bizarre plot devices and comically stoic characters like Frank (Keith Agius) contrast well with the always sombre lead Barry (Jay Gallagher).
There are some gory shots but these are nothing that more skirmish viewers wont be able to handle if they are familiar with the genre.There isn't really too much in the way of character development and the plot is fairly light, but the pacing and the way the film jumps between a couple of different story lines makes the film enjoyable to watch.One of the things that makes this film stand out is the somewhat surreal and often mysterious cast of characters.
Meanwhile, the sister is being captured by sadistic psychopath military types in order to experiment on her.There are many references to cult films, like The Evil Dead and Mad Max, and the ending of the film leaves a lot of place for sequels.
This is not a perfect film, but considering that it is an Australian zombie movie made with unknown actors and probably a low budget, there was no chance it could have been.
Bizarre characters and zombies are hurled at us non-stop, with a side-order of break-neck road chaos and a good few laughs - this viewer was left sated.Somewhat in the spirit of such splatterfests as Feast (2005) or The Rage (2007), Wyrmwood doesn't take itself seriously but it's abundantly clear that the film making process was.
Wyrmwood is a good movie if you like a zombie action movie with a actual plot and great camera work.I did enjoy the idea behind the zombies special power and with each person in the crew taking a hit.The use of slow-mo during this movie is well placed and did not take away from the movie and acting at all.Watching this movie with a friend or a loved one is recommended for the laughs..
I was hooked, yup, despite my love for excellent production values and well written scripts, (which this certainly doesn't have) i loved every stupid, gory moment.Get in some beers and whatever else you like, invite round your geekiest friends, kick back and enjoy.As you'd expect from an Ozzie film it has bags of humour, some is even clever.As zombie movies go this is a belter - there's some excellent ideas in here that may well influence future zombie films - and some ridiculous ones as well - 'A zombie powered car?
Never!', but there is, I swear to you.It's a non-stop blood fest, plenty of stupid deaths and the most unlikely car chase/shoot out in the history of Zombiedom - topped off by the most unlikely and luckiest of coincidences ever - but what the heck - it doesn't try to be serious or logical - this is pure fun from the pen of an obvious 'B' movie zombie fan.Don't look for meaning or deep character development, there isn't any.
Okay this is the best zombie action I've seen in some of time; whereas The Battery was hip and careful, this is sloppy, has verve and gleefully throws itself around, it has a carpenter's love for things you can build with your hands that I like and just an overall air of messily practical filmmaking in the best spirit of Evil Dead and Braindead that just wants to revel in blood it throws up.And this means that it doesn't try to make too much sense.
The notion of a girl who comes to control zombies and emotive moments here and there I could do without.And New Zealand is the ideal backdrop for the appeal this aimed to have; we see no cities and no cohesive social fabric being torn, there are only roads through sparse New Zealand bush, a garage here, a tunnel there, forests, so it all adds to that feeling of a bunch of young people letting loose with no larger narrative in mind other than the adventure of making up things in the wild.Creativity here is not intellectual or really concerned with style, or bogged down in somber atmosphere; it is practical and freewheeling, the joy of splashing blood on a floor, slipping on it and filming the goof, what Raimi and Jackson did so well once upon a time.
From what I thought might be another badly done take on the seemingly tired zombie premise came a fresh, well-acted, nicely-directed, great little indie film with some new ideas, lots of humor, hair-raising tense moments, and chock full of interesting characters.
Australian mechanic Barry packs his tool-belt and heads off in his car with his wife and daughter to try and locate his sister Brooke (Bianca Bradey), who has been taken to a military laboratory where she is being experimented on by a crazy doctor.Cheap, uninspired zombie films have been stinking up the horror genre for quite some time now, but I've found that it's always worth attacking the hordes of undead movies that shuffle my way to discover the occasional gem—like Wyrmwood, a cool addition to the genre that doesn't do anything by the book.
The film's poster describes it as 'Mad Max meets Dawn of the Dead', but that is only part of the story: Wyrmwood also brings to mind the early films of Peter Jackson, the Resident Evil series, and the 28 Days Later movies, as well as delivering plenty of fresh ideas of its own.Initially, I found myself cursing Wyrmwood for its use of unconvincing CGI blood-splats during an opening zombie attack scene, but it wasn't long before the film had won me over with its infectious style, likable characters, silly sense of humour, and sheer unpredictability.
Wyrmwood's creators, Kiah and Tristan Roache-Turner, have filled their film with some really original and entertaining stuff, including such craziness as a sadistic, disco-dancing military scientist, an armoured vehicle powered by zombie gas, and a sexy female survivor who can control the undead with her mind.
There were many original ideas between the expected stereotypes you encounter when you watch zombies on screen and those made Wyrmwood great.I had some laughs and plenty of smiles and I sure advise you not to get fooled by the low budget.
Reminiscent at times of Dawn of the Dead, Undead and the Mad Max series surprisingly Aussie Wyrmwood stands shoulders above many indie zombie films.
One of the strengths of Wyrmwood is that you care about the characters even the squeaky chemical suited, creepy music loving scientist.Zombie gas, DNA experiments and mind control sit nicely in this post apocalyptic adventure as heart broken Barry, Jay Gallagher, goes about finding his sister, meeting an array of characters played excellently by the supporting cast long the way.
While it may not please those wanting a straight forward traditional zombie film complete with it's They Live-like fight scene, it exceeds all expectation as piece of horror, action entertainment.
WYRMWOOD is a high energy zombie flick from Australia that combines the road movie genre with a classic zombie apocalypse outbreak type horror yarn.
(Gore doesn't make a movie for me personally) Although it didn't add to the film, it didn't subtract from it either.It's best to just describe this as a morbid roller-coaster ride that most zombie fans will enjoy.
So i thought it is one of those zombie action movies like resident evil, all start and end the same but this is way much different.
It's great to see not only the spirit of DIY filmmaking but Ozploitation cinema alive and well in the form of the Roache-Turner brothers (Kiah the director, Tristan his co-writer) blood filled and over the top zombie carnage horror/actioner Wyrmwood: The Road of the Dead, a film that was clearly a labour of love for these aspiring filmmakers and a film that in recent months has grown quite the reputation on the festival circuit that has seen the filmmaking duo well and truly become the next big thing in the local industry.Filmed from my understanding over a number of years on a budget that was more than likely made up of family, friends and everyone else in between, there is no questioning that this is an unpolished film but at the same time a film that you can't help but appreciate on a level where you understand that the limitations set before the filmmakers failed to derail a film that is at its core a hugely energetic and often fantastically inventive tale.
While we all know that the zombie genre of film and TV has virtually been done to (pardon the pun) death over many years Wrymwood has enough OTT ideas, violence and the Aussie humour we all know and love to keep us glued to our zombie guts covered seats for it's pretty quick fire 90 or so minute run time and in an age of films that look to cover up there budgetary flaws it's a joy to see Wyrmwood reveal in its roots.Every part of Wyrmwood feels as though it could've been made in your backyard and in anything but a negative it gives the overall sense that this is a film that is truly its own beast.
It's glorious to see the Roache-Turner brothers use the locales at their disposal to great effort from the wilderness through the "road of the dead" this is a tale that feels Australian and benefits from it while the movies performances range from impressive through to never passing acting school yet it doesn't bring the film down, it in fact brings it to a new level of enjoyable even though what your witnessing is akin to watching a friends high school media production.With some off the wall ideas (mind controlling zombie hordes, zombie blood as a new source of fuel, just to name a few) and with an impressively constructed yet whole heartedly home grown production Wrymwood is indeed a film in a league all of its own.
Wyrmwood: Road of the Dead serves up a masterful combination of high-impact violence and Australian humour, while simultaneously managing to spin the Zombie-film genre on its head with its unique twists and ideas.
A lot of action, great camera work, a lot of gore (the ideal measure for a zombie flick), and the right touch of comic reliefs makes this movie a gem that has nothing to envy on the referents of the genre, like Resident Evil.
A lot of action, great camera work, a lot of gore (the ideal measure for a zombie flick), and the right touch of comic reliefs makes this movie a gem that has nothing to envy on the referents of the genre, like Resident Evil.
It was quite refreshing to hear some timely scripted Australian humour coming through in this movie however the storyline development and blunt eradication of some key characters had me feeling genre confused!The concept of a zombie apocalypse is one we have seen numerous times before.
It starts out bad the first 5 minutes then it just starts to accelerate to a awesome crescendo.im glad it came from Australia and it shows,its not like other zombie movies.It has some dark humor jammed into the gore.
The plot is somewhat outside the mold for this kind of movies but still keeping with the genre.The refreshing part is people are somewhat acting more like people do in reality and not just standing around screaming while being eaten.If you want a fast paced somewhat brutal movie that goes over the top i really recommend this fresh injection to a bloated zombie market..
The budget doesn't seem too high and it does have some superficial plot twists, but the movie makes the best out of the clever script and its cast.The story highlights mainly two siblings, Barry (Jay Gallagher) and Brooke (Bianca Bradey) as they struggle to deal with zombie apocalypse respectively.
Leon Burchill as Benny gets the best/funniest of the film's lines and older character actor Keith Agius brings a touch of gravitas to his role as a key expositor of what has occurred, as well as being crucial in the creation of the anti- Zombie vehicle that is featured heavily in the film's second half.The film features a plentiful number of good action set pieces without being individually spectacular.
The idea of the van full of infected roaming around the countryside carrying on these experiments is a notably creepy idea to start with, and the various scenes showcased here offer up a great twist which is paid off with the later half involving the woman who's half-human, half-zombie that is given the especially powerful new powers of being able to control the creatures telepathically which has a lot of quality moments to like here.
Wyrmwood: Road Of The Dead on the other hand is an enjoyable to watch zombie movie.
I hadn't heard of this film when I watched it so had no expectations, but I'm glad I gave it a go as the cast and director have delivered a real treat.This is the story of Barry and his sister Brooke, battling Zombies and the military in the Australian Bush.It was only at the end I realised I had no real idea of why the zombies had arrived or why the military were acting the way they were, but this lack of exposition actually made the film a more enjoyable experience, leaving me to enjoy the visuals all the more.And for me the look and feel of this film is what makes it a cut above most other low budget zombie films out there.It owes a lot to mad Max in feel, but manages to be it's own story.One of my pet hates in Zombie films is wooden acting,but here the cast really deliver.
I liked the lead characters and wanted to know more.I'm not a fan of CGI effects when you can notice them and that was the case here with some of the blood but that is just a small thing and may have been down to budget and timeAll in all though this was a fun ride and I do hope we I get to see more of Barry and Brooke..
Filmed in the same way with wide angles and zoomed in and the explicit gore added this flick is indeed a flick for the gorehounds.After a while I had something like, okay, this I have seen before in this flick and the experiments at the lab are a bit weird but overall it's an excellent gory zombie flick.Gore 4/5 Nudity 0/5 Effects 4/5 Story 2,5/5 Comedy 0/5.
The story features elements of both comedy and horror, reminding me of "The Evil Dead" a bit, but it has its serious moments too.I read that it's the first movie from Director Roache-Turner and I hope to see more like that in the future.
But I had good memories from the last couple of Australian zombie movies that I have watched.Now having seen "Wyrmwood", I will say that it was entertaining and a rather unique movie in its own way.
(9/10) Suggestion: Wyrmwood: Road of the Dead is one for the horror fans to enjoy especially if you like a zombie film.
Let me say first that even though i am an Aussie there are some Australian made movies out there that just don't meet the cut, so when it comes to Aussie movies i often wonder if they are going to be any good and only watch them after i read the reviews but i decided to see Wyrmwood as i like zombie flicks but wasn't expecting to much being an Aussie film but the movie actually surprised me.With zombies being all the rage now the genre is getting flogged to death and there are some that really bite (puns intended).Now, let's get one thing straight right off the bat; this movie doesn't attempt to break new ground, (although it does have some original ideas).
It kind of has the humor of evil dead 3 coupled with the feel of a mad max movie with a few original ideas incorporated in the film.
The ending of the film is left open for sequels to be made.I wont put spoilers in but i have to say don't judge it on the beginning when it switches between the events leading up to the main characters and what happened to them.Like i said ,don't try and judge it on other films as it is not a perfect film, but considering that it is an Australian zombie movie, with unknown actors and a low budget, ( from what i read about it after the money to make this film was deferred meaning that there is no payday for the actors until the movie is fully released & starts making money from ticket sales) I still highly recommend it for its humor, blood and gore factor and original ideas.
Like another reviewer said, it feels like it is made by people who clearly enjoyed playing with the genre and love the same movies that we do.Long story short; if you want massive budgets, OTT special effects and a-list actors, look elsewhere.
It seems like we can't get more than a week without hearing about a new TV series or film that has zombies in it these days, which for us horror genre fans is great news, but we all hope we don't see the same story and characters regurgitated with each new zombie project.That brings us to two sibling filmmakers Tristan and Kiah Roache-Turner, who are Australian filmmakers decide to make a zombie movie.
'Wyrmwood: Road of the Dead' is a very good and highly entertaining zombie film.
It starts pretty well giving you the set up for each of the lead characters back stories but then shambles along much like every other zombie film you've ever seen.
"Wyrmwood: Road of the Dead" takes zombie movies to another level.. |
tt0071733 | Lacombe Lucien | In June 1944, as the Allies are fighting the Germans in Normandy, Lucien Lacombe, a 17-year-old country boy, tries to join the Resistance. The local Resistance leader, the village schoolteacher, turns him down on grounds of age. Arrested by chance, Lucien is taken to the local headquarters of the Carlingue, the French auxiliaries of the Gestapo. There he unwittingly denounces the teacher, who is brought in and tortured. Seeing that Lucien could be useful, the Carlingue recruit him into their lawless regime of extortion and terror.
He enjoys his new power and position, but falls in love with France Horn. She is a French-born Jewish girl living in seclusion with her father Albert, a tailor, and her paternal grandmother Bella, who are living in fear of deportation. Forcing himself upon the girl, Lucien becomes protective of the very people targeted by his superiors. Albert, giving up hope, surrenders himself to the Carlingue, who alert the Germans to the two other Jews. When a German soldier comes to arrest them, Lucien kills him and takes the women to an abandoned farm.
But he knows that he has chosen the wrong side and that his crimes will be found out. The film ends at this point and a final message on screen says that Lucien was caught, tried and executed by the Resistance. | romantic | train | wikipedia | Based on the childhood memories of Louis Malle, Lacombe Lucien tells the story of Lucien (Pierre Blaise) a rural French teenager who, having been rejected by the French resistance in 1944, joins with the German occupiers and becomes an enforcer.
Though the film implies that Lucien is attracted to the Gestapo as a means for an individual without status or power to achieve a sense of self worth, ultimately Lucien must take responsibility for his choice.He becomes involved with Albert Horn (Holger Lowenadler), a wealthy Jewish tailor from Paris, his mother Bella (Therese Giehse) who has lived in an Eastern European ghetto, and his young daughter France (Aurore Clement) who is totally Parisian and uncomfortable with her Jewish heritage.
I felt he was moving toward self-awareness before the end of the film.Lacombe Lucien poses moral questions about the point that innocence and immorality meet, and with its almost matter-of-fact style, the powerful conclusion almost takes us unaware.
Lucien, the provincial teenager who tries to join the resistance and when rejected becomes a Gestapo killer, may be more innocent and ignorant as well as more brutish than the average Frenchman of the occupation; but many French people must have fallen into collaboration like this.
The determinism and sheer stupidity of Lucien's enlistment is underlined by the fact that it's late in the war: the Americans are coming, the Germans are losing, and the French resistance is inflicting daily casualties on the closest collaborators, as we see when Lucien's French Gestapo bosses get wounded and killed.Lucien's lumpenproletariat helplessness couldn't be made clearer.
Horn makes a suit for Lucien, later another: they become his new uniform, an escape from his peasant identity and stepping stone to the power, status, and money that are why he's playing this deadly game.On the way to the tailor in a collaborator's posh, sporty convertible, Malle brilliantly has Lucien try on a pair of big sunglasses -- which instantly transform him.
What comes next clinches the moral ambiguity of Lucien's role: he falls in love with the very Parisian but still Jewish daughter of Monsieur Horn.Lucien wields his new power crudely -- he has no finesse, only self-confidence and a well-tailored suit -- but he is drawn to Horn as a substitute father and to the daughter because she -- who herself rejects her Jewishness -- represents urban sophistication as well as femininity.
But upon falling for the daughter of a Jewish tailor, Lucien begins to view his actions in a very different light.Louis Malle was never a director to worry about public opinion, having ruffled feathers with his intellectual study of incest in 1971s, Soufflé au coeur, Le, he practically ostracised himself with this simmering collaboration piece.
It's now something of common knowledge that Malle drew from his own upbringing by way of motivation in some of his work, how much of this particular story affected him is not entirely clear, but what isn't in doubt is that the directors time during the occupation of France lends this piece an aura of honesty, it feels personal, and the result is very special indeed.Each individual viewer can interpret the sequence of events as they may, but just maybe Lacombe Lucien is a simple portrayal of a missed opportunity, and this missed opportunity coupled with naivety bred the wickedness that is viewed in the film.
The theme of betrayal hangs heavy in the story, and the mere fact that Malle refused to take sides with his outlaying of the story, only furthers the sense of intrigue that covers the viewer come the stunning ending, an ending that creeps up on you and begs you for another thought process.Sadly, first time actor Pierre Blaise would perish in a road accident a year after Lacombe Lucien's release, his portrayal of the title character is truly wonderful and it leaves a truly fitting epitaph indeed.
"Lacombe, Lucien," director Louis Malle's searing, powerful film of innocence lost and how power corrupts, is one of the great films in French cinema.
The Criterion Collection is releasing "Lacombe, Lucien" as part of a three film box set retrospective on Mallle's French films ("Au Revoir Les Infant" and "Murmus of the Heart," two great Malle's features in their own right).
Malle's film tells the story about a young French boy who joins the Nazis and snubs the French Resistance during the German occupation of France.
I think this film was the one that really opened my eyes as to just how horrible life was in France under the German occupation and led to my great interest in almost any film depicting the era, or even better, newsreels.A young man develops the power of life or death over others by "accidentally" joining the Gestapo-even the French police are forced to defer to him.
At the end, Pierre Blaise provides a great calibre in his main rôle and thanks to this, the film is strong, powerful and remain one of Malle's best films.Note: the movie was inspired by a real fact: during the second world war in France, a young collaborator had arrested and killed numerous resistants..
Louis Malle's film about the German occupation of France is based on his own experiences during that time, when he was a teenager (Malle was born in 1932) The young man is Lucien Lacombe, and he is 17 in 1944, when the German war machine has started to fall apart.
They're young, uninformed, naive, and the fact is that adolescent sex appeal is a great deal more meaningful to them than all the considerations of history.Louis Malle, whose previous film was the bittersweet and lovely "Murmur of the Heart" (1971), gave himself a difficult assignment this time.
His film isn't really about French collaborators, but about a particular kind of human being, one capable of killing and hurting, one incapable of knowing or caring about his real motives, one who would be a prime catch for basic training and might make a good soldier and not ask questions.As played by Pierre Blaise, a young forester who had never acted before (and who died in a road crash a few years later), Lucien is a victim trapped in his own provincialism and lack of curiosity.
The complication of a beautiful (and very French looking) daughter takes some of the expected turns, but not completely, because this very young man doesn't really know how to behave, or how to fall in love.The director, Louis Malle, is a legend of French cinema, and later even of American cinema.
PIERRE BLAISE is the young man who plays the title character in LACOMBE LUCIEN, the story of an unhappy youth who becomes a Nazi collaborator during WWII in France.
It's a fictional account and the young actor was a non-professional chosen for the role who met an untimely death a year later in an auto accident.He plays a French peasant who falls in love with a Jewish girl while working for the Gestapo.
It's an engrossing story dealing with a lot of unpleasant, unsavory situations including scenes of torture and animal cruelty, moving unpredictably through a whole gamut of scenes which give a strong impression of what it must have been like for the French during the war.For a non-actor, Blaise gives a commanding performance in a film he is forced to carry since the whole story revolves around his behavior, close-up and personal.
Malle has to be commended for getting a natural, unforced performance from young Blaise and good work from all the cast members.Summing up: Although it has a rather abrupt ending, it's a realistic look at Franco/German relations during WWII.
The moral ambiguity of Lucien Lacombe, the innocent boy who happily and childishly turns into a Nazi collaborator for the adventure of being in a war, is chilling.
This was a great film about a young man, Pierre Blaise,(Lucien Lacombe) who was raised on a farm in France and loved to kill animals, even birds singing in a tree.
Lucien gets involved with the German's as they occupied France during WW II and joins the Nazi's as an informer and becomes deeply involved with a Jewish family.
France Horn, (Aurore Clement) is a Jewish girl who Lucien falls in love with and her father is Albert Horn who is a tailor by trade and he does not like Lucien because he knows he is a turn coat for the German's who hate the Jews.
The main character comes off as highly unsympathetic and even enigmatic - an unusual slant to take for Malle given the subject matter, but clearly indispensable in order to evoke his essential selfishness (since he only joined the Nazis after the Resistance turned him down for being too young!).The film is peopled with relative unknowns and only Aurore Clement registers with the audience from other films: in fact, she delivers a moving portrayal of a Jewish girl attracted to - but, at the same time, repelled by - Lucien; the actor playing her father is excellent as well.
Its inherent theme of sexual awakening links the film with Malle's earlier MURMUR OF THE HEART (1971; which I only recently watched myself for the first time), while the hard choices made by the various characters between loyalty to cause and friendship (in this case, love) has an affinity with the same director's later AU REVOIR, LES ENFANTS (1987; which also occurs against a WWII backdrop).Apparently, the film was based on fact - but ends rather too abruptly; even so, there are several powerful and disturbing sequences featuring animal cruelty and the torturing of prisoners.
When Lucien visits the Jewish tailor Albert Horn (Holger Löwenadler) to make new clothing, he sees his beautiful daughter France (Aurore Clément) and forces her to date him.
Later Albert is arrested and when France and her grandmother Bella Horn (Therese Giehse) are hold by the Germans, Lucien kills the German soldier and flees with them to the countryside."Lacombe Lucien" tells the fictional story of a despicable collaborationist in World War II.
This is a dark and very non-compromising drama/war film set in Vichy France where the childish, but "tough", young Lucien, living in a small farmer village, gets denied membership when he seeks to join the resistance movement.
But he also begins to fall in love, in his own odd way, with the daughter of a Jewish tailor while still being part of the occupation forces.Lacombe Lucien is not your typical WWII drama, this is a very beautiful but grim movie full of questions about where the limits go between something being just ignorance or active evil.
The nihilistic themes and atmosphere of hopelessness when Lucien, who seems to have no thoughts at all about what he is doing, sinks deeper into fascism, is something that we get to feel very early on in the film.The viewer is probably constantly wondering "maybe Lucien will begin to realize things now?" but instead director Malle takes us only deeper into the abyss that Lucien has ended up falling into...
The Jews who live in the small town where France and her family live try to become invisible while they eke out a meager existence."Lacombe, Lucien" is not a true story, but is based upon the wartime experiences of its director, Louis Malle.
His story is tragic because by the time he chooses to do the right thing it is too late.Apart from Malle's distinctive style this film is quite different from his other coming of age tales, because Lucien seems to lack the kind of youthful joy which Malle captures so well.
Lucien Lamcombe is the title character of this story about a French teen who joins the German police on a lark during the last year of WWII.
Perhaps they just didn't want to be reminded that many "good people" willingly collaborated or maybe the wounds were just too fresh.I liked the film and recommend it, though I must admit director Malle's style is quite unusual and nothing like a Hollywood product.
During the WWII, a French countryside boy, Lucien Lacombe, insouciantly gets involved and recruited by the local Gestapo, after procuring the fast-gained high-handed social position and war trophies, his life has descended into a limbo when he is enamored with a Jewish girl.
Ingmar Bergman didn't like "Citizen Kane"; Robert Altman didn't like "Titanic", and I tried with all my best to appreciate the acclaimed "Lacombe Lucien" but it simply didn't work for me.The story: Pierre Blaise plays the title character, a French 18 year-old boy who joins the German police and the Nazists after been refused to work along with the French Resistance during WWII.
And amidst of that he gets involved with a Jewish family, the father who works as a tailor, the mother, and the young daughter for whom Lacombe has a sexual relationship (don't even think on reading reviews out there saying that he's in love with her because he's not.
The only good soul of this film (and the great performance too) is the tailor played by Holger Löwenadler, he's the only wise guy here, the only one who isn't naive or ignorant to know what's going on, he managed to survive the war with his skills with clothes requested by the French who collaborates with the German police.
The news of the untimely death of Pierre Blaise in 1975 entered my brain in the shape and spirit of his memorable character in Louis Malle's remarkable film.
It takes a look at French collaboration with the Nazis and concentrates on how a young farm boy, Lucien Lacombe, ends up collaborating with the Gestapo.
He never seems to weigh the morality or consequences of his acts.To complicate matters Lucien is taken by the collaborators to the Jewish tailor Albert Horn (Holger Löwenadler in a great performance) in order to get him out of his peasant's clothes and into something more befitting one who works for the Gestapo.
It was hard to resist the little perks of collaboration - even Lucien's mother had few qualms about taking money from her son, knowing where it came from.While the story is absorbing, one has to be impressed with Malle's artistry in its telling and his choice of actors.
Lucien commits the ultimate sin by turning Horn over the Germans and to a sure death, but has second thoughts when a German soldier comes for France and her grandmother.Louis Malle film, seen for a second time, still holds one's interest.
Throughout the movie there are other scenes where Lucien's nasty personality comes out: his betrayal of the school teacher who refused to let him join the resistance movement, his abuse of power, his bullying of the Horn family etc., and toward the end of the movie when the German soldier takes the pocket watch Lucien stole, Lucien kills him to take it back!
French director, Louis Malle's "Lacombe, Lucien" is an honest film about one young man's journey into accidentally becoming a Nazi collaborator during occupied France in the 1940s.
Apolitical, amoral, and pretty much apathetic, Lucien is one of those stunning heroes of cinema in that he, even at his most despicable, is an engaging enigma--even to the filmmaker who creates him.Louis Malle's film is something of a parable of the relationship of French people during the German occupation, revolving around the character of a young man who joins the Gestapo.
This boy we follow as he sells out his own school teacher, gets his hands on his hope of power (the ultimate phallic symbol, a gun), and tries to woo France (the girl whose name sets up an obvious metaphor for the country itself).The metaphor works from Lucien's perspective, as the love, hate, and sometimes sardonic relationship the two have entirely encompasses the disassociation a lot of the French must have had at the time, but it doesn't work so much as a roundly developed character from France's perspective.
He wanders in a moral wasteland of his life and ends up just where he is supposed to be, a French Gestapo unit, Lucien joins not only in a wrong place, but at the wrongest of times to be serving the German Nazi regime (June 1944).
It's a motley crew full of shady characters, racists, bigots, one of which is even black and politest of them all, former actresses in insignificant films, and a dog, all of them some sort of has-beens trying to do harm to the world they're also left out of.Lucien knows no love, no compassion, no human emotion, and it shows perfectly on his face, not until he meats a Jewish girl, called France (of all names),the daughter of Albert the tailor who survives the madness of the war doing his job for everybody even the collaborationist that is out to get him.
When Americans come to France they sentence Lucien to death for working for the Nazis.Louis Malle often tested the audiences he pushed the limitations of cinematic expression.
The severe aesthetics and the subtle narrative worked very well and Louis Malle's decision of giving sympathy for Lucien in the end fascinated film.
Yet, not that far behind has to be Louis Malle's decision to caste the lead character for his 1974 film, Lacombe, Lucien with an amateur named Pierre Blaise.
No actor would likely be able to capture the natural ferality that Blaise brings to the role of a none too bright French farm boy who unwittingly, at first, becomes an accomplice and collaborator with the Gestapo in the final months of Vichy France, in late 1944.He is not evil, even though the film abounds with moments of animal cruelty that seem to delight both the actor and character to such a degree that separating the two of them is nearly an impossible task.
But I still didn't enjoy it, and had to push myself to stay with it.It is the story of an amoral, troubled young man (the Lucien Lacombe of the title) who takes pleasure in killing rabbits and other small animals, though early on we see that he had feelings for an old horse. |
tt0113870 | Murder in the First | As a 17-year-old orphan, Henri Young (Kevin Bacon), steals $5.00 from a grocery store to feed himself and his little sister, both of whom are destitute. He is apprehended by the store clerk, and his sister is sent to an orphanage. Because that grocery store also housed a U.S. Post Office his crime becomes a federal offense. Young never sees his sister again and is sentenced to Leavenworth Penitentiary, Kansas. After later being transferred to Alcatraz, he participates in an escape attempt with two other prisoners.
The escape plan fails due to the betrayal of a fellow inmate, Rufus McCain (David Michael Sterling). Young is punished by being sent to "the hole" which is in Alcatraz's dungeons. Except for 30 minutes on Christmas Day in 1940, he is left in there for three years. The solitary confinement causes Young to lose his sanity. On release back to the general population, he experiences a psychotic episode in the prison cafeteria and attacks McCain, stabbing him to death with a spoon in full view of the prison staff and the other convicts.
Young is put on trial in San Francisco for first degree murder in what prosecutors and the public-defender's office believe is an open-and-shut case. Public defender James Stamphill (Christian Slater), a recent graduate of Harvard Law School, is given the case. After discovering the facts of Young's case, Stamphill attempts to put Alcatraz on trial by alleging that its harsh conditions drove him insane. The trial becomes highly politicized and contentious. Eventually Young is convicted of involuntary manslaughter, not first degree murder. He is returned to Alcatraz where he subsequently dies. The film concludes with ″The Rock's″ associate warden Milton Glenn (Gary Oldman) being convicted for mistreatment and banned from working in the US penal system. | insanity, murder, flashback | train | wikipedia | But i have to say it's not an easy watch, and the violence is relentless, it reminds me of the time i once witnessed a boy get bullied at school, it just never ended and i remember feeling awful for the poor chap, the fact that it's a true story just makes me shudder.
Gary Oldman gives one of the most hateful performances i've ever seen while Slater shows depth as the lawyer trying to get him out of prison as early as possible..
Christian Slater plays a youthful, inexperienced attorney to perfection.In showing another side of Alcatraz the movie breaks away from typical escaped based Alcatraz films.
As Wayne would have it---"DENIED!!"how this film escaped the attention of Oscar and Globe voters is one of the great Hollywood mysteries of our time...if Bacon ain't Oscar meat here, i don't know what is...an absolutely brilliant performance in the kind of role the voters usually jump all over at ballot time...ya really gotta wonder...conspiracy theories aside, this is one helluva flick...besides our pal Kevin, there's outstanding work from Christian Slater, Gary Oldman, and everybody's favorite drill sergeant, Lee Ermey...Moe Greene's kid, Marc Rocco, gets a great period feeling economically...solid work by the wardrobe and make-up units...this film deserved a much better fate at the box office and at awards season in '96...if you haven't seen this one yet, you're missing a real gem....
To do so successfully, as I think this movie does, is the definition and purpose of art.Kevin Bacon shows the most range in his film that I have ever seen from him.
He reminds me of DeNiro's performance in the "Cape Fear" remake.Christian Slater's character provides the viewer's point of view in the film, and he plays with great emotion and passion, and yet with a touch of reserve and detachment.
His portrayal of the warden in this film is a brilliant balance of a socially acceptable monster.This movie has received a lot of criticism for portraying historical facts inaccurately, and for taking sides in a political debate.
Personally, I support both "To Kill A Mockingbird" and "Murder in the First" as films whose merits outweigh their flaws.In short, this movie is worthy of your time, and will reward you, whether you want entertainment thrills, a good popcorn movie, a morally inspiring story or the appreciation of a well-crafted piece of work.
At the heart of this movie, Kevin Bacon's character, Young, asks Christian Slater's character, Stamphill, if they were on the outside, would they be friends?
Henri Young was played by Kevin Bacon who did a fantastic job of acting and captured your attention through out the film.
Christian Slater, (James Stamphill) was the lawyer assigned for Henri Young's defense, who had a hard job trying to rehabilitate his client so he could stand trial and even speak a few words.
The true facts of Henri Young's case are significantly different from the story told in the movie.
Young's trial had some impact on correcting those abuses, but not to the extent suggested by the film.If you're interested in another view of the Henri Young case, visit the Bureau of Prisons web site (I can't give the URL because that would violate the comments posting guidelines) and search for "Murder in the First".In any film based on a true event, some license must be granted to the screenwriter.
Having caught up again with this film on t.v., I can only support all other commentators who have observed how utterly ridiculous is the American Academy Award system for not having even nominated the utterly brilliant performance by Kevin Bacon in this film for the best actor award, let alone in not giving him the damned thing!
The story is pretty good, and the movie is never boring, but the highlight of the film is Bacon's haunting portrayal of a man forced into solitary for three years.
In this film, called "Murder in The First Degree ", Henry is played superbly by Kevin Bacon.
Even though this film is not historically accurate, it's still an engaging film with three of the finest performances you will see.Marc Rocco's film is loosely based on Henri Young and his time at Alcatraz.
Kevin Bacon delivers one of his best performances of his career and he shows a wide acting range playing Henri who lacks trust after spending three years in complete darkness.
Christian Slater does mighty fine as the lawyer and Gary Oldman, as usual, delivers another impressive performance.Overall, this film is very interesting and it's an emotionally powerful movie.
Directed by Marc Rocco, Murder In The First (based very loosely on a true story), tells the tale of Alcatraz inmate Henri Young (Bacon) and his treatment at the hands of the Associate Warden and Alcatraz authorities, which subsequently lead to the catastrophic events that set the film in motion.The period is set in the late 1930's.
Petty thief Henri Young, played by Kevin Bacon, was sent to Alcatraz previously from another prison to make up the numbers as the infamous Rock was lacking incorrigibles at the time and the numbers needed justification.
The rest of the movie is focused on the subsequent court case whereby Henri is defended by a young and inexperienced, albeit enthusiastic lawyer James Stamphill, played by Christian Slater.
He plays Henri Young as a pathetic, ruined man who is totally at the mercy of Alcatraz.Gary Oldman is great in a supporting role here, playing a sadistic warden almost in a monstrous bureaucratic way.
I am often undecided in my opinion of Christian Slater when I watch him, but I feel that in this movie he does what is needed and plays Stamphill as a decent guy who is fundamentally a humanist.Some scenes are brutal and hard to watch, especially the torture scenes in the dungeons where Bacons's character suffers.
An interpretation that will draw me to watch a Bacon performance - whether the script is wrong, the directing is off key or any other reason a film can be deemed bad..
It stars Kevin Bacon, Christian Slater, Gary Oldman, Embeth Davidtz, William H.
Music is scored by Christopher Young and cinematography by Fred Murphy.Slater stars as James Stamphill, an idealistic young attorney who is tasked with defending Alcatraz prisoner Henri Young (Bacon) who clearly murdered a fellow inmate.
Stamphill risks his career, and Henri's life, to put Alcatraz and the people in charge on trial.Inspired by a true story, viewers should note that this is mostly a fictitious film.
An astonishing performance that once again in Bacon's career was ignored by his Academy peers.Whilst high on emotional wallop, and some scenes really are tough to watch, the film falls shy of brilliance on account of standard fare for the courtroom sequences.
Henry Young was released (on Parole) from Washington State Prison in 1972 (he did not die on Alcatraz)This movie is good as a story but Michael "I wouldn't know the truth if it kicked me" Moore could have come closer to the truth on this one..
This movie was tough to watch because of the terrible treatment given to a prisoner, played well in here by Kevin Bacon.It's an interesting story, and well performed and told, but so unpleasant to see in a number of spots that I wouldn't watch it again.
**SPOILERS** Highly fictitious account of the life and times of Alcatraz inmate and career criminal #Az244 Henri Young, Kevin Bacon, and his fight to put an end to the torturous dungeon, solitary confinement, where he spent most of his time while incarcerated on the "Rock".We're given the impression that Young's only crime that in the end landed him on the "Rock" was a petty $5.00 robbery of a grocery store.
Young held McCain responsible, in his unfounded suspicion of him, for tipping off the guards in Young and his fellow inmates escape plan.Out off the hole and in with the local prison population Young, after an unsuccessful attempt earlier, attacked McCain in the prison tailor shop and stabbed him with a sank, home-made prison knife, killing him: Not in the mess-hall with a spoon like depicted in the movie.The most egregious misrepresentation in the film "Murder in the First" of Youngs stay in Alcatraz is that he was assigned a young lawyer, who just passed the state bar, to defend him in his trial for McCain's murder James Stamphill, Christian Slater.
The attorney who actually successfully defended Young at his murder trial was San Francisco lawyer Sol Abrams.The film had Henri Young being tortured by the prison guards and assistant Warden Milton Glenn, Gary Oldman, day and night until he finally snaps.
It's then, according to the movie, Young is let out of the hole where, in what seem like within minutes, he attacked and murdered McCain with a spoon in front of well over two hundred witnesses in the prison lunchroom.An open and shut case at first Young's court-appointed attorney James Stamphill turns the trial upside down.
Christian Slater captured the role as Henry Young's (Bacon) lawyer perfectly.
Though depressing and hard to stomach, the honesty it's been made and it's hallmark performances, manage to hold your interest.'Murder in the First' is a about a petty criminal named Henri Young, played by Kevin Bacon, who is put on trial for murder in the first degree.
But, a righteous recent law school graduate, played by Christian Slater, takes up the challenge to take up Young's case, and later blames the prison's executives, for the brutal murder committed by Young.'Murder in the First', like mentioned before, is a largely fictitious take on Henri Young's life.
Based on the real story, this film deals with the story of Henri Young (kevin bacon), a petty criminal caught escaping a prison and is sent to 'the rock'.
Brilliant performances by Slater, Bacon and Gary Oldman(as Prison Wardon).This one stands among very few flicks which make you think and cry.A must see!
Murder In The First examines courtroom intrigue in San Francisco, concerning an Alcatraz inmate (Kevin Bacon) who has been accused of killing a fellow prisoner upon being let out of a cruelly long stint in solitary.
It is often interesting how when old movies show up On Demand years after their first release there is a waterfall of response from viewers - almost like the film has been resurrected and given a second life.
Such is the case for this 1995 film MURDER IN THE FIRST - there seems to be a more honest evaluation of the film as a film than when it was first released and the public took exception to the 'veracity' of the allegedly true story.According to the reported facts, 'Henri Theodore Young (born 1918) was a prisoner at Alcatraz who attempted to escape with four other inmates, Arthur Barker, Dale Stamphill, William Martin, and Rufus McCain.
The film plot follows:Henri Young (Kevin Bacon) stole five dollars from a post office and ended up going to prison - to the most famous, or infamous, prison of them all: Alcatraz.
The true murderer, he says, was Alcatraz.Mark Rocco directed from the screenplay written by Dan Gordon and the film was photographed by Fred Murphy, the tense musical scoring is by Christopher Young.
The story is tight and made credible by the extraordinarily fine performances of Kevin Bacon, Christian Slater, Gary Oldman and a supporting cast that includes Embeth Davidtz, Kyra Sedgwick, Mia Kirshner, William H.
Henri Young (Kevin Bacon) is incarcerated in the prison of Alcatraz for stealing $5; when an attempt to escape is foiled, he is left to take the blame and he is kept in solitary confinement for several years.
Driven Mad by the isolation, within hours of his release he takes the life of the man responsible for his suffering.His Lawyer (Christian Slater) is given Henri's case as a way to cut his teeth as a new lawyer, after all Henri is guilty and he can't possible make this case any worse than it is.Based on true events, Murder in the First is a truly compelling story of the torture of one man, a man that had to go to Alcatraz to become a killer.Kevin Bacon is simply outstanding as the eccentric Henri Young, and he and Christian Slater bring this movie to life, with intrigue, suspense, passion and guts.
This movie is fiction, not remotely based on any the actual story of Henry Young.
I remember seeing this at the very beginning of 1995 and when I saw Kevin Bacon's brilliant performance, I couldn't believe that this film was not given better publicity and an end of the year release.
Kevin Bacon is a fine actor, it is just too bad that the truth could not be told about the trial and incarceration of Henry Young.
Kevin Bacon was amazing as was Christian Slater and Gary Oldman.
but Kevin Bacon and Gary Oldman make this movie.
Christian Slater plays a somewhat bold on the inside rookie lawyer fairly well, and unfortunately some of his dialogue, as well as the judge's (name escapes me) serves to possibly weaken the movie.Bacon's performance is absolutely awe-inspiring.
Kevin Bacon's touching performance is the focus of this drama about a youth , whose cruel imprisonment in the 1930s comes to the attention of a steadfast young attorney(Christian Slater).
The guards at Alcatraz kill one prisoner and recapture others including Henri Young (Kevin Bacon) during an escape attempt.
Young James Stamphill (Christian Slater) becomes his defense lawyer who makes Alcatraz and Warden Milton Glenn (Gary Oldman) as the ultimate cause of the murder.This is one of those based on true story but one shouldn't look too closely.
I love courtroom dramas, Alcatraz has always fascinated me, and it also stars the ever incredible talent that is Oldman, and another top notch performer, Kevin Bacon!
One of my favourite parts in the film was him getting a beating!Sure, the film had its highlights: Gary Oldman at his wicked best almost a rival to Shawshank Redemptions Warden Norton, Brad Dourif performance as Slater's brother was great, and there's a great cameo by Bacons wife Kyra Sedgwick and I admit it was at times quite touching, shocking and emotive.
Rocco's drama tells the true story of an Alcatraz inmate(Bacon) who is severely mistreated inside the institute and its warden (Oldman) and his public defendant lawyer (Slater) who goes public with his case.
The film is solidly directed with a good script from Dan Gordon and great performances from Bacon, Oldman and Slater.
Bacon portrays the character of 'Henri Young' so well that it becomes difficult to watch the film more than a couple of times, I found; and I love to watch 'good' films over and over.
The court room scenes are entertaining if a bit unbelievable but all the performances, Bacon, Slater and Oldman are spectacular and worth watching.
A petty criminal named Henry Young (Kevin Bacon) is sent to Alcatraz for stealing $5 from a general store/post office.
Both Christian Slater and Gary Oldman does a very good job, but Kevin Bacon is superb.
This movie is a good courtroom drama and Bacon's performance was so wonderful that I can't believe he wasn't at least Oscar nominated.
I saw it on the big screen and was completely taken with Kevin Bacon's performance, although Gary Oldman's name drew me to see the movie.
Although I've never heard of this movie until tonight, I was in awe at the stellar performances by both Christian Slater & mostly, Kevin Bacon.
The film is good in its content, Bacon played the role of Henry Young masterfully, but the work of the camera in this film makes it difficult to watch..
I thought it was thoroughly entertaining , with Oldman playing his usual bad guy role and Kevin Bacon outacting Christian Slater.
Henri Young (Kevin Bacon) is sent to Alcatraz for theft and put in solitary confinement.
Depression-era orphan Kevin Bacon (as Henri Young) is sent to the notoriously brutal island prison Alcatraz, after stealing five dollars to feed his little sister.
The story recounted in "Murder in the First", is quite shocking: Henri (Bacon), a young convict who has been arrested for a petty crime, is being transferred to Alcatraz for reasons having to do with logistics and nothing more.
This movie like so few others allows you to get to know the characters and to genuinely care about them and what happens to them.This film was excellent and Kevin Bacon's acting was at it's finest.
This is a remarkable piece of Hollywood film-making, one of the best big studio efforts of the 90's and it was so poorly marketed that few have seen or heard of this picture.The too often (and sometimes easily) dismissed Kevin Bacon is here Henri Young, a role as powerfully haunting as any actor could dream of.
Great job to Marc Rocco and his crew of Christian Slater, Kevin Bacon, Gary Oldman, Embeth Davidtz, William H.
Murder in The First is a powerhouse film about The life of Henri Young and the downfall of Alcatraz.
It contains some of the best performances I've seen from Kevin Bacon and Christian Slater.Gary Oldman is, as always, superb in his role as the Assoc.
The tagline tells us this is the story of the trial that closed down Alcatraz, and the first twenty minutes of Dan Gordon's screenplay tell us precisely why: Henri Young (Kevin Bacon) was illegally kept in solitary confinement for over three years, and during that time was regularly brutalized by the prison warden (Gary Oldman).
The cinematography is wonderful and the movie had a great cast who had given exceptional performances, most noted is Kevin Bacon's tortured Henri Young.
Kevin Bacon(wild things) puts up an Oscar worthy performance as an abused occupant of The Alcatraz Prison.
Kevin Bacon is the main reason to watch this frightening movie about the mental condition of a prisoner in Alcatraz. |
tt0039111 | The Yearling | Young Jody Baxter lives with his parents, Ora and Ezra "Penny" Baxter, in the animal-filled central Florida backwoods in the 1870s. His parents had six other children prior to Jody, but they died in infancy which makes it difficult for Ma Baxter to bond with him. Jody loves the outdoors and loves his family. He has wanted a pet for as long as he can remember, yet his mother, Ora, says they barely have enough food to feed themselves, let alone a pet.
A subplot involves the hunt for an old bear named Slewfoot that randomly attacks the Baxter livestock. Later the Baxters and Forresters get in a fight about the bear and continue to fight about nearly anything. (While the Forresters are presented as a disreputable clan, the disabled youngest brother, Fodder-Wing, is a close friend to Jody.) The Forresters steal the Baxters' hogs and, while Penny and Jody are out searching for the stolen stock, Penny is bitten in the arm by a rattlesnake. Penny shoots a doe--orphaning its young fawn--in order to use its liver to draw out the snake's venom, which saves Penny's life.
Jody convinces his parents to allow him to adopt the fawn--which, Jody later learns, Fodder-Wing had named "Flag"--and it becomes his constant companion. The book now focuses around Jody's life as he matures along with the fawn. The plot also centers on the conflicts of the young boy as he struggles with strained relationships, hunger, death of beloved friends, and the capriciousness of nature through a catastrophic flood. Jody experiences tender moments with his family, his fawn, and their neighbors and relatives. Along with his father, he comes face to face with the rough life of a farmer and hunter. Throughout, the well-mannered, God-fearing Baxter family and the good folk of nearby Volusia and the "big city," Ocala, are starkly contrasted against their hillbilly neighbors, the Forresters.
As Jody takes his final steps into maturity, he is forced to make a desperate choice between his pet, Flag, and his family. The parents realize that the growing Flag is endangering their very survival, as he persists in eating the corn crop on which the family is relying for their food the next winter. Jody's father orders him to take Flag into the woods and shoot him, but Jody cannot bring himself to do it. When his mother shoots the deer and wounds him, Jody is then forced to shoot Flag in the neck himself, killing the yearling. In blind fury at his mother, Jody runs off, only to come face to face with the true meaning of hunger, loneliness, and fear. After an ill-conceived attempt to reach an older friend in Boston in a broken-down canoe, Jody is picked up by a mail ship and returned to Volusia. In the end, Jody comes of age, assuming increasingly adult responsibilities--yet always surrounded with the love of family--in the difficult "world of men." | melodrama | train | wikipedia | The essence of the main characters is perfectly portrayed by the main leads of Gregory Peck and Jayne Wyman, but Claude Jarman Jnr as Jody has a special place in my childhood.
But then, four years later, MGM decided to start again with Gregory Peck as the kindly father, Jane Wyman as his embittered wife and Claude Jarman, Jr. as the naive Jody whose love for a pet fawn is the centerpiece of the story.
They are all well cast in this tender, warm-hearted story from the Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings novel of a family living near the Florida everglades.The technicolor photography is as impressive as the use of background music, especially in the scene where Jody playfully comes across the abandoned fawn.
From the opening scenes of this beautifully photographed movie I found myself caught-up in the intriguing post Civil War story of a boy and his pet faun and their fantastic adventures on a scruffy Florida Everglades farm.
The film stars Gregory Peck, Jane Wyman and Claude Jarman in the lead roles, with some of Hollywood's best character actors in the supporting roles.
Jane Wyman brilliantly plays Orry, the hardened mother and wife who is so embittered by past tragedies in her life that she is unable to show any love for her one surviving child for fear of losing him as well.
And Claude Jarman plays Jodie, the wistful young boy who is just one summer away from adolescence and all the emotional growing pains that come with it.
This movie was one of the most emotional experiences of my young life and I believe I am a better person from the lessons learned here.I highly recommend this film, it is one to be experienced with your entire family..
They don't make actors nor films like this anymore.This is a classic which works on many levels, which will function as a coming of age story for youngsters, and an introspective film for adults about the loss of innocence and the price of responsibility.I so wish that the whiz kids at Disney and DreamWorks would stop wasting their time and effort on computer animated feel-good trash, and reach into their hearts and make a film this wonderful..
One would have to be heartless not to be disarmed by this beautifully photographed, acted and realized story of a young boy's timeless, blissful childhood, represented by the yearling, and its inevitable end.There is a stage in childhood, somewhere between the terrible twos and teens, when a boy or girl is without guile, believing that kindness and good intentions make everything right.
And, no, not just because of the fact the plot involves a family and the emotional fallout and drama caused by a pet such as in "Old Yeller", or the fact that Jane Wyman stars with an adorable child actor, such as she did in "Pollyanna".
The performances make this movie.Claude Jarman Jr. stars as Jody Baxter, a young boy living in post-Civil War America who longs for the companionship and love of a pet - someone to take care of and nurture.
While Jody's loving father, Ezra(Gregory Peck)makes great strides to give Jody companionship and someone to look up to, Jody suffers from the neglect of his hardened mother, Orry(Wyman), still reeling from the untimely deaths of her other children.
And despite some off-kilter bits at the end revolving around Jody getting lost on the river and being found by a ship, "The Yearling" is a solid and heart-warming film that has earned its place among the top Hollywood classics..
Claude Jarman Jr. gives a devastatingly earnest performance as the young boy who can only become a young man by becoming tough enough to kill his beloved pet to save his family.When people wish to consider what we mean by basic American ideals, they should view this movie again -- carefully..
Gregory Peck and Jane Wyman both were nominated for Best Actor and Actress and I'm not sure either of them was better in the performances they eventually won for.Claude Jarman, Jr., making his film debut won a special Oscar as a juvenile performer that year.
Later on when it grows up it becomes more than a nuisance, eating the Baxter family's precious corn crop as it's sprouting out of the ground.Jane Wyman who usually played very light roles in her early years, first got noticed for heavy drama as Ray Milland's long suffering girl friend in The Lost Weekend the year before.
Wyman gilds her hard portrayal with an edge of sadness that is unforgettable.If you were to ask most people the role they most identify Gregory Peck with, I'm willing to say a good majority will answer Atticus Finch from To Kill a Mockingbird.
Jarman was so good in this that he got to do another film for MGM adapted from a Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings novel, The Sun Comes Up. He was just as good in that one as a slightly older and orphan version of Jody Baxter.The Yearling won two Oscars that for Art&Set Design and Cinematography for a color picture.
It would have been better titled as, 'How to kill your innocent family pet.' I have never read the book but I did see the movie, and I think any parent who would choose to make their child watch this film has got to be as insensitive as the woman who wrote the book.It is a story about a struggling floridian family who have bad luck thrown their way (the loss of their children from infant deaths, crop failures, and how poor, poor Ms. Baxter doesn't have a thing to wear because her clothes are being worn out from treading to a source of water because she doesn't have a well).Enter the doe, who is killed by Mr. Baxter so that he can use its heart and liver to draw venom from a recent rattlesnake bite.Enter the fawn, who the boy finds, and later decides to adopt (it's only fair, his father killed it's mother), because he wants a pet.
The parents decide to execute the animal and in the process, make the boy emotionally suffer, INSTEAD of being responsible to the animal and locking it up at night so that it won't get into their crops, then watch over it during the day, making sure it gets fed other things that deers eat.What kind of a moral is this?
"The Yearling" is one of those movies I had stayed away from because of my misguided perceptions about what it was going to be like (maudlin, sentimental, "family friendly" in all the worst ways).
The effect highlights the beauty and wonder of the natural world, but it also serves the purpose of making the men who populate it seem even smaller and humbler in comparison to all the grandeur.Gregory Peck and especially Jane Wyman give lovely performances as parents, and Claude Jarman, Jr. won a special juvenile Oscar as the young boy who adopts an ill-advised pet.
The film deservedly won the Oscars for Art Direction and Cinematography in the color categories, and brought nominations to Peck and Wyman in the Actor and Actress categories, respectively, as well as to Harold Kress for his editing, Clarence Brown for his directing, and MGM for Best Picture of the year.Grade: A+.
Since I wasn't born until 1949,I never had the opportunity to see this film at a Movie Theater.When it was shown on television I had the same reaction many people had.Tearing up when Jody had to shoot his beloved pet Deer that his Mother had shot and wounded.Knowing how much he had loved this animal and was willing to sacrifice to be able to keep him made me think of how much we get attached to our own pets whether a Dog,Cat,Bird,whatever!
The emotions he could express on his face through out the movie were riveting and heartwarming.I'm sure many Movie Audiences leaving theaters in 1946 were wiping away tears.I see why he was given a special Academy award for his performance.If all animal owners showed the love,care,devotion,empathy, that Jody had for his beloved pet deer; we wouldn't need organization like the ASPCA...Great Heartwarming Film that all should see at least once...s.m..
At least not on that farm as depicted in "The Yearling."Viewed from the angle of pioneer logic, this is a mighty curious tale.Here are supposed adults who allow a deer to be brought not only onto their land but even, on occasion, into their home, feeding and pampering it for a year--then chastise it for acting like a deer.They allow it to roam about freely (instead of putting it in a barn) build a fence which the creature can easily surmount--then blame it for munching their tasty crops.What's a poor deer supposed to do?
Only their kid can be forgiven.That said, this rich MGM production was taken to heart by a weary post-WWII public, optimistic for family values as it tried to rebuilt its deferred domestic structure.The cast, including Gregory Peck, Jane Wyman and Claude Jarman, Jr. were uniformly strong; Clarence Brown's direction was sensitive; and the cinematography, editing, and general production were all at a high level.Leaving common sense logic aside, this is a "family film" that many consider one of the best of the genre..
It is hard to capture literary symbolism in a movie, but this movie, comes close to "hitting the mark." Jane Wyman is very good as Jody's hardened mother, Orry Baxter, who has learned to be disappointed with life and its hardships.
Gregory Peck plays Jody's father, Penny Baxter, who wants to let Jody (Claude Jarman, Jr.) enjoy the joys of childhood as long as he can before facing hardships of the world.
This movie was one of Gregory Pecks's earliest roles and although it also was far from his best or most memorable one, it shows some of the things to come, from his future acting career.
I wasn't too fond of Jane Wyman but that had more to do with her character than her acting skills really.The story tends to get a bit messy at times, when it starts to drift away and tries to put too much emotions and drama stuff in it but luckily the movie knows how to restrain itself for most of the time and it keeps its main focus on the father-son relationship of the movie.
This film has a lot going for it, including beautiful Technicolor cinematography, an engaging story, and fine acting by Peck as the father.
But my favorite scene has always been Peck's speech in the little cemetery ("because we do not know any prayer") where Fodderwing is being buried :it echoes the crippled boy's dreams when he and Jody spent the night in a tree -one of those magical moments of childhood-.Today's children are used to action-packed violent movies: I hope they will enjoy "the yearling" all the same..
"The Yearling", an adaptation of the Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings novel about a Florida family in the 1800s, is a fairly well-made family film that suffers mostly from bad acting and a slow plot.Jane Wyman, as the mother, blows every one else off the screen.
The worst acting of all comes from Claude Jarman Jr. who portrays the young Jody as if he were acting in a silent film.
Greg Peck's finest role in a coming of age film when everyone worked for the family.
That year's films included "The Best Years of Our Lives," "It's a Wonderful Life," "Henry V," "The Jolson Story," "To Each His Own," and "Duel in the Sun." What prompted me most to write this review, with so many other comments, was the performance by Gregory Peck.
Another reviewer, bkoganbing from Buffalo (2 March 2008), said that he wasn't sure that Peck and Wyman gave better performances than in "The Yearling," where both later won Oscars for roles in other films.
But I think his Penny Baxter in "Yearling" was much broader, deeper and touching than was his very good Atticus Finch in "Mockingbird." Most actors over time develop a very identifiable film persona.
This film is the best of a fine actor who had several nominations in his life for excellent roles in some great movies..
In 1870s Florida, pioneering Gregory Peck (as Penny "Pa" Baxter) and Jane Wyman (Orry "Ma" Baxter) raise both corn and children.
I'm a-way past the age of dying!" And, so he is - but, that doesn't mean "The Yearling" is done with tragedy.The boy raises a fawn, after cutting out its mother's heart to draw poison from his snake-bitten father.Of, course, you know where this story is going - but, you've got to admit, it's done exceptionally well.Every frame is staged for the maximum amount of heart-tugging cinematic beauty possible.
Everyone has to get their "insides tore out" sometimes.********** The Yearling (12/18/46) Clarence Brown ~ Gregory Peck, Claude Jarman Jr., Jane Wyman, Donn Gift.
This movie's beautiful, Academy Award winning cinematography and vivid Technicolor are worth the view alone and the fine performances of the entire cast lift the film far above the usual sentimental tearjerkers..
Gregory Peck and Jane Wyman, who play Jarman's parents, come off a lot better (both were nominated for Oscars), but they're saddled with some awful, faux-archaic dialogue.
Gregory Peck's acting was excellent, as one would expect, and the cinematography quite stunning even when playing directly into some melodramatic "moment." But, the rest of the film was overacted and hard to watch, for me anyway.
I've seen the movie I don't know how many times, but watched it again on TCM this past Sunday and noticed that the music playing while Jody is running through the woods with the fawn, is Mendelsohn's Midsummer Night's Dream overture, slightly changed.
Based on Marjorie Kinnan Rawlins' novel,this beautiful family movie tells the story of a child's journey towards maturity.The story unfolds through the eyes of little Jody Baxter (Claude Jarman Jr.),the son of a farming couple (Gregory Peck and Jane Wyman) in the Florida swamps in the 1870s.His love for his pet deer is the core of the story.The movie is shot magnificently in Technicolor and the performances under the sure hand of Clarence Brown are fine.Jane Wyman's performance as the mother is particularly good.
Gregory Peck stars in "The Yearling," a warm family drama about a family in the American Frontier where the son Jody befriends a deer, which causes problems for the family such as eating their crops.
Clarence Brown directed this adaptation of Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings' award winning novel set in 1870's Florida, where the Baxters(played by Gregory Peck & Jane Wyman) are pioneer farmers, with their son Jody(played by Claude Jarman Jr.) When Mr. Baxter is forced to kill a dear for survival, it leaves behind a young fawn that will surely die on its own, so Jody takes it home as a pet, naming it Flag.
Call me overly sensitive, but The Yearling, was just emotionally overwhelming and always will be for me.I think the acting is superb, Gregory Peck giving one of his two incredible performances as a loving father, the other one, of course, in "To Kill a Mockingbird." If ever there is a film role model for fathers today, it can be found in these two films.
Peck's love for his son, his desire to protect his world and let him be a boy for just a little bit longer, is beautifully portrayed.Whenever this film is shown on television I will indeed watch the beginning up to when "Flag" is found, but then I do turn the channel before the end.
I had watched it because it featured Gregory Peck as the father and I liked him, but it was Jarman's movie all the way.
It's about that horrible mutation every adult has gone through-- from one who (for example) can only see a "boy and his deer" story in this movie into one who mourns for the time when that's all he/she could see.I can't imagine the parent whose guts wouldn't be wrenched out by Pa's words to Jody at the end-- followed by Jody's dream of the two things he's forever lost.The central themes of this movie are well over any child's head, but at the same time "The Yearling" is rich with stuff that's engaging and perfect for viewers of all ages.
Especially Gregory Peck and Claude Jarman Jr. I highly recommend this movie because it truly is a Classic!.
Secondly, I could easily see why Claude Jarman, Jr. won a special Oscar for his performance as the young boy who simply adores his pet deer.
And, the acting here is fine, both on the part of Gregory Peck and the child.One of my complaints about this movie is how such a loving father would be married to such an old grump of a mother.
This family lives in the near-swamp country of 1870 Florida -- Gregory Peck as the stolid, humane pater familias, Jane Wyman as his hard-working wife, a little grim maybe, and Claude Jarman Jr. as their blond, pudding-faced son who finds a tiny fawn and brings it home to raise.
The story is set within the 1870s and is about a young boy called Jody Baxter, played by Claude Jarman, Jr. Jody lives on a farm in the scrub-land of Florida with his father, played by Gregory Peck, and his mother, played by Jane Wyman.
The Yearling shows typical nature-movie scenes for instance, hunting, animal fights, such as a bear attack, and the coming of age for Jody and Flag.
The Cinematography is outstanding, and Claude Jarman Jr. is the best actor in the movie as the young son.
The Yearling is based on Marjorie Kinnan Rawling's 1938 Pulitzer Prize-winning novel about a boy (Claude Jarman Jr.) and a pet deer in the Florida backwoods in the late 1800s. |
tt0804452 | Bratz | Four teenage friends named Cloe, Yasmin, Sasha and Jade are about to start high school. Self-centered Meredith wants everyone to belong to a clique, and goes about organizing students. She does not like the independent spirit of the four girls and plots to destroy their friendship and make them conform to her pre-fabricated cliques. Cloe is an amazing soccer player. She meets Cameron and is instantly smitten. Sasha is recruited as a cheerleader. Jade joins the science club, meets Dexter and designs great outfits. Yasmin joins journalism, even though her real passion is singing even though she hasn't realized yet. She also feels lonely as her friends are busy with their own cliques. She also meets Dylan who is deaf but can lip reading (lip read). The friends begin to drift apart as they are compelled to stay within their cliques.
Two years later, when an accidental food fight causes them to get detention, they realize that they miss being BFF's and decide to be friends again. They also try to get the other schoolmates to socialize outside their cliques but their attempts fail when Meredith's 2nd Super Sweet 16 party which ends disastrously has them seated with their original cliques.
The upcoming talent show and its prize of a scholarship gives them the idea to bring all the cliques together again with an act, but the chances are slim with Meredith's constant attempts to steal the spotlight. In the end, there is a tie. Meredith gets the trophy, but the girls get the scholarship, which they later give to Cloe. | romantic | train | wikipedia | (Note to script writers: If you really have to put "OMG" as an actual spoken line, then I think it's time to rethink your career) After this monstrosity finally ended, I looked to my friend and we looked to her sister, who then informed us that the movie was horrible.
But don't worry, when she really needs it (for a dress), her friends have gift certificates.Sure enough, no one would like to see a movie with a bunch of fat teens running around acting silly but did the movie have to star four slender girls with attitude problems?
For me it's still a very negative word meaning that your parents have spoiled you.Bratz doesn't want to give its core audience (small girls) a good message.
It also has enough montages to kill a few horses, Jon Voight with not only a prosthetic nose but a statue of his head with the same fake nose, a fluffy dog who gets beauty treatment along with her owner, a mariachi band that lives at the house of the Hispanic girl of the Bratz (and, for some reason, this doesn't seem too out of place, especially when they show up at talent shows), and...Jesus, did I mention the montages?But for all of this, if one is in the right frame of mind, it's hilarious, even achingly and hysterically, funny material, whether it was intentional or not.
It also makes for some ample absurd moments when just seeing the four Bratz having a fight amongst themselves about sticking together or going off into their other interests (naturally, they have only one aptitude a piece, one soccer, one cheer-leading, one science, and one journalism/singing), and as well the diabolical attempts to thwart all of their fun by the nasty, less than one-note daughter of the principle, who goes for a 2nd super sweet sixteen party even after she's turned 16.Maybe if you're already quite a young girl, seeing this movie might not matter too much in the grand scheme of things as far as real psychological impact.
If the intention of writing this film was simply because the last time a movie has been this cringe-worthy was Britney Spears' Crossroads, then the idea was a nail hit directly on the head.If you feel any emotion, be it happiness, joy, elation or even sadness (in context to the film, as opposed to its existence) during the running time of this film, you are unfortunately a biased person...or are 2 years old, in which case you would not have the mental capacity to read this or form opinion throughout the film...except for when to soil yourself during its run time.The sad truth is that this film was surely doomed from the start.
No-one would in their right mind would write, direct and produce this film, under the impression that anyone would actually enjoy it except for toddlers...and, unfortunately, that peculiar clique...young girls who actually assume that they and there friends are actually Bratz."Oh, that film was totally written about us," they say.Unfortunately...it probably was..
I see reviews of other members saying things like (a-hem), "No-one would in their right mind would write, direct and produce this film, under the impression that anyone would actually enjoy it except for toddlers...and, unfortunately, that peculiar clique...young girls who actually assume that they and there friends are actually Bratz.", or "If you really have to put "OMG" as an actual spoken line, then I think it's time to rethink your career", or even, "It makes high school seem like a horrible place full of cliques and a mean, prissy, "boss" figure that runs the whole school"My God. You people need to relax.We were all laughing hysterically the entire duration of this movie.
Expecting a Bratz movie to accurately depict high school life or common social interaction or whatever else you think it should have, is mad.However I do know that this is a film I will never forget.I will always have these fond memories of watching this astonishing film with my friends on a Saturday night.
The script is corny, the plot follows a cliché formula which appeals to a very specific demographic (5-10 year old girls who play with Bratz dolls).
I genuinely think it's a good movie, it's got a below average plot and the acting is from about E-list actors, but there's something really nice about it, it's really quite nostalgic for me and the fact I could relate with this when I was younger, idk but generally it's really appealing and although it's got shitty reviews, it's on Netflix and Lovefilm, won't cost you any extra but I do recommend it.
The film in itself is about 4 girls who are completely different however, they still have a close bond, but as they go through school they get split apart by the things they like and within two years, they've almost forgotten each other.
OK, for what this is, a movie for 5 year old little girls, I think it was great.
Okay, it looks like this film was created to do two things; Obviously, the first one is to give little girls another movie to add to their collection of princess/bubblegum memorabilia.
Bratz does not approach teen movie fame; I'd rather watch Date Movie again.If you read the reviews of those who gave Bratz a high rating you'll understand the kind of vapid, shallow people this film was aimed at.
This goes for the one comment, on how the person writing hated the movie, but the six year old girl loved it, that would be because she enjoys thinking life is all about school and clothes.
If it was made for anyone over the age of 14 it would have been quite a bit different.Also, If you are going to bad talk a kids movie because YOU didn't like it then hopefully you have some interesting reasons to back the opinion up because believe it or not people do use this as a judging point unfortunately.
and the storyline is cool, even there's one unimportant scene.but it was heart-touching and so high school!but that doesn't matter because overall the movie offers an amazing story about friendship.
Sure, it may be a 'kids film', but I think mum and I both agreed that this was a movie worthy of 10 stars.People giving low rankings should perhaps remember that this film is probably aimed at younger children who have grown up with the Bratz dolls.
I thought the film was an excellent comedy.I love the idea of friendship, though many people find it corny but I love the idea as the girls Yasmin, Sasha, Chloe and Jade face during their first year of high school.
Yup, Daddy's the principal of the school.Jade: Typical Asian-American girl with strict mother who over burdens her with academic work, Jade has to act like she loves all of it, but has a secret rebellious side.If that doesn't scream American cultural movie character stereotypes, I don't know what does.
Rather than a shallow, frothy, candy-colored stroll through ditzy women, inappropriate fashion, and immature circumstances, I received a mildly-entertaining, high-energy romp filled with attractive leads, all of whom at least carry their part with some semblance of conviction, acceptable, if scatter-plotted themes and ideas, and a pleasantly fun diversion through the world that sort of mimics our reality but still finds itself wholly trapped in cinema's, family-friendly kind of reality.Make no mistake, Bratz isn't really a good film and it wouldn't be the first thing I recommend your daughters see.
The Bratz essentially were telling them not to leave the house without a tube-top, eyeliner, and eyeshadow.Bratz follows four lifelong best-friends - Cloe (Skyler Shaye), Yasmin (Nathalia Ramos), Sasha (Logan Browning), and Jade (Janel Parrish) - as they enter high school with an attitude to keep each other as close as possible.
Upon reuniting the group to prove that they can still be inseparable and devoted to each other, Meredith sets out to destroy the girls by recreating the party she threw for her sweet sixteen, making it even bigger and better, which she hopes will propel herself to the known voice of the school while the four girls wallow in their shame.I laud Bratz for at least doing what I never thought would be done in one of the most ostensibly shallow teen films of the last decade, which is etch some solid, vital commentary about high school into its material.
Yes, Bratz would be better if it didn't make the cliques so overblown and farcical that they tread the line of being part of a high school satire, but its acknowledgment of a real problem in a pleasantly real way is actually heartwarming to say the least.Then there's the abundance of singing, dancing, and just hanging out these girls do, which is surprisingly fun and enjoyable, given how shallow it sounds.
But the fact that there's moralizing in a film called Bratz, taken from the line of dolls that look the way they do, is surprising enough, giving the film much more leverage and likability than I could've ever imagined.Starring: Skyler Shaye, Nathalia Ramos, Logan Browning, Janel Parrish, and Chelsea Kane.
So despite what everyone seems to be saying by watching this film (and playing with the dolls) your children are not going to be brainwashed and filled with messages that they must dress like a hooker.
The producers have unintentionally managed the positive message that no amount of expensive clothes, shoes, hair, and make- up can make an average girl look like a hot teen actress.Speaking of wandering on to the set looking dazed and confused, Jon Voight plays Meredith's father and the school principal.
There is a time and a place for everything, and this movie has a limited target audience; it is aimed specifically at the teeny-bopper age!!I ended up liking it because it brought me back to my childhood and my own experiences with "mean girls" and cliques, and it helped me have a wonderful conversation with my daughter afterward.
Some of the absolute worst acting in years and this was made in 2007 mind you .A plot that was mediocre,boring,lame,predictable,and extremely corny all rolled into one .The movie epitomized the word corny from the over acting to the SASS to the obvious reading straight from the script lines .The movie was just ...bad period .I get I'm not the demographic for this film and more power to the fans of this film I just found it to be an exercise in pure torture getting through it .Oh and the MUSIC ?My God talk about absolutely horrible and the music video at the end was extremely lame as well as laughable .It also didn't help that the villain was as equally annoying as the lead characters were .Even less helpful is how superficial the characters all are and that doesn't really improve much..
I know some people would argue that my standards for what a movie can be should have been lowered when I came across this live-action film based on a series of dolls, but aren't little girls people too?
My little cousin (girl) likes Bratz (the dolls)and had thoughts about seeing the movie.
that girl meredith was the most annoying little bitch i've ever seen on a movie screen, the four lead actresses are just your typical 20 something year old whores who can't act trying to make it big, and not even John Voight (that's right, JOHN VOIGHT) could save this film.
Throughout the movie, the four Bratz girls (Chloe, Jade, Sasha, and Yasmin) meet events that challenge their friendship.
Some of the worst dialogue I have ever heard in a film not to mention the weird messages it tries to convey just feels like a room of 50 year old business men tried making this without any realization of how teens or high school acts.
Not in a while have more shallow and unlikeable characters graced any film by me seen by me recently, they all live up to their names as brats with personalities that never sparkle and instead make one depressed and they serve as unhealthy role models for the primary target audience.Other than the bright colours, there is a real straight-to-video/DVD look to 'Bratz'.
Similarly, once again (just when you think he couldn't get just as bad as his career-low-point, film and performance, in 'Superbabies: Baby Geniuses 2'), Jon Voigt disgraces himself with an bumbling idiot role (that is actually meant to be an authority figure) overacted dreadfully, and no obviously prosthetic/false nose won't give you any dignity sadly Jon no matter how hard you try to hide behind it by looking barely recognisable.In conclusion, lots of brat-itude but no style or substance of any kind.
I've seen a lot of bad films, for comedic purposes, but this is by far the worst.I cant believe people are defending this as being "A movie for little girls".
Like all middle-aged gay man, I have the musical & movie taste of a 14-year-old teenage girl.
Young girls would love a movie about this, with the good girls beating the bad girls.This movie has some sweet natured parts behind it, including a deaf boy learning to appreciate music and 4 best friends reuniting and become a team again, teaching kids that best friends should always be there for each other.If you want your little girl to truly enjoy a night out at the movies, then take her to see Bratz.
Meredith is pretty much appalled as she watched the world she created crumble beneath her, so she sets out to teach the 'Bratz' some lessons.I am actually kind of embarrassed to say that I liked this movie.
Now they must stop the school from separating everyone into groups and they must defeat the uber-popular Meredith.This movie is filmed like a music video mixed with a commercial.
Sprung from a line of fashion dolls that make Barbie look like an Amish housewife, the film tones down its creepy sexualised tone for quickie moral lessons and puerile considerations of racial identities.These Bratz consist of freshmen high schoolers in Hispanic Yasmin (Nathalia Ramos), African-American Sasha (Logan Browning), Caucasian Cloe (Skyler Shaye) and Pan-Asian Jade (Janel Parrish).
Somehow I wanted to block it all out in fear of it destroying my brain cells.So to sum it up, do not watch Bratz if you have the tiniest bit of self dignity because at the end of the movie, you'd be punching yourself and asking "Why did I waste 2 hours of my time on this?" Oh and seriously, letting little kids watch this will not change the way they think about 'life' or 'friendship'.
Had I not been forced to see this film because of my occupation (and the fact I have two young daughters), I would have avoided this particular production like Richard Simmons avoids women.However, no such luck came my way on this night, and I was subjected to one of the single most shallow, insignificant, poorly-directed, badly-acted movies of the year.Or in ANY year, for that matter."Bratz, The Movie" is supposedly based on those slutty-looking dolls with huge eyes, full lips and no noses; figures which many parents feel imbues their daughters with an overinflated infatuation with clothes, shoes and make-up.
Unfortunately, this movie is live action (but still concentrates on the whole "appearance is the most important" thing).And while the film tries to touch on friendships being key, the main message here is that only thin, good-looking people are worth anything; and the only way to make a difference in the world is to wear the latest, most expensive fashions.As if any of this makes any difference, here's the basic plot outline: Four adolescent girls (all beautiful with perfect bodies), Yasmin (Natalie Ramos), Jade (Janel Parish), Sasha (Logan Browning) and Chloe (Skyler Shaye) enter high school.
He not only embarrasses himself in the movie, but has put a stamp of incompetence on what was once a stellar career.Oh, there's also a deaf kid, Dylan (Ian Nelson) who somehow has the power to hear Yasmin singing (oh, and he can spin turntables, as well).The picture's witless conclusion consists of a huge birthday bash for Meredith (see enters on an elephant) and a loud and irritating musical number (it's amazing what passes for entertainment in today's world).My little girls liked this film, but then again they are 3 and 7-years old.
we certainly enjoyed it, but not in the way i believe the film makers were intending.neither of us went into the movie with high expectations, knowing that it was a film based on hideous dolls that neither of us had played with in years, but we were at least expecting some sort of plot line!
No matter how extremely negative the vast majority of reviews for this film, this movie was great because: 1.It conveys great messages about FRIENDSHIP & LOYALTY 2.High school cliques are true in real life 3.The soundtracks are so amazingly awesome 4.This Movie Is Good For Any Of Ages 5.Full of music, fun & fashion!!!i live in Indonesia n i think Bratz had so much audiences in here than in its domestic place, USA.
i mean, forget about the horrendously terrible popular teenage movie like "High School Musical 2" who copied "BRATZ" or some R-Rated horrible movies, this light-hearted "BRATZ" is more than just based on top-selling fashion dolls or make-up makeover.
i myself be a bit fashionable after watched this film because the Bratz girls know how to dress just to express their own personalities.
Well, I Watched The Movie With My Girlfriend And She Took Her Little Sister Too. For The First Five Minutes, I Thought The Movie Was So-So, But I Was Wrong, Bratz Helped My Eyes To See How Important Friendship Is. Okey, So There Are 4 BFF's Who Trying To Fit In At The New High School But They Were Failed Because A Student Evil Body President Who Splited Them Up Into Different Cliques.
there are little girls, fans of bratz dolls, wanting to see this movie, and what will they take from this?? |
tt0392009 | A Flintstone Family Christmas | Fred Flintstone gets into the Christmas spirit by hanging up decorations and being altogether joyful while awaiting the arrival of his daughter Pebbles, her husband Bamm-Bamm and their twin children, daughter Roxy and son Chip. After learning that they will arrive at 4pm, Fred and Barney leave to get their turkeysaurus for dinner. However, on the way back home they are mugged by a Santa. Fred hands over his wallet and watch and orders Barney to give him the bird, but while tossing the turkeysaurus the Santa "breaks" in half. Seizing the opportunity, the two run away from the mugger.
When Fred and Barney get to the police station, they identify the thief, who turns out to be a "caveless" abandoned child named Stoney. According to the social worker, Stoney used to be the horror of foster homes because of his stealing habits. Feeling sympathy for Stoney, Wilma decides to adopt him, despite Fred's initial reluctance. They try to show Stoney that they trust him and attempt to teach him that stealing is wrong.
However, things get slightly bleaker when Pebbles and her family get stuck in an airport because of a blizzard. The Rubbles and the Flintstones then go Christmas tree shopping, but can't afford any that aren't "smaller than their grandchildren". Stoney attempts to help by convincing people to bet on him as he plays a game in order to earn enough money for the Flintstones to buy the tree. When a man loses, he chases Stoney, who runs for cover near Fred. The man claims that Stoney cheated him, and Fred asks if this is true. Stoney then truthfully replies "no", and when Fred believes him, he gets hit in the head with a tree by the man.
Fred then goes to the hospital, but his boss informs him that he can't participate in the Christmas parade (which is something Fred is quite eager to do since the beginning of the movie) and when he tries to protest, his boss finalizes his "no". To make it up to Fred, Stoney poses as his boss's driver and locks him up in the Flintstone's bathroom, which will allow Fred to participate in the parade. Instead, Fred saves his boss and ends up in jail, where he eventually bonds with Stoney. Fred even consoles Stoney that cutting corners to get what you want is not the solution. However, the social worker then takes Stoney away, and meanwhile Fred's boss makes him go to the parade. While there, Fred saves Stoney.
At home Fred sees Pebbles and her family, and Stoney bonds with the twins. Fred says that the new addition to the family gets to put the star on the Christmas tree. Stoney thinks Fred is referring to Roxy and Chip, but it turns out it is him and he becomes a Flintstone. Bamm-Bamm helps him put on the star and they all have a happy Christmas. | psychedelic, alternate history | train | wikipedia | Deck the halls with yabba dabba doo.. There seems to be a lot of sarcastic comments on this (and the other two Flintstone Xmas specials) referring to the fact that even a modern stone age family cannot celebrate. I might have been one of them, but if you are the type of person who is going to seriously judge a satirical cartoon where humans use dinosaurs as slaves for their household appliances then perhaps you should be locked in a cold, dark room for a long spell.In this one, which received an Emmy nomination, Fred takes in a homeless orphan boy called Stoney and tries to give him the best Xmas ever. The enthusiastic kid tries to help but instead makes lots of trouble for Fred.It's a great cartoon, and certainly one of the best Xmas specials.. A sacrilegious Christmas special?. Firstly, let me acknowledge that perhaps I am being a bit too extreme when I toss out the word `sacrilegious' as it relates to this special. As a moderately religious person myself, I am certainly not an individual who usually goes around passing judgement on these kind of things. But I do raise this question: how on earth can a society living in the stone age celebrate a holiday that honors the birth of Christ?I suppose we could let this slide (after all, this is not the first Christmas-themed Flintstones special), but there was one particular scene in this special that really took me aback: The Flintstones pose for a Christmas family photograph, which is taken and then shown with the following writing below it: `Flintstones Christmas BC'. If there was ever an opportunity to use the words `blasphemy' and `oxymoron' in the same sentence, that's it.That aside, this is a pretty bland, by-the-book half-hour of Christmas television viewing. As with most modern Flintstones specials, it doesn't hold a candle to the sheer delightfulness of the original television series. There are better Flintstones Christmas specials than this one.. Decent Christmas Special. A Flintstone Family Christmas (1993) ** 1/2 (out of 4) Decent short has Fred and Barney being held up by a young orphan who has always been in trouble with the law. Wilma feels sorry for the kid and invites him back to their house for Christmas but Fred doesn't like the kid at all but overtime they become buds. A FLINTSTONE FAMILY Christmas isn't nearly as good as some of the early episodes and specials that dealt with the holiday. Overall I think fans of the show are going to be somewhat disappointed because this special is just missing a certain quality that made the earlier stuff so special. With that said, this here isn't too bad but I think the biggest problem is that the kid is just so annoying. Not once did I like this kid and I really didn't care for his transformation as the picture went along. Perhaps I'm being too harsh on a cartoon but this was a big part of the story and it just didn't work for me. I also thought some of the jokes were a little flat, especially for a Christmas special as there's even a joke about Charlie Mansonstone. Try explaining that to the kids if they ask.. Rocky from start to finish. "A Flintstone Family Christmas" is a 23-minute television special from 1993, so this one has its 25th anniversary next year and it is the last directorial effort by prolific filmmaker Ray Patterson. The title already gives away that this one takes us back into the prehistoric world of Fred, Wilma, Barney and Betty and it's a special made for holidays. But sadly, I must say here that stones and spirit don't really go together. Perhaps I am a bit biased as I've never been a big fan of Fred in particular and his little buddy included here didn't do too much for me either. Then again maybe I'm not as I have nothing against the series. There is an okay moment here and there for sure, but with the Christmas message and emotional impact they were going for, the film comes really short in my opinion. If there is any reason to see it, it is the comedy, not because that area is particularly great, but because everything else is so mediocre. The voice acting is okay too. If you care about voice actors, you will see one or the other known name like Welker of course. But story is key and there it is just unfulfilling overall. It's just not working out well at all and the Emmy nomination was definitely a bit (too) much. I give this one a thumbs-down. Not recommended. |
tt0084633 | Savannah Smiles | The story begins at a prison work site where Boots "Bootsie" McGaffey (Donovan Scott) attempts to help his old friend, Alvie Gibbs (Mark Miller), escape by causing a diversion and getting away in a crudely disguised vehicle. Surprisingly, Bootsie's efforts were unnecessary, as Alvie was scheduled for parole later that same week. The two friends roam the area, searching for food and shelter while continuing to evade the police.
Meanwhile, in the wealthy part of town, a six-year-old girl, named Savannah Driscoll (Bridgette Andersen), is feeling lonely and unwanted by her affluent parents. Her father Richard (Chris Robinson) is a candidate for the United States Senate and is more concerned with his public image than he is with his daughter. Feeling sad and motivated by an old episode of Our Gang, Savannah decides to run away during a trip to the park with her aunt and cousin, and leaves a note before she flees. Unfortunately, a gust of wind blows her note under her parents' bed, out of view.
Meanwhile, Alvie and Bootsie arrive at that park in an old vehicle they stole earlier. While the children play hide-and-go-seek, Savannah decides to hide in the backseat of the car, and Alvie and Boosty unknowingly drive off with her. After a run-in with a police officer, they pretend she is Bootsy's niece. They attempt to return her to the park, but she doesn't want to leave, and they decide to care for her in the meantime.
After learning Savannah is missing, Richard and his wife Joan (Barbara Stanger) contact the authorities. Believing Savannah was kidnapped, they also hire a private detective, Harland Dobbs (Peter Graves). The police officers soon piece together evidence and eyewitness testimony and conclude that Savannah was kidnapped. However, the eyewitnesses feel Savannah was not actually kidnapped, given the genuine surprise shown by Alvie and Bootsie. Joan is hesitant to go along with the kidnapping theory and disagrees with how to proceed. While wanting to appear tough on crime for the benefit of his Senatorial campaign, Richard agrees to follow Dobbs' strategy.
The following day, after reading a newspaper article, Alvie discovers Savannah's identity and the $100,000 reward for her safe return. As he and Bootsie are fugitives, he is unsure how they can retrieve the reward. In the meantime, they do their best to take care of Savannah and entertain her. Alvie attempts to make a deal with a waitress/singer he meets at a local bar, to turn in Savannah and split the reward. She turns him down but befriends Alvie in the process.
Over the next few days, Alvie and Bootsie grow closer to Savannah, and she is happy to have them in her life. They play games, tell stories, and even go on a picnic together. While getting ice cream, Alvie gives Savannah a free puppy. As Alvie continues to plan to get the reward money, Bootsie begins to have second thoughts and would rather just give Savannah back without the reward. On the way back to their hideout, they are spotted by local police officers, who notify Dobbs. Dobbs, along with a team of officers, surround the hideout and attempt to capture Alvie and Bootsie. After an errant shot by one of the officers, Alvie realizes what is happening, and he and Bootsie take Savannah hostage in order to escape. Before they can leave, they are approached by the Driscoll Family priest, Father O'Hara (Pat Morita), who tries to be the peacemaker. Not wanting to make peace just yet, Alvie orders Father O'Hara to accompany them on their escape. Father O'Hara goes along to assure Savannah's safety, under the condition that he be dropped off at a nearby wedding ceremony he is scheduled to perform. The group uses the wedding to continue their getaway, by switching vehicles and escaping during the post-wedding procession. They are successful, and proceed to the resort area previously visited during their picnic day.
While at home waiting to hear from the alleged kidnappers, Richard is handed the note Savannah had left behind, which her nanny has found. Not wanting to create confusion or change his stance, Richard burns the note and instructs the nanny to keep that information between the two of them. He takes a call from Father O'Hara, notifying them of the fugitives' whereabouts. Richard notifies Dobbs and his team, then goes to the resort area with Joan. Once arriving at the resort, Alvie and Father O'Hara travel down the mountain to meet the Driscolls, to negotiate Savannah's safe return. Richard assures Alvie they will not press charges so long as Savannah is returned. Alvie declines the reward money he originally sought and agrees to the terms. He and Father O'Hara proceed back up the mountain. Meanwhile, Bootsie and Savannah are waiting atop the mountain. After a while, Savannah takes her new puppy for a walk, but he gets away from her, and she ends up disappearing into the woods . Alvie and Father O'Hara arrive, and along with Bootsie, discover Savannah is missing. Father O'Hara urges Alvie and Bootsie to leave while a clean getaway is still possible, but they refuse and begin a search for Savannah instead. Dobbs and his team arrive at the site and surround the area. They easily capture Bootsie, then wait for Alvie who is still searching for Savannah. The Driscolls, too, arrive. Alvie finds Savannah, but then sees the officers have him surrounded. Before turning himself in, he wants to say good-bye to Savannah. He explains to her that their time together is over, and although they had fun, they need to go back home. Joan, against Richard's wishes, rushes to meet with Alvie and Savannah as they approach. Father O'Hara shows his support and escorts Alvie into the custody of the officers. Disgusted with the turn of events, Joan decides to take Savannah back home on her own and leave Richard. Alvie and Bootsie are arrested, but are happy Savannah is back home, safe. They feel fortunate to have spent time with a little girl who changed their lives for the better. | storytelling, flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0419373 | Supernova | Supernova chronicles the search-and-rescue patrol of a medical ship in deep space in the early 22nd century and its six-member crew, which includes captain and pilot A.J. Marley (Robert Forster), co-pilot Nick Vanzant (James Spader), medical officer Kaela Evers (Angela Bassett), medical technician Yerzy Penalosa (Lou Diamond Phillips), search and rescue paramedic Danika Lund (Robin Tunney) and computer technician Benjamin Sotomejor (Wilson Cruz). Aboard their vessel, the Nightingale 229, they receive an emergency distress signal coming from an ice mining operation on the moon Titan 37, more than 3,000 light-years away.
The crew answers the call and dimension-jumps — during which Captain Marley suffers fatal injuries due to a malfunction of the ship's equipment — arriving in the path of Titan 37's debris cloud, some of which damages the ship and causes the loss of 82 percent of its maneuvering fuel. Worse still, Titan 37 orbits a blue giant, and its high gravity field will pull the ship to the point where it will be incinerated in 17 hours, 12 minutes — which happens to be almost the same amount of time that the Nightingale 229 will need to recharge its jump drive, their only possible hope for escape. With only an 11-minute window for escape, the surviving crew soon find themselves in danger from the disturbing young man (Peter Facinelli) they rescue, and the mysterious alien artifact he has smuggled aboard. This artifact is analyzed by the ship's computer and is said to contain nine-dimensional matter.
It is ultimately discovered that the young man who called for rescue is actually Karl Larson, an old former lover of Kaela (it is implied they had an abusive relationship). Karl came into contact with the nine-dimensional matter after recovering the artifact. It somehow enabled him to acquire super-strength and supernatural healing abilities, and made him younger (such that Kaela did not recognize him). Karl murders most of the crew except Kaela and strands Nick on the mining platform. Karl unsuccessfully attempts to romantically reconcile with Kaela. Nick finds his way back to the medical ship through a rescue pod left on the mining platform, and a battle ensues between Nick and Karl. Karl is ultimately killed by Kaela using explosives placed near the alien artifact which Karl was obsessed with retrieving. The explosion ejects the artifact into space, hurtling it towards the blue giant.
With moments left before the dimension jump activates, Kaela and Nick place themselves into the only remaining dimensional stabilization chamber (Karl had destroyed all but one), which is the only thing that enables human beings to survive the ship's dimensional jump drive. The pods are meant to hold only one person; however, two subjects might be genetically mixed during the dimensional jump. Before Nick and Kaela enter the only remaining pod, the computer warns them that the nine-dimensional matter is reacting with the gravity of the blue giant sun and will cause a nine-dimensional reaction that will spread in all directions, such that the reaction's resulting supernova will reach Earth within 51 years. The computer hypothesizes that the reaction will either destroy life on Earth or "enable humankind to achieve a new level of existence". Just before the blue giant supernovas, the ship engages in a dimensional jump which brings Nick and Kaela back to Earth. As a result of their being in the same pod, the two of them each have one eye of the other person's original eye color. The ship's computer also reveals that Kaela is pregnant, which may be the result of them being in the pod together during the jump, or the result of their copulation hours earlier. | flashback | train | wikipedia | It's the middle of the day in Sydney at the same time as the Sahara, India and what I presume to be Central America, when they're all meant to be in Australia they keep changing the side of the road that they're driving on, the number plates are not Australian (the cars either), half the street signs don't even exist here, waitresses in cafés don't wear uniforms (except at Starbucks), the only Australian accents are terrible, the desert scenes are definitely more like 14 than 4 hours drive from Sydney - everything about Australia in particular is just wrong!
It wasn't until Luke Perry says "St Louis is half way around the other side of the world" that I really became convinced that they were meant to be in Australia.
Well, firstly, there is no need for me to give a summary of this mini-series when people can just easily refer to the standard disaster film formula: smart guy with all the answers, pretty but tough woman, cute kid, corrupt government agent/politician/business man who is only interested in some greedy proposition and some CGI effects.
Although the story is supposedly set in Australia, the director and the actors don't seem to know this and are confused whether the location should be America, Australia, the UK or South Africa (the shift in scenery and accents just gets irritating after the first half-hour).
While one can't blame the CGI effects for being far from great given the lower budget of the series, this could have been avoided if it hadn't bothered to show off.What could have save 'Supernova' was if the plot was solid and the characters were interesting but it didn't even have that.
The characters were so flat and uninspiring that they just left the audience praying that sun would just swallow these people up, and the plot was tedious and too drawn-out.If you want a disaster film, stick with 'The Day After Tomorrow' or 'Independence Day'.
This must surely be one of the worst movies ever made - an abysmal script, ridiculous sets and effects, woeful actors, outrageously poor accents, unbelievable story, ridiculous conclusion, etc, etc It's like a Godzilla movie, but without the finely-tuned character development and deeply thought-out plot - hell, it makes Godzilla look like Shakespeare.Set in Sydney - oh really??
About location : Cape Town, South Africa, is perfectly recognizable in most exterior scenes (Table Mountain with Signal Hill on its right when looking from the sea; the business center of the city; even in some street scenes you can see typical buildings with Old Cape Dutch style; the license plates are definitely capetonians; on a house wall there is a plate claiming that the house is protected by Chubb Security Company; in one scene you can see a train, which is a Metro one, used in CPT,...etc.).A "movie" to forget.
Since the premise of the film derives from astro-physics, the finale - a typically empty 'happy ending', having absolutely no grounding in any science whatsoever - makes no sense whatsoever.Although the film actually avoids religion, let's put the matter in religious terms for clarification: Imagine Judgment Day; and God is really pee-ed off and decides no one is worth saving.
This movie would've gone a lot better if Aussie A-List actors put on their flawless Yankee accents (mind you I'm sure they had better projects to work on.) Luke perry...
The series stupidly segue-ways from an exploding sun to a convicted rapist going after the Loving Wife and the Adorable Daughter.The Adorable Daughter is played by Eliza Bennett, who sadly had to take a stop in this miniseries before she stars in the highly anticipated 2008 fantasy film 'Inkheart,' also starring Brendan Fraser and Paul Bettany.
Leaving the incredibly bad science out of it (and believe me, as a former astronomer I gotta say the science was so bad!), the people who made this movie did obviously NO research on what Australia is supposed to look like.Not only did just about everyone have an American accent (and most of those who affected an Aussie accent need to fire their dialect coach), but just about every detail was way, way off.
Too bad they couldn't have scheduled another film for this time."Supernova" would a made a pretty good two hour disaster movie.
While not particularly surprising, given the limited effects budget for TV fare, the bad "space effects' contrast jarringly with the pretty good "earth effects" on display.Peter Fonda plays, flatly, a world famous astronomer who predicts the sun will go supernova (enlarge, then explode) within a month (or, was it a week).
The women come off much better in the acting department, most notable are Tia Carrere (as a government agent), Emma Samms (as a crusading TV news commentator), Clemency Burton-Hill (as a scientist) and an unnamed actress who plays Fonda's bartender-squeeze.Jettison an hour and "Supernova" would be good enough for a "7".
To the writers and producers I say "If you want to make a movie like this, do your homework."(By the way, I have used Australian spelling which is different from American spelling, so please don't get worked up over that.).
A quick summary of errors - the accents, of course (Yanks never get them right - though the producers get half a point each for one New Zealand accent and one semi-Afrikaaner); Sydney populated by Yanks and Brits, and the odd black West Indian; Aussie vegetation the same as that in Colorado; what looks suspiciously like Table Mountain - which overlooks Capetown in South Africa - "to the west of Sydney"; a serial rapist and murderer, imprisoned in a US-style prison in Pretoria (that's actually in South Africa, guys!), condemned to death by lethal injection - we don't have the death penalty here in Oz - escaping overland to Sydney for revenge; Sydney cops driving 1.5 litre toy cars...
When the outside world is actually the empty lot of a studio in Hollywood or LA, with a few home movies cut in for "authenticity," it's no wonder that most Americans know nothing about the rest of the planet, care less, and regard other countries as their private playground.
Almost as funny as Robot Monster, or any of the magnificent Ed Wood Classics, but without the deep scientific grasp of those earlier films.Read a dozen or so reviews -- the reviewers put a lot more into their posts than anyone connected with this incredible turkey -- I didn't see any review mention that our sun can't supernova, it isn't the right kind of star.
It can nova, and its furthest expansion will reach the orbit of the inner planets, probably out to earth, but will not fill the whole solar system, as stated by one of the characters.Great observation by one of the reviewers on how, after surviving in those Phoenix locations, the lucky few come to the surface and get to work on constructing a new sun.
No one in the whole project who knew any science at all, with tens of millions of dollars to burn -- pun definitely intended.During the opening scenes I thought the story would involve the supernova of some distant giant star finally reaching our solar system seven million later.
Which would have been convenient, as their countryside is quite similar in parts and also that they drive on the correct side of the road.Not even the license plates had been changed.What was great was that Mythbusters was on Discovery at around the same time.Shows like this and another recent wreck (Poseidon Adventure), really bring into question the integrity of some of the players: Peter Fonda, Tia Carrere, Lance Hendriksen.
I thought it was terribly made it jumped about to much to many sub plots and when they were in Sydney the were showing American buildings and American number plates what idiots there is no point in watching it as they hadn't written a good script the idea was good but they needed to get a better script writer.
But the inmates could then apparently surface and drive across country, first to what we thought was Sydney, Australia, then across desert to a country house in what looked suspiciously - and obviously - like South Africa.
For example, I really liked it when Luke Perry discovered he'd put a plus sign into the equation instead if a minus sign so the world as we know it really wasn't going to end.
Well you can take a sci-fi scenario of the possible sun going supernova and then add the crime thriller of the possible murderer who seeks revenge and you get the television mini-event "Supernova." This overly long, sometimes boring, and many times unconvincing drama has so many clichés, impossible illogical plot decisions that it's pretty hard to watch.
Peter Fonda, Tia Carrera, Emma Samms and Luke Perry team up to save the world from our exploding sun!
As Luke Perry (as Chris Richardson) explains, it's "the end of the world as we know it," in an original two part Hallmark Channel TV movie.This film simply fails to take advantage of what it has to offer.
What gave these old films their charm was that they didn't know any better at the time, and to their credit, the writers/directors/whatever were trying to push the boundaries and encourage budding new thought.As always, making an obviously idiotic film like this is just retarded and lazy..
I won't go into detail about the absolutely INEPT representation of Australia in this dismal piece of tripe, but I will address the basic premise of the film.The Sun is simply not massive enough to go nova, let alone supernova.
This movie follows in the slouching, palsied footsteps of a dismal movie called "The Void" which purported to be science-fiction.And as with "The Void," the science is mostly wrong and the fiction so poorly-written that you want to hurl your remote at the TV screen in disgust.One innovation that seems to be aimed at creating a huge audience and will probably please no one is the unique method of production in which parts of the film are shot in Australia and parts in other places (some location shots were either done or simulated to have been done in North America - scenes featuring the destruction of the Gateway Arch in Saint Louis, Missouri, USA and plot references to that and other American cities).
From other posters' comments, there was at least one other version of this movie than the one I am watching in the Hallmark satellite TV channel right now.Well, the Aussies and Americans will both spot major false notes in this turkey - the cars and trucks are all right-hand drive and run on the left-hand side of the road, while the vehicle sirens are all those "oo-gah, oo-gah" klaxons that the British and Australians like to use.
You got your suspense-thriller in my disaster film!" The other responds "No, you got your disaster film in my suspense-thriller!" About that time, a producer emerges from his office and overhears the exchange--and thus, Supernova was born.This movie has a lot of "I used to be famous!" stars, including Luke Perry, Emma Samms, Lance Henriksen, and other names who were popular sometime back in the 1980s.
The serial killer plot thread finally develops (in one of the most absurd scenes of the movie it's almost funny), Luke Perry finds himself in a bit of a Twilight Zone situation, and we finally get to see some big explosions as a major city is destroyed.
"Hey, maybe we can chuck a nuclear bomb into an asteroid," is much more compelling than "Hey, maybe we got the calculations wrong."Simply avoid this movie, unless you happen to come across it and you have nothing better to do, like watching "Lake Placid 2"..
But thats what happens when you get some Beverly Hills 90210 burnout to conduct some Astro Physics research and hire an arab, a Jamaican and a bimbo as his incompetent colleagues.Perry's mentor who first read his findings and discovered the impending doom of the world did what anyone else would do in the same situation, namely not tell a soul and instead go hang around a beach in South Africa with a blonde local waitressIn breakthrough technology scientists can now watch giant fireballs hurtling towards earth at great speeds by using extremely intelligent satellites which can stand in the path of the fireball whilst filming and then flip round the back of it afterwards to get the perfect shot while it smashes into earth.
Also we got a look into the mind of a rioter when the mob was faced with an angry police force instead of banding together they decided to attack their fellow rioters.Still showing hes 'Got it' Matthew Perry found the time (in between pondering the fate of the world and saving his family from a killer) to spade 3 girls and also discuss at length why a 16 year old girl was at a party, proving that even when your wife and child are days away from dying not even the Apocalypse can stop a man like Luke Perry making a run at some Asian poon.A sinister scheme was uncovered by the government to firstly hide the fact that sun was going to blowup, hoping that nobody would notice the fireballs, extreme heat,millions of people dying around them, the disappearance of the sun and the fact that the sea has become the worlds largest deep fryer, hoping that people would write it off as some sort of freaky eclipse or just blame it on that pesky el nino.
All designed for an ambitious attempt to sort out the ensuing over heating problem with a little dry ice and then bring them out of hiding after it 'all blows over' and begin construction of the new sun.In an ambitious move Wayne's Asian Girlfriend from Wayne's World decided to drive from Sydney to St Louis with only her good looks and ill conceived idea to aid her.
Luke Perry is his colleague whose wife and daughter are being pursued by an escaped serial killer as he gallivants about the countryside with Tia Carrere who is a turncoat federal agent while the earth is being destroyed by fireballs emanating from the sun.
Okay, Luke ultimately saves the world by discovering that Peter's original formula was missing a minus sign and, with that news, the sun immediately stops hurling fireballs and decides to behave like a good little sun, the worldwide rioting and looting stops, entire cities which were destroyed are now deemed "just a scratch", Luke's wife shoots and kills the serial-killer bad guy, and the rain comes to put out all the fires.
It cannot be compared to other end of the world saga's and after the opening scenes should definitely not be torn apart to look for logic, when it is clear to all who watch this movie that logic and research have not been added into the making of this movie at all.We have a thriving industry of actors, producers, directors and playwrights in South Africa and unfortunately due to lack of publicity and the fact that it is more cost effective to film in South Africa, these hardworking people are often reduced to acting in movies, that they can hardly bear to watch themselves.Everyone has to start somewhere and better known actors such as Peter Fonda should have their acting ability and judgment questioned more than the 'glorified extra's' who are simply taking whatever they can get.
The producers could have chosen a million other destinations that would have made more sense.I nearly switched off, but I was hoping the producers had a surprise up their sleeve at the end - like the Earth really ending, but then the scientists discovered a flaw in their equations (which they had to repeat several times in case we missed it) and the Earth was saved - but not the movie.
Luke Perry Cannot Act His Way Out Of A Paper Bag. Wow, I feel cheated out of the time I wasted watching this utter garbage.
I was never entirely sure where things were supposed to be set, or who people were - the caption would say we were in Australia and ten minutes later you'd realise you were watching things happening in South Africa with no real awareness that the transition had been made.
Never mind our sun is projected to die out as a red giant instead of exploding, but let's just go with it.So, we've got government agents wandering around, trying to scoop up those people who will have been determined to possess the "necessary" skill sets if there are any survivors left (a la' a Noah's Ark kind of thing) who can rebuild the civilization.
But it doesn't stop there...add to that a subplot that includes an escaped serial killer and man...then the horrible acting, horrible accents, horrible effects...This is quite possibly the worst movie ever made.It seems that an "Astrophysicist" discovers that the Sun is much older than previously thought.
In honesty I missed the point of the sub-plot convicted killer, it didn't add anything to the movie.At the end they say "To Be Continued", apparently only the first half was on this particular DVD set, that's fine with me, if the second half is anything like the first, I'd rather not waste my time, I've got access to YouTube and can get more convincing and entertaining movies on it.
And even the special effects look like they were done using a freeware software package!Watch 30 minutes or so just to see how bad it is, but for the sake of your sanity, please do not watch the whole movie....
Until I read these other comments I hadn't realised the plot was supposed to be set in Australia, OK I got the comments by the wife of the scientist about "how I hate it here" but thought that she meant the Deep South of the USA (because it frankly looked like that). |
tt3442990 | Lila & Eve | Lila, a single mother living in Atlanta, struggles after the murder of her son Stephon in a drive-by shooting. Faced with indifference from the police force and barely able to take care of herself and her younger son Justin, Lila joins a support group for mothers of murdered children. There, she meets Eve, whose daughter died. Eve sits off to the side without participating. Eve seems less interested in moving on with her life than in seeking revenge.
Lila chooses Eve to be her sponsor, and one night, while engaging in therapeutic home redecorating, they find a gun in Justin's book bag. This discovery horrifies Lila but inspires Eve to suggest they investigate Stephon's murder themselves. The two women find someone with the information they seek. When he pulls a gun on them, Eve shoots him dead, and they flee.
When it seems as if they have gotten away with the shooting, the two women move up the underworld chain of command to discover who ordered the drive-by. With the death of the drug dealer, Alonzo Troys, who actually pulled the trigger, they come to the attention of Ojeda, the hired gun of the kingpin of the criminal organization. As the bodies begin piling up, Lila becomes increasingly unsure of the morality of their actions, while Eve becomes bolder and more daring. Finally, a rift develops between the two women and Eve suddenly disappears.
Around this time, their actions pique the interest of Detective Holliston, the cop assigned to Lila's case. It appears to be only a matter of time before he puts two and two together and figures out who is behind the killings. Lila and Justin are on the way to school one morning when, while sitting at a stop sign, a van containing armed men drives up beside them. Before the men can shoot, Lila pulls out into traffic and is involved in a car accident. This saves their lives when witnesses aid, stopping the gunmen from finishing them off.
After Lila gets out of the hospital, she and Eve make up. They rig Lila's house with explosives and set up a trap to lure local criminal kingpin, Miguel Alejandro, and his henchmen to come after her by shooting at his home. After he threatens to kill her, and she drops off Eve, Lila visits Ben, her neighbour. When he questions her about Eve, she shows him pictures from her phone, only to be confused when Eve appears in none of them. During the course of the night, Lila realizes that Eve is a figment of her imagination. Lila has done everything herself and is responsible for all the drug dealers' murders. In a late night conversation in the street, "Eve" talks her into finishing the job so she can move on and keep Justin safe.
Ojeda poses as a cable installer and breaks into Lila's house. Finding it empty, he invites Alejandro to wait for her arrival at the house. Lila watches them via a laptop's webcam at Ben's house. When Alejandro and another henchman arrive, Lila asks Ben to take care of Justin while she takes care of things at home. Lila walks across the street with Eve and lights a fuse at Eve's urging. When Eve tells her that she cannot stop it, Lila throws herself into the blast. Lila is blown onto the front yard, and the house burns as Ben arrives to take care of her.
Detective Holliston fails to convince his partner, Detective Skaketti, that Lila is responsible. Undeterred, Holliston approaches Lila at a support meeting once she is released from the hospital. When Holliston threatens to take in Ben and Justin if she does not cooperate, the other mothers, who have collected donations to assist Lila, stop her from confessing and volunteer alibis. Holliston recognizes that grieving mothers are a strong alibi and leaves.
Ben says goodbye to Justin and Lila as they leave Atlanta for a new life elsewhere. As she is driving down the road, Justin asks his mother if she is okay, and she replies that she will be. | revenge, murder, violence | train | wikipedia | And Lopez, considering the substance of her character that you come to realize later during the film, I think plays adequately, though people don't find her convincing.
Viola Davis, as usual, gives a wonderful performance in this film along side Jennifer Lopez.
Although Jennifer Lopez's performance isn't as high caliber as Viola Davis' they both made a great pair in this film.
Not anything different or original, this film is about two women who seek out and take revenge on the men who murdered their sons, it's that simple, or is it.
Funny how these grieving mothers believe taking somebody else's life is going to take away the pain they feel for their own children.
It will probably receive many awful reviews, since many seem to believe Ms Lopez does some terrible acting and that Viola Davis is far too superior than her.
Viola Davis delivers a strong performance in this roller coaster story of a single parent raising two sons, when one is inexplicably shot dead.
Viola shows remarkable range in this convincing portrait of a woman scorned and a mother who lost a good son to random violence.
This movie makes you feel alive even tho a lot bad things happen.
Lila and Eve is about the story of two grieving mothers who want more than just comfort over the death of their children, but revenge.
Viola Davis also gives an incredible and accurate portrayal of a grieving mother conflicted over the sudden murder of her son.
"Maybe we could help each other." Lila (Davis) is a loving mother who has just lost her son in a drive by shooting.
She joins a grieving mothers support group and meets Eve (Lopez) who has also lost a child.
Solid Revenge Chick-Flick Starring the ever Intense Viola Davis and Jennifer Lopez giving another Workmanlike Performance, an Underrated Actress Lopez usually brings Spunk and believability for aggressive Females Everywhere.The Movie is a bit Different, in the Thelma and Louise (1991) tradition of Two Women Driven beyond sanity and into a World that is distinctively Not Their Own. After Her Son is Innocently Gun Downed in a Drive-By, Viola Davis' Grief Cannot Comfort Her loss and She Snaps into Action with the Help of Her "Sponsor" Lopez.What happens is Cathartic and Violent and ends With a Twist or Two. Engaging, Entertaining, and Well Done.
This is an Unknown, Little-Seen Indie that is Worth a Watch for the Topical Story and better than Average presentation of a Mother's Pain and Revenge..
I thought that Viola and Jennifer did a good job.One thing that the movie didn't do so well is the relationship between characters.
This Lifetime movie is watchable if imperfect.There are some things going for this mother's revenge thriller.
If you remember the Charles Bronson movies they all had this amusing ludicrous moments.Viola Davis is a most effective actress and you feel her emotions of grief and depression.
It is not exactly the quality I'd expect from a Hollywood thriller; it has the feel of a made-for-TV flick.The twist was the highlight of the movie.
Make no mistake the film belongs to Viola Davis and Lopez is simply there to give a film a bit of a kick, which you will understand once you've seen the film.
She comes across as a soap opera star and completely takes the audience away from the seriousness of any scene she's in.Lopez aside however, it's not a bad film.
It's the era of angry cinematic women, and this time we get Viola Davis and Jennifer Lopez as mothers who go on a rampage of violence to gain vengeance for the murders of their sons.
In 1991 Thelma & Louise tried to teach abusive and pig-headed men a lesson, and now Lila & Eve face off against neighborhood gangbangers.Director Charles Stone III is best known for Drumline (2002) and Mr 3000 (2004) and this high-stress thriller seems a departure for him, though he compensates with a talented cast.
In addition to Ms. Davis and Ms. Lopez, we get detectives played by Shea Whigham and Andre Royo, and Michole Briana White as the leader of the support group.Stories of vigilantism always skirt the line between gritty and far-fetched, and unfortunately this one leans a bit too far the wrong way.
The side story focusing on the support group was actually the most interesting, as it provides a glimpse of the grieving process and psychological effects experienced by mothers of murdered sons.
Even this part flies off the rails towards the end of the movie – though it was with the best intentions.Jennifer Lopez at least seems to take some delight in her character
a role much less restrictive than that of Viola Davis, who is forced to play it straight and angry (and she is very adept at this).
Foreseeable thriller, yet there's a hefty amount of personal conviction invested on Lila & Eve. The morality of revenge has been used as theme in many occasions, Kevin Bacon and Jodie Foster have made similar works before.
It's a story about two mothers seeking justice, yet ultimately absorbed by the vengeance in an attempt to cope with the overwhelming sadness.Viola Davis as Lila is easily the best asset of the movie.
Since the movie almost entirely revolves around her trial, it's a boon to have a reliable lead.Jennifer Lopez has a mixed record in acting.
With Viola Davis, the chemistry is definitely present, she appears to be an integral part of Lila's story than just a guest star.The movie is not without flaws though.
Not too surprising that Viola Davis gives a strong performance as a mother who has a very interesting nervous breakdown after her son's murder from a drive-by, and good for Jennifer Lopez who I can't remember the last time was in something really worth seeing.
Her role as another grieving mother out for vengeance rather than justice was a turn in a different direction.
This film tells the story of a grieving woman who lost her son because of a shooting on the street.
She attends a mothers' support group, where she finds support from another woman who lost her daughter."Lila & Eve" is quite a good thriller!
Viola Davis is very good as a grieving mother.
Jennifer Lopez may not be headlining any big Hollywood movies anymore, but she can still pull off major roles like this one (even if it was initially offered to another actress who had to turn it down due to another commitment she had herself).While this is convincing, even in its way to turn things around, it does have this "break point", where people may get annoyed or disappointed where this turns to (quite literally too).
A cop that knows the truth but let's the perpetrator walk cause out of sentiments?Bad guys that wait long enough so the girls can take out guns out their purses and shoot them?What a lame movie!When I see the positive reactions I guess that we are dealing with a lot of people that are satisfied with thin plot lines and are just happy with the ending of this movie when justice is served.I wonder if there isn't anyone on the million dollar movie set to correct those lame mistakes that are made in this movie.Lopez can't act for a dime....it is time she gave this up..
This is bad in the conventional sense, a lifetime movie about grieving mothers who go on a killing spree to avenge wrongs in the order of things.
But bad films can be sometimes as revealing in the examination of the mechanisms that give rise to narration, and by extension self and life.A mother's son is killed in a drive-by as the film begins, later in her therapy group where mothers come to cope with loss, among different voices in that room offering comfort, urging acceptance, she zeroes in on one that demands justice.
Viola Davis is still brilliant however and Lopez was better than she was in 'Gigli' but not as good as she was in 'Out of Sight'.
Often overlooked Viola Davis and too often noticed Jennifer Lopez twist up this terrific tale to tease your senses...
Regardless Viola Davis is a tremendous actress who always gives a great performance and Jenny from the block still got it too!.
Lila on the other hand, Viola Davis, gave a touching and beautiful performance, considering the script was ordinary.
I wonder if we didn't have Eve in this story if it might have been a better film with Davis carrying it all on her shoulders.
STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday Morning Lila (Viola Davis) loses her son in a drive by shooting, and her life is turned upside down.
But as events roll on, Lila comes to suspect Eve may not be who she says she is.Despite still being what you could call a household name, and even a brand in her own right with the JLo label, it does feel a little like Jennifer Lopez's name on a film won't make it quite the draw that it used to, with this struggling even to find its way onto DVD over here.
And the wisdom to know the difference."Lila (Viola Davis) and Eve (Jennifer Lopez) are two grief-drawn women after their children have been killed.
She's the driving force behind Lisa's revenge.Maybe I wasn't paying attention enough or I was tired while watching "Lila & Eve", because I really didn't see that plot twist coming at the end.
No doubt Viola Davis continues to impress with her amazing talent as a grieving mother willing to do anything to exact justice for her son's unnecessary death.
While many were dissatisfied with the possible holes
I found the film to be refreshingly original, well written, great story line, plot and acting.
There are many twists that elevate this above the usual vigilante film: Do mothers have a right to avenge a child's death when the system of justice breaks down ; Are support groups, religion, family, sufficient to comfort those grieving over slain family members ; When bad folks are killed are their mothers any less deserving of sympathy?
Reviewed by: Dare Devil Kid (DDK)Rating: 3.5/5 starsViola Davis is a formidable presence in "Lila & Eve", playing the grieving mother of a teenage son killed in a drive-by shooting by a drug gang.
Lila's (Davis) grief is a pain that no parent should ever experience, and Davis plumbs the depths of that anguish in a stern, electrifying performance that transforms the film into something far beyond a mundane revenge thriller.
While on the surface "Lila & Eve" resembles a grief-stricken mom picking up a gun and wreaking vengeance on the men responsible for her son's death, the movie has much more in mind than purveying violent thrills.
"Lila & Eve" feels like Viola Davis' "Still Alice".
In a just world, this deeply compassionate and politically relevant revenge fantasy would do for Davis what last year's Alzheimer's odyssey did for Julianne Moore: deliver a long overdue Oscar to one of the finest actresses of our generation.Lila's grief is fueled not only by the fact her 18-year-old son, Stephon (Aml Ameen), has been shot down in the street, but also by the apathy displayed by the cops assigned the case.
(This is in part due to how news institutions debate the guilt of each young black man after his death — a distraction from the individual and collective trauma such losses engender.) Though the fatal drive-by shooting that incites "Lila and Eve's" plan for vengeance has nothing to do with the police, it's the cops' eager willingness to dismiss 18-year-old Stephon's (Aml Ameen) death as just another unsolvable casualty in the drug-turf wars — and by extension his mother's desperate need for justice — that sets the fast-moving plot into motion.
Almost a month after her older son's killing, Lila is unable to embrace the agenda of acceptance, forgiveness and baked goods of her grieving mothers' support group.
The movie is at its most emotionally wrenching in scenes filmed in a support group for moms who have lost children to gang violence.
It's there that Lila meets Eve and is urged by her new friend to avenge her son.The movie's familiar thriller aspects are nowhere near as compelling as the two women's angry rejection of the unbearable powerlessness they've been told isn't just their lot to bear, but the right way to respond to their grief.
Lopez's character is the more challenging one in some senses, for the film's tonal consistency largely depends on Eve's temptress role.
The supporting actress occasionally seems more like an id-fueled sprite than a real person, but a late twist satisfactorily reveals why Eve is so sociopathically unbothered by the murders they commit.Though more conflicted about their killing spree, Lila too has her moral compass broken by anguish that affects her far more than she had realized was possible.
The movie unexpectedly shades into the surreal as the two women unleash their wrath on a variety of gangsters, but through it all Davis' portrayal of a mother's pain, moving from hopelessness and despair to revenge and regret, gives the picture its impressive power.
Good movie with a twist.
OK, I do have a possible spoiler, but only if you know the other film and make the connection.Firstly, Jennifer Lopez has always been a decent actor, but she obviously has been getting better.
She plays a very good supporting role here, not Oscar worthy, but very good.Viola Davis masterfully plays her role showing the full range of her talents, and the script for the most part works.I won't say what the twist is, but it's sort of a pseudo Fight Club scenario, and that's all I'll say.Absolutely worth a look!.
Luckily the expectation came right before the twist, so it wasn't as if I was meandering through this movie knowing what was going to happen.
In this movie, there didn't need to be a "happy ending." The story would've flowed better and left a better lasting impression had the detective actually done his job and arrested Lila for the murders and crimes she committed.
The message would've shifted from "a mother scorned" to "our actions have consequences, no matter how noble we think our actions are." This is why I give it an 7 out of 10, and this is the reason I can really only watch this movie once in my lifetime.
Viola Davis did a very beautiful job in portraying her emotions, and I really never saw the "twist" coming.
Jennifer Lopez gets a lot of criticism from some quarters but she in fact is a fine actress and is good as Eve. Viola Davis is Lila and as always gives a great performance.SPOILERS follow: In a theme borrowed from 'Fight Club', Eve is in fact not real, only the alter ego of Lila.
This is a story about a mother who has her son gunned down in a drive by shooting.
The story does a good job to show the emotional pain and problems a mother going through this would encounter.
Viola Davis does a good job in her acting of a grieving mother.
When the revenge part of the story comes it seems a little forced.I am finding it hard to believe anyone is saying that Jennifer Lopez can act, she is downright horrible.
A wonderful film about a mother - Lila (Viola Davis) - who suffers the murder of her oldest son via a drive by shooting.
Eve's story is the story of every grieving mother in the support group.
Eve is the iron willed & stoic persona Lila must become to do what must be done not only for herself but for every mother in the support group she joins.
For Lila the justice system is slow and inefficient so she and Eve go out into the streets to find who murdered her son and along the way she just happens to clean up!This story by Pat Gilfillan and film directed by Charles Stone is not without it's flaws.
His mother is Lila (Viola Davis) and the remainder of the movie basically follows her.
And we watch her growing relationship with Eve (Jennifer Lopez), whom she meets at the support group and who has recently lost her daughter to a murderer.
Basically this ends up being a fairly typical revenge/vigilante movie.
Lila wants justice for her son and since the police seem unable to get it she takes on the job of finding Stephonn's killer herself, egged on by Eve. Davis was decent in the role - portraying Lila as uncomfortable with the killing spree she eventually goes on as she follows the trail to her son's killer and yet unable to stop, so great is her grief and her desire for revenge.
Am still trying to figure out the Jennifer Lopez role in the film.
She befriends Lila, Viola Davis whose son was gunned down while walking down the street and being at the wrong place at the wrong time.It doesn't take much to turn Lila into a virtual killing machine.The film also shows how overwhelmed the police department is when they attempt to solve homicides..
Lila and Eve reads well and has two decent leads and looked like an indie film so I was intrigued.
I guess I expected something along the lines of Death Wish or The Brave One and it has some of those elements but a very poor screenplay ultimately with some very clumsy directing that leaves you completely unsatisfied with the idea.Viola Davis is a great actress.
Jennifer Lopez is a good actress too I think.
I think the idea is great but it misses the mark and ends up being mildly watchable probably due to the talent of Davis and yes even Lopez. |
tt0013257 | Häxan | === Part 1 ===
A scholarly dissertation on the appearances of demons and witches in primitive and medieval culture, a number of photographs of statuary, paintings, and woodcuts are used as demonstrative pieces. In addition, several large scale models are employed to demonstrate medieval concepts of the structure of the solar system and the commonly accepted depiction of Hell.
=== Part 2 ===
A series of vignettes theatrically demonstrating medieval superstition and beliefs concerning witchcraft, including Satan (played by Christensen himself) tempting a sleeping woman away from her husband's bed and terrorizing a group of monks. Also shown is a woman purchasing a love potion from a supposed witch, and a sequence showing a supposed witch dreaming of flying through the air and attending a witches' gathering.
=== Part 3 ===
A long narrative broken up into several parts; set in the Middle Ages, it concerns an old woman accused of witchcraft by a dying man's family. The narrative is used to demonstrate the treatment of suspected witches by the religious authorities of the time. The old woman, after being tortured, admits to heavy involvement in witchcraft, including detailed descriptions of a Witches' Sabbath, even going so far as to "name" other supposed witches, including two of the women in the dying man's household. Eventually, the dying man's wife is arrested as a witch when one of the clergymen accuses her of bewitching him.
=== Part 4 ===
The final part of the film seeks to demonstrate how the superstitions of old are better understood now. Christensen seeks to make the claim that most who were accused of witchcraft were possibly mentally ill, and in modern times, such behavior is interpreted as a disease. His case revolves around vignettes about a somnambulist and a kleptomaniac, the implication being that these behaviors would have been thought of as demonically-influenced in medieval times whereas modern societies recognize them as psychological ailments. There is heavy irony, however, in the observation that the "temperate shower of the clinic" i.e. the treatment of "hysterical women" in a modern institution, has replaced medieval solutions such as burning at the stake. | cult | train | wikipedia | Haxan delivers in spades.This 1922 Danish silent film about black magic, witches, satanism, and the persecution of said subjects during the middle-ages, which attempts to make a connection between the ancient phenomena and the modern study of hysteria (modern in 1922), has been wonderfully presented by The Criterion Collection in their new dvd.
Narrated by Danish silent film scholar Caspar Tybjerg, the commentary centers on the director Benjamin Christensen's life in film, the Danish silent film industry, origin of the documentary film genre, technical aspects of Haxan, the cast of Haxan, historical aspects of the study of hysteria in psychology circles, the origins of the devil as a character in media, and of course, the phenomena of witchcraft and witch hunting.
This was a very engaging look at Christensen, his film, and the sociological atmosphere both during the middle-ages, and during the time of Haxan's production.As for the 1967 version narrated by William S.
Criterion has done a great job of preserving the film as it was intended to be seen with censored footage restored, an excellent tinted print, a corrected "projection" speed, a new score that recreates the music played at the original Danish premiere, and some interesting extras.
Fans of "The Blair Witch Project" should take notice, especially considering that the Danish title of this film is "Haxan", also the name of the movie company that created "Blair Witch".Director Benjamin Christensen appears as a leering, tongue-wagging Satan, with very realistic makeup.
The witches are shown with the Devil and his minions performing various acts of sacrilege and perversion that must have been extremely shocking at the time the movie originally appeared, and would be offensive to many people still.
The writer and director Benjamin Christensen discloses a historical view of the witches through the seven parts of this silent movie.
Finally Benjamin Christensen compares the behavior of hysteria of the modern women of 1921 with the behavior of the witches in the Middle Ages, concluding that they are very similar."Häxan" is incredibly perfect for a for a 1922 movie.
I have to say I admire the courage Benjamin Christensen showed in making this film which not only must have offended the sensibilities of the time for the obvious reasons but also because it dared to champion reason over superstition as a way of explaining things which we do not fully understand.
After many tribulations and false starts (including having my Order cancelled by the retailer due to lack of funds on my Credit Card and having the DVD stolen - by some stingy customs official, I presume when it was finally shipped!), I recently managed to sit down and watch in its entirety, The Criterion Collection's DVD of Benjamin Christensen's HAXAN.What an amazing film!
I do not know how Christensen was allowed to get away with it back then and indeed the film was heavily censored in its initial showings around the world but I guess it was evident that the director's aim was not to wallow gratuitously in sensationalism but to portray as realistic a tableau of witchcraft through the ages as was possible at the time.
Directed by Scandinavian filmmaker Benjamin Christensen, Haxan' / Witchcraft Through the Ages' (1922) is a head-trippy silent film depicting black magic, witchcraft, and demonology from the middle ages to the 20th century.
Not as intense or as shocking today as upon its initial release, the film is filled with nightmarish images that are certainly profane and explicit, but also humorous and downright silly.Yes, sex goes hand-in-hand with Satan, and Christensen's flamboyant portrayal of the aforementioned character, complete with flicking, wanton tongue, drives home the point (well, that and a peppering of nudity).
Most of our popular-images of witches, demons and horror-film monstrosity comes from this era, and Haxan is surely a great-contributor to this reservoir.Of-note, I think Ken Russell must have seen this film before making his magnum-opus, "The Devils" (1971).
And, while not all of the film is perfect and it's a bit uneven, the overall production is really quite amazing as you have a hard time believing that such special effects and makeup were possible almost a century ago.The film purports to be a history of witchcraft, though the vast majority of the film is a supposed recreation of a case from the Middle Ages.
The director himself and others (including critics like Ebert) have said that silent films work great for horror's nightmare landscape where excessive dialogue or explanations could get in the way of the unsettling mood.
The scene of the witches' broomstick flight is a well-done special effect for the time.Haxan is in a documentary format with dramatic recreations of the witch accusing and torturing to obtain confessions and includes stuff right out of the 'Malleus Maleficarum' (that infamously repulsive 1480's witch hunters' handbook of choice written by two Dominican monks who had previous papal sanction to hunt witches and whose writings in the 'MM' embraced highly sadistic methods).
There is some great iconic horror film imagery contained in Haxan where it seems to interpret those olde tyme artistic depictions of witches and their alleged Sabbaths.
It's ironic that ultra-religious types complain the most about horror films when some of their former religious leaders long ago helped to dream up some of the visions later contained in horror films.Haxan reminds us that alleged 'witches' were people like: folk medicine practitioners, old impoverished women with physical deformations, or simply women that someone else had a disagreement with and figured would be easy to dispatch of by accusing her of what was considered that worst of crimes.
We've come so far
*cough* The Criterion disc I watched also contained the 1968 version where the film was re-edited and given a (horribly out of place) jazz score and voice-over narration by William S.
It's clear the film wants to have it both ways.The film ultimately deconstructs the act of witchcraft from one of maleficence and devil worship to one of mental illness; cheer- leading for the current time's rational thinking winning out against superstition.
Then like a blunt hammer, the film knocks us into reality and asks "what did you learn?" Plus, considering the film was released in 1922, we're experiencing a "modern" rationality that included the concepts of hysteria and electroshock therapy so Haxan isn't exactly the bastion of progressive thinking it thinks it is.From a historical perspective, Haxan is an interesting little relic that provides some stunning visual tableaux that rivals Nosferatu (1922) in the horror genre.
This film was way ahead of it's time.This documentary is a really interested look at the history of witchcraft.
One other similarity is that in both films, witches use bundles of sticks to carry the body parts of victims.HAXAN was banned in many places because it shows the clergy in a bad light -- fat, easily yielding to temptations, corrupt, sanctimonious, projecting their own human corruption onto their victims.
A wry sense of humor -- if that is what it is -- would also make this film similar to THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT.In any event, it is an interesting look at early horror and has some very atmospheric scenes employing good FX -- all the more impressive because they were done in 1922, long before computer graphics..
Even as I don't think the 1st and 7th parts work really so well - the former is more like a Powerpoint-slide presentation (albeit some dark slides) and the latter doesn't really add much and is dated with terms like 'hysteria' - the more times I watch this, the more I get into how disturbing and honest the imagery is, or at least the intent behind it.You're left to make your own assumptions by the majority of what this director shows you, and the images of the many monks and so-called "religious" men (aka Men in Power) is like pre-Joan-of-Arc Dreyer imagery.
It's akin to how Scorsese shows gangsters and criminals or Jordan Belfort: you'd almost think this movie is borderline endorsing the burning of women at the stake for actually being witches, but such is the power of the anthropological state of things.Its impact lies in how much it sticks to its guns as far as showing what the world was like then from that of late 15th/early 16th century Middle Ages when the Inquisition was still going on (that part is left out, this is squarely about witches and while men are mentioned among the "8 million men/women/children" killed during this time, you know who is really the target of the Church at the time), and this includes the director showing us how someone like Maria the Weaver's descriptions of hell and Satan and people literally kissing his ass is conjured up in the minds of these men, and the torture devices that were used.The first time I watched this I almost thought the director sided *with* then men in a way, but I was mistaken; it's pretty clear to see how women were basically massacred in the name of, literally, witch-hunts.
Look how many witches you had and never even knew it!" The film jumps to the present and says that modern science has shown that many of the symptoms of witchcraft - such as lack of sensitivity to pain - have been found to be the result of hysteria and thus has a psychological component, not a demonic one.
It's a stark and unsettling film packed with the kind of horrific imagery that has since become clichéd in the cinema, and yet some scenes retain their brutal power and feel surprisingly fresh and terrifying.The documentary begins on a slow note with lots of description and not much in the way of life, but after a time the staged dramatisations begin and this is where HAXAN comes to life.
It's also surprisingly strong stuff, with explicit sequences of torture and black masses which are still tough to bear even today.Danish director Benjamin Christensen elicits strong performances from his cast members, particularly from Maren Pedersen who gives a haunting turn as the condemned witch, and the 1920s-era special effects are a lot of fun; strange how the flying broomstick scene looks better nowadays than the lamentable CGI of the Harry Potter franchise.
Burroughs, the original silent version is more pleasing to watch for me, mostly because of the classical music being more fitting to the film than the hipster's jazz as background music (which I'm sure was popular in the time of 1968).
As far as documentaries go, 'Häxan' might not be the most enlightening film out there, particularly with the way it blurs Satanism and witchcraft together, but between the intense witch trial section of the movie and several weird shots of witches engaged in rituals with Satan, the project has enough going its favour to rate as an undeniable curio.
It actually stands as a sort of 7-part documentary of sorts about witchcraft in the Middle Ages, leading up to some striking parallels that film-maker Benjamin Christensen manages to draw with conditions in his own day (the film being made in 1922.) It's a silent movie, of course, and quite lavish by the standards of 1922.
The film then offers a dramatization of several aspects of witchcraft - the supposed activities of witches that drew them to attention, the actions of the authorities (and, especially, church authorities) in putting them on trial with all of the excesses involved, including a truly unsettling look at various methods of torture that were used to force confessions out of these poor unfortunates.
Finally, Christensen brings us up to "present day" 1922, and makes some interesting connections between the things that caused many to be condemned for witchcraft in earlier centuries and the condition known at the time as "hysteria" - pointing out effectively that not only were the condemned witches innocent, many of them were probably mentally ill.
The film is a documentary about the history of witchcraft, told in a variety of different ways, from slide shows to dramatised events of real-life events, up to the early twentieth century.
This is something of an overlooked classic, mostly known only to film buffs and historians, but it is such a superb work of dark imagination that it surely deserves to be better known and seen more widely.The film doesn't start too well, with its first chapter devoted to a lecture which is both dry and dull, but subsequent chapters offers us scenes from the history of witchcraft that are filled with incredibly detailed and atmospheric detail.
It is amazing how so many of the modern documentaries available on Netflix strive to hold my attention yet something that's almost 100 years old still strikes a chord as to its relevance today.Haxan helps disperse the notion that silent films from the bygone era are but only an oddity when it comes to showcasing real life on the screen.
Part documentary, part surreal horror film, "Haxan" purports to show the history of witchcraft throughout the world, up to the then modern era.
Finally, the final part connects feudal stories of witches and demonic possession with modern conditions such as sleepwalking, kleptomania, or "hysteria." While the historical information presented in "Haxan" is fascinating, and sometimes horrifying, the movie is most valuable for its striking and surreal horror imagery.
Häxan: Witchcraft Through The AgesIf magic were still considered to be witchcraft than Las Vegas magic acts would be nothing more than glitzy illusionists burning at the stake.Unfortunately, this documentary doesn't depict David Copperfield on a spit.Commencing with a narrated exposition on humanities first held beliefs towards demonology, witchcraft and Hell, this chronicle then centers on the myths surrounding Satan and witches during medieval times.Next, a parable about an old crone accused of witchcraft serves as an example of the legalities/intimidation involved with a charge of sorcery.The allegory concludes with a contemporary take on the middle-age methods for dealing with witchcraft.
Haxan (The Witch) is probably not the title to seek out if you are new to watching silent film as it lacks what modern viewers might call a coherent narrative.
This is a sort of a study of psychological disorders that dramatizes cases of "witchcraft through the ages" (as the film is also known), including the 17th century demoniac possessions among nuns in a Loudon convent, later seriously remade in Jerzy Kawalerowicz' "Mother Joanna of the Angels" (1961), and grotesquely staged in Ken Russell's "The Devils" (1971.) In the end, though, these parts are more riveting than the real images of emotional disorders, and they mine the pretended scientific approach..
The film follows a documentary structure, but the Swedish director implements lots of different ways of telling his story, which ensures that the film never becomes dull or mundane and offers more than just a commentary on witchcraft through the ages.
The documentary follows the subjects of spell casting, witch trials and wrongful accusation, and while I can't say that I'm now an expert on witchcraft; this film offers a fairly good education.I saw this film on a video released by Redemption films in the UK, which isn't the same version released by Criterion in the USA.
The storyboards included in the Redemption version ensure that it's more like a silent film, although Haxan does feature a lot of visuals that are surprising given the time that the film was made.
Christensen decorates his film with some great sequences, which include devils, skeletal horses and witches performing witchcraft and these aids help the director to fully implement the ideas of the plot.
Benjamin Christensen directed, wrote, and even acted (as both the devil, *and* Christ) in this appropriately bleak, really creepy docu/ horror, about magic, Satanism, witchcraft, the occult, legends, folklore, and superstitions, filled with grotesquely beautiful images, and deep red tinting, for even creepier sweat-inducing tension and unease.Paving the way for the Mondo films decades later, its surprising bursts of nudity, violence, and torture, especially for a film from this time period, is all the more frightening and unsettling.
Fictionalized documentary showing the evolution of witchcraft, from its pagan roots to its confusion with hysteria in modern Europe.Two versions of this film are floating around, or if you have the Criterion edition (which you should), you can watch either of them on the same disc.
Sounds like a plan the conservatives would heartily embrace.It was interesting to see what is also most likely the first filmed instance of good cop - bad cop.I found the film to be what I would consider to be very spicy for 1922, the special effects were amazing considering what was available at the time, and the story certainly kept my interest throughout.I also watched the 1967 remake with William Burroughs narrating and found it to be easier to watch and the jazz score was certainly better than the typical music used in silent films..
'Häxan', often going under the translated title, 'Witchcraft through the Ages' is a gloriously bizarre film from the early days of cinema which documents the history of witch-cults in the Middle Ages and the church-led inquisitions that hunted them.
A wry sense of humor -- if that is what it is --would also make this film similar to THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT.In any event, it is an interesting look at early horrorand has some very atmospheric scenes employing good FX --all the more impressive because they were done in 1922,long before computer graphics..
"Häxan" was an ambitious film, and although it doesn't work entirely, it's a landmark achievement.(Note: The 1968 condensed version "Witchcraft Through the Ages", with narration by William S.
Häxan belongs to a time when the frontiers between a documentary film and fiction weren't clear yet; so director Benjamin Christensen had the freedom to dramatise his history of witchcraft using actors and creating a plot.
Haxan: Witchcraft Through the Ages is one of those films that you have to ask yourself, what the hell did I just watch?
If you're interested in old school silent horror films about witchcraft, I highly recommend HAXAN!!!. |
tt0278500 | The Importance of Being Earnest | The play is set in "The Present" (i.e. 1895).
=== Act I ===
=== Algernon Moncrieff's flat in Half Moon Street, W ===
The play opens with Algernon Moncrieff, an idle young gentleman, receiving his best friend, John Worthing, whom he knows as Ernest. Ernest has come from the country to propose to Algernon's cousin, Gwendolen Fairfax. Algernon, however, refuses his consent until Ernest explains why his cigarette case bears the inscription, "From little Cecily, with her fondest love to her dear Uncle Jack." 'Ernest' is forced to admit to living a double life. In the country, he assumes a serious attitude for the benefit of his young ward, the heiress Cecily Cardew, and goes by the name of John (or, as a nickname, Jack), while pretending that he must worry about a wastrel younger brother named Ernest in London. In the city, meanwhile, he assumes the identity of the libertine Ernest. Algernon confesses a similar deception: he pretends to have an invalid friend named Bunbury in the country, whom he can "visit" whenever he wishes to avoid an unwelcome social obligation. Jack refuses to tell Algernon the location of his country estate.
Gwendolen and her formidable mother Lady Bracknell now call on Algernon who distracts Lady Bracknell in another room while Jack proposes to Gwendolen. She accepts, but seems to love him very largely for his professed name of Ernest. Jack accordingly resolves to himself to be rechristened "Ernest". Discovering them in this intimate exchange, Lady Bracknell interviews Jack as a prospective suitor. Horrified to learn that he was adopted after being discovered as a baby in a handbag at Victoria Station, she refuses him and forbids further contact with her daughter. Gwendolen, though, manages covertly to promise to him her undying love. As Jack gives her his address in the country, Algernon surreptitiously notes it on the cuff of his sleeve: Jack's revelation of his pretty and wealthy young ward has motivated his friend to meet her.
=== Act II ===
=== The Garden of the Manor House, Woolton ===
Cecily is studying with her governess, Miss Prism. Algernon arrives, pretending to be Ernest Worthing, and soon charms Cecily. Long fascinated by Uncle Jack's hitherto absent black sheep brother, she is predisposed to fall for Algernon in his role of Ernest (a name she, like Gwendolen, is apparently particularly fond of). Therefore, Algernon, too, plans for the rector, Dr. Chasuble, to rechristen him "Ernest".
Jack, meanwhile, has decided to abandon his double life. He arrives in full mourning and announces his brother's death in Paris of a severe chill, a story undermined by Algernon's presence in the guise of Ernest.
Gwendolen now enters, having run away from home. During the temporary absence of the two men, she meets Cecily, each woman indignantly declaring that she is the one engaged to "Ernest". When Jack and Algernon reappear, their deceptions are exposed.
=== Act III ===
=== Morning-Room at the Manor House, Woolton ===
Arriving in pursuit of her daughter, Lady Bracknell is astonished to be told that Algernon and Cecily are engaged. The revelation of Cecily's trust fund soon dispels Lady Bracknell's initial doubts over the young lady's suitability, but any engagement is forbidden by her guardian Jack: he will consent only if Lady Bracknell agrees to his own union with Gwendolen—something she declines to do.
The impasse is broken by the return of Miss Prism, whom Lady Bracknell recognises as the person who, twenty-eight years earlier, as a family nursemaid, had taken a baby boy for a walk in a perambulator (baby carriage) and never returned. Challenged, Miss Prism explains that she had absentmindedly put the manuscript of a novel she was writing in the perambulator, and the baby in a handbag, which she had left at Victoria Station. Jack produces the very same handbag, showing that he is the lost baby, the elder son of Lady Bracknell's late sister, and thus indeed Algernon's elder brother. Having acquired such respectable relations, he is acceptable as a suitor for Gwendolen after all.
Gwendolen, though, still insists that she can only love a man named Ernest. What is her fiancé's real first name? Lady Bracknell informs Jack that, as the first-born, he would have been named after his father, General Moncrieff. Jack examines the army lists and discovers that his father's name—and hence his own real name—was in fact Ernest. Pretence was reality all along. As the happy couples embrace—Jack and Gwendolen, Algernon and Cecily, and even Dr. Chasuble and Miss Prism—Lady Bracknell complains to her newfound relative: "My nephew, you seem to be displaying signs of triviality." "On the contrary, Aunt Augusta", he replies, "I've now realised for the first time in my life the vital importance of being Earnest." | romantic, satire, flashback | train | wikipedia | He focused on the "dashing young bachelors" when the real focus of the play is Lady Bracknell, the absurd and beautifully ironic representation of the Victorian mind who was then and has been for over a hundred years Wilde's singular creation and one of the great characters of English literature.
Compared to Dane Edith Evans's brilliant performance in the celebrated cinematic production from 1952, Dench's Lady Bracknell is positively one-dimensional.The point of Wilde's play was to simultaneously delight and satirize the Victorian audience who came to watch the play.
Playwright Oscar Wilde put into Lady Bracknell's mouth some of the most delicious comments in stage history: "To be born, or at any rate bred, in a handbag, whether it had handles or not, seems to me to display a contempt for the ordinary decencies of family life that reminds one of the worst excesses of the French Revolution".The story follows the ups and downs and deceits of the two men whilst they pursue Gwendolen and Cecily, dogged by Algy's creditors and Lady Bracknell, whose opposition to Jack's origins proves insurmountable.
Reese Witherspoon as Cecily mastered an English accent and, along with Colin Firth as Jack, Frances O'Connor as Gwendolen and Judi Dench as Lady Bracknell (Aunt Augusta), is first-rate; the film also boasts Edward Fox, Tom Wilkinson and Anna Massey in supporting roles.
It's a wicked slight, but I confess to thinking that Oliver Parker might have had that very fellow in mind when he butchered Oscar Wilde's brilliant play to make this awful film.
The cast choices also looked good: Colin Firth and Rupert Everett as the male leads, the two false "Ernests"; the formidable Judi Dench as the even more formidable Lady Bracknell; Frances O'Connor as Gwendolen Fairfax; and Reese Witherspoon as Cecily Cardew - Witherspoon doing a creditable "Gwyneth Paltrow" turn with an English accent.A bankable American star appears to be a standard requirement these days when presenting an essentially British production to viewers on this side of the Pond.
Why on earth he chose to elide Gwendolen's second statement about her first opinions is baffling beyond all comprehension.Fourth, he apparently failed to notice that the harsh lighting in most of the scenes makes all of the cast, even Ms Witherspoon, look much older than necessary, and certainly older than they should be.Fifth, he shoehorned in some dreadfully awkward and quite out of character physical buffoonery, completely at odds with the tone of the piece.The superb cast is wasted: poor Judy Dench is reduced to whispering her character's iconic line, I can only assume in an overly ostentatious attempt to distance this performance from previous Ladies Bracknell.
Firth, Everett and O'Connor are all just a little too old to pull off their roles, and worst of all, none of the cast seem to be having any fun during the production.This is a dreadful version of what should be a rip roaring play, that fails and disappoints on every front.
The witty repartee that Wilde's characters engage in, particularly in The Importance of Being Earnest, is hilarious in most performances.What a pity, then, that this production of it drags its feet like a drunken yeti (Yes, that's right, a drunken yeti.
Most were provided either by Judi Dench, who brings some true Wildian spirit to the movie as Lady Bracknell, and Reece Witherspoon as the innocently shallow Cecily (but what the #@$& were those 'knight in shining armor' dream scenes?).Wilde I may love, but not this movie.
Reese and her accent were good but the old film had Dorothy Tutin and Joan Greenwood as Gwendolyn who was unique and had that voice.And who could ever compete with Margaret Rutherford in any part she chose to play?The song "Lady, Come Down", was not in the original play and despite being a setting of a real Oscar Wilde poem was just another feeble attempt to be "original".
This sad disappointment of a movie is what happens when you gather a group of top-notch actors together, give them one of the wittiest and funniest plays in the English language, and then put them under the direction of a film-maker who does not trust his material (which is a shame) and who furthermore believes that by tweaking it he may "improve" on it and render it more palatable for modern audiences (which is a scandal).To do director Oliver Parker some justice, "The Importance of Being Earnest" is a lighter-than-air comedy of social mores and is -- in its very essence -- not cinematic, but theatrical, as was its creator, Oscar Wilde.
Perhaps it is too much to expect this play ever to be given a 100% successful cinematic make-over.Parker cannot be faulted for trying to translate this play into a cinematic medium; he is, however, guilty of ham-handed 're-writes,' unnecessary excursions, ill-considered excisions, and a feckless attempt to jam his cast into cinematic "dress" that doesn't fit them and that leaves them looking foolish.Watching this film, I felt badly for all the fine actors ensnared in it.
The line readings are slow, the Polonius light character of Lady Bracknell is given to Judi Dench, an actor of tremendous gravity, the basket scene is played as if it were the unmasking of Oedipus - I kept expecting references to pinioned feet.
They all seemed like actors pretending they were living in the era, in amongst over the top sets and oodles of extras.I can't say I laughed out loud at all, so the hilarity I have always experienced on seeing this in the theatre was totally missing.The locations were lovely, but the script was either a bad adaptation or else it was just so badly directed that it just couldn't ever work.Thank God Colin Firth rose above the mediocrity of this awful movie, and Reese Witherspoon and he, will both remained unscathed by this unwatchable remake.And by the way, Judi Dench was at her very worst in this movie, even she didn't seem to believe what she was doing!I would recommend anyone to wait until this movie comes free to TV, that way you can sleep through it and not be miffed you paid to see it!.
In spite of his film-making repertoire being relatively small, Oliver Parker (Othello, An Ideal Husband) does justice to Oscar Wilde's play with a lush and vivacious film adaptation to the nonsensical farce; more than a century later in 2002, it springs to life the hilarious satire of nineteenth century English society.
From the intricate ornaments and overstated decorations in Lady Bracknell's home to the luscious grass of Jack's Hertfordshire Manor House's rolling hills, the sceneries augment the flamboyance in all aspects of the film; this also allows the audience to experience the overstated character of the bourgeois world of The Importance of Being Earnest, which, despite Oscar Wilde's intentions, could not be expressed as clearly on stage.
Only people who can't get into it do that." However, in addition to long discussions regarding muffins and teacakes, Oscar Wilde adds zest with epigrams and one-liners, witty statements that are more than often satirical: "You don't seem to realise, in married life three is company and two is none." The amusing and mocking epigrams, wordplay and discussions both provide a major source of the humour of the film and drive the plot to keep it fresh and appealing.As a result of the entertaining actors that brings the dialogue and story of the film to life, as well as the physical and aural aspects in its surroundings and music, The Importance of Being Earnest is a brilliant piece of entertainment.
It has various plot twists, and where other playwrights would have stopped early on during the revelation of multiple Earnest, and then slap together some closure with a happy ending, this movie keeps on going, slowing stitching back the relationship together, and it keeps on going to the very end, literally up to the last sentence.The film has some very witty dialogue and interesting word play, although I do feel that the wickedest sarcasm has been mellowed down a bit, either by pacing or just edited out..
Like HP, it would appear new subtle elements need to be added to make a the original written word in a film, and going word for word from the original screenplay by Oscar Wilde while making a great stage play, does not necessarily carry as well to the big screen.
And of course Judi Dench is spot on and absolutely brilliant as Lady Bracknell.The film does vary somewhat from the original play (as seems to be what many people are complaining about) but I love the changes.
That's how blinkered they are.) The design is exquisite and the cast perfect (one expects as much from Judi Dench and Colin Firth, but Reese Witherspoon's flawless accent and extraordinary charm make her perhaps even more impressive, while Rupert Everett, an actor of frankly limited range, is for once in his element as a character one suspects is very like himself.) The "additional" dialogue is in fact mostly salvaged from the four-act version Wilde originally wrote, while the few lines which are added take care of necessary exposition economically and without the least incongruity.No other filmed version can make me laugh as much as seeing the play live.
A lot of Hollywood (and English) starpower was brought to bear on this adaptation of Oscar Wilde's well-known drawing room comedy "The Importance of Being Earnest" but simply assembling a group of big names (the better to sell tickets with)and loosely attaching them to a mediocre adaptation of a brilliantly written play (written for the stage, long ago) does nothing for the original story, or the viewer's entertainment.
This is a comedy and not a serious period drama, and what makes it work is the dialog, which is based on the play of the same name by Oscar Wilde and adapted for the screen by the film's director, Oliver Parker.
My wife, who has, was disappointed, because apparently too little of Wilde's words remain in the finished product.The acting talent is first rate, including, in addition to those mentioned above, Tom Wilkinson from "In the Bedroom." They do very well with the material, but it's so light you don't think about the skill required.The bottom line is that this film is a good choice if you are looking for something frothy and entertaining, yet respectable, and you keep your expectations fairly low.Seen on 7/15/2002..
Simply awful version of the Oscar Wilde tale.Only Dame Judi Bench's performance gives a drop of light to this hopeless story.It's a story of conventional manners and goings on in England.Rupert Everett and Colin Firth are given writing material and a story which isn't worth much.
The end result is just plain silly.The actors in the film are attractive, but the story, as presented on the screen, is just so boring, that instead of amusing, it induces the spectator to fall asleep, as witnessed by this writer, on a screening at the Angelika in New York, a few weeks ago.Having seen the play a few times on stage in London, this version pales in comparison to the worst staging of the work.
As a titled lady looking out for the future of her lovely charge, well-played by Francis O'Connor, she brings that very special whiff of aristocratic just-below-the surface opportunism that often passes as a fair representation of the English upper class.And then there's Reese Witherspoon, enjoying an adjournment before returning to court in the forthcoming "Legally Blonde II." Without joining the debate on her English accent (or butchery of same), she's cute and engaging and does no harm.This film is no substitute for a fine theater production of a timelessly enthralling comedy.
The interaction between Colin Firth and Rupert Everett's characters is the most genuinely hilarious thing I've scene in a new movie in a very long time.
The film follows Jack Worthing (Colin Firth), a wealthy young bachelor who resides in the country with a young ward named Cecily (Reese Witherspoon) while making trips as often as possible to London.
Sounds like bliss, however Gwendolen's mother, Lady Bracknell (Judi Dench) refuses to allow Jack's (or Earnest, as they know him) hand in marriage due to his mysterious parental origins.What ensues further is a hilarious tale of mistaken identity.
Colin Firth's wealthy Jack and Rupert Everett rakish Algy play two young gents living in 1890's England and both use the same pseudonym of Earnest (Jack's non existent brother) on the sly.Both fall in love with women using that name.
There is also a side plot of Firth being found abandoned as a baby as he has no knowledge of his real parents.The play is a farce as well as a cutting satire which has a lot to say about status and marrying for money and these mores are represented by Judi Dench's snobbish Lady Bracknell.However this film version is flat.
Frankly Firth and Everett although enjoying themselves, look rather too old especially compared with Witherspoon and O'Connor.The director Oliver Parker has opened up the play, there is a nice scene when both Firth and Everett sing and serenade their sweethearts and you feel just then the film has found its gear.
In Victorian England, two young ladies are convinced they can only fall in love with men named "Earnest," so wealthy Jack (Colin Firth) and his scoundrel friend Algernon (Rupert Everett) adopt that name and the result is unrestrained hilarity.
Two young Victorian English gentlemen, Algy and Jack played by the superb English actors Rupert Everett and Colin Firth, use the name of Earnest on the sly for their own mischievous ends until they are found out.
Director Oliver Parker, who also directed a film version of Wilde's An Ideal Husband, has gone beyond the text of the play to add more scenes and settings and even a few jokes of his own.
The award winning Dame Judi Dench is great as she plays an absolute dragon in Gwendolen's mother, Lady Bracknell, which produces the occasional laugh, but most of the comedy comes from the sparring between Algy and Jack.
The original filmed version did a good job of moving this theatrical stalwart onto the big screen however since there is no money to be made by re-releasing that into theatres the producers of An Ideal Husband have got Rupert Everett back into a nice suit and filmed the the rest of the cast out with as little invention as possible (indeed the risky decision of casting the American Reese Witherspoon leads to a mildly amusing accent reminiscent of Queenie from Blackadder, but that wears things soon enough).
Never before have a I laughed so hard as when I first saw this movie.Frances O'Connor (of A.I. and Mansfield Park fame) does great credit to her character with sweet innocence and ignorance; Colin Firth and Rupert Everett are brilliantly funny together; and Reese Witherspoon and Judi Dench have elevated their characters beyond mere words and paper to near perfection.Indeed, this movie is a must-see for any Oscar Wilde fan, those who love comedies of manners, and, of course, those who just need a good laugh.
I must admit I was a bit cynical about this adaptation of one of my favourite Oscar Wilde plays but I had seen Oliver Parker's "An Ideal Husband" which I thoroughly enjoyed.When I discovered England's excellent trio of Judi Dench, Colin Firth and Rupert Everett were to play Lady Bracknell/Jack Worthing/Algernon Moncrieff, I knew I had to see it.I was rather dubious about the casting of an American and an Australian for the two principal female roles of Cecily and Gwendolyn, and their characters were not fully developed.
I was also relieved to see that there was none of Firth's `Mr Darcy' character showing.I was not wholly persuaded by Rupert Everett, switching from rakish cad one minute to smitten Romeo the next but I thought the scenes with Firth worked best.In the supporting roles, I would single out Edward Fox's cameo as Algy's long-suffering butler, Lane; wonderful and droll, and played spot on but then you never get anything less from Edward Fox.It is nothing like Anthony Asquith's 1952 version with Michael Redgrave as Jack, Michael Denison as Algernon, and Edith Evans as Lady Bracknell but what would be the point of doing just another remake of the original?I think Oliver Parker's interpretation was bold, imaginative and worthy of note.
Cecily's dreams of the Knight in shining armour, although in one way silly, was also clever and I am sure young ladies of Edwardian era (and especially Victorian era) may have fantasised like that!I think Oscar Wilde may have been amused by this interpretation of his play; after all, he did lead rather a decadent life..
Wilde's wit remains intact and the actors deliver their lines impeccably; the audience I saw this movie with did lots of laughing.It's also beautifully shot; the period costumes and grand country estates are wonderful to look at.And Reese Witherspoon does a great job at being "English".If you like intelligent romantic comedies, "The Importance of Being Earnest" is worth seeing..
I have read that some critics object to the added scenes in this film version of Oscar Wilde's classic play, but they didn't bother me that much.
It is a 2002 British-American romantic comedy-drama film directed by Oliver Parker, based on Oscar Wilde's classic comedy of manners The Importance of Being Earnest.
The film was shot by English film-director Oliver Parker and it was created as screen-adaptation of the Oscar Wilde's play.
The film was shot by English film-director Oliver Parker and it was created as screen-adaptation of the Oscar Wilde's play.
The 'cast' is really impressive: Rupert Everett, Colin Firth, Frances O'Connor(2), Reese Witherspoon, Judi Dench, Tom Wilkinson!
Anyone that loves Oscar Wilde's delicious play "The Importance of Earnest" has visited and revisited the shrine that is Anthony Asquith's 1952 film version with the unbeatable cast of Michael Redgrave, Joan Greenwood, Dorothy Tutin, Michael Denison, Margaret Rutherford and especially Dame Edith Evans' Lady Bracknell. |
tt0029431 | Porky's Romance | The cartoon opens with an introduction of Petunia Pig; Petunia is shown as nervous, tripping on her lines and being unable to pronounce them correctly while on stage, leading an off-screen announcer to quietly tell her not to get excited. This causes her to go into an explosive rant and then the curtain closes on her and the main part of the cartoon starts.
Porky is shown buying some flowers, candy, and then eventually a diamond ring. He proceeds to go over to Petunia's house and knock on the door, then Petunia goes to answer the door with her spoiled dog, Fluffnums, but when she sees Porky, she is disgusted to see him so she disdainfully tells him to go away. This causes him to leave crying out of sadness and he then walks away, but Fluffnums sees the candy Porky has and alerts her to this fact.
Petunia proceeds to run out after Porky and take him into her house, where she rips open the candy container and starts eating the candy. Porky tries to help himself to the candy several times but is constantly harassed by Fluffnums, who snarls and growls at him each time he tries to reach for the candy box, then Porky finally gets a piece of candy, winks at the audience, and then finds out that Fluffnums ate it. He eventually tries to propose to Petunia, but as he is starting to do so, Fluffnums pulls a mean-spirited trick on Porky by pulling the rug out from under him and the fickle and selfish Petunia laughs at him, causing Porky to leave the house and walk off in shame. He proceeds to write a suicide note and tries to hang himself from a tree, but the branch the rope is on snaps due to Porky's weight, knocking him out and causing him to go into a dreamlike state.
Porky dreams that he is at a church and getting married to Petunia, then after the ceremony, they head off on their honeymoon and the couple get together there and then a message Time... munches on! is displayed on screen, and sounds of Petunia eating candy can be heard. The screen then shows Porky having to do all the housework while Petunia is essentially a couch potato; she has become fat and lazy, and Fluffnums has done the same thing. Eventually, Porky's kids (all of whom are named "Porky Pig Jr.") are woken up when a stack of dishes accidentally fall over on him from the kitchen counter. He tries to put them back to sleep after Petunia yells at him to "shut those kids up", but even though he meekly tells her he is trying his best to do so, Petunia yells at him for back-talking her and she beats him over the head repeatedly with a rolling pin while the kids cheer her on.
Porky then wakes from the dream by Petunia gently brushing him and accepting his proposal. When he remembers Petunia's horrid treatment of him in his dream and fears what his future could hold for him if he marries her, he proceeds to take his gifts and runs off, then he comes back once to punish Fluffnums for its ill behavior toward him by kicking him on the rear, making the dog yelp in pain while Porky runs off again, leaving a dazed and confused Petunia behind as the cartoon irises out. | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | A Mostly Sad & Cruel Story.
This has an odd introduction as we see a stuttering "Petunia Pink" being introduced as a new star for Looney Tunes.
She doesn't do well, let's just leave it at that.
After that minute bit with her, the opening credits suddenly appear.Then we see an obviously-in-love Porky buying diamond rings, candy, flowers, etc., and we hear a great song "I Want to Woo" or something with great lyrics.
Pay attention to them and you'll get some laughs.
Poor Porky isn't laughing, however, after he arrives at Petunia's door and gets the brush-off.The shallow Petunia glances at Porky walking away and sees the big box of candy, runs and snatches that and Porky back to her house.
She then pigs out, big-time, on the candy.
Poor Porky can't share in that because Petunia's dog "Fluffnins" growls each time he reaches for a piece (of candy).
Not only is Petunia bad news, so is her trained dog.
In no time, heartbroken Porky is out the door while the sadistic girl he loves laughs at him.
This is pretty cruel stuff.The last half is not unusual in old cartoons: the main character has a dream where he sees the future and finds out losing his girl wasn't so bad, after all!
The only funny part of this entire cartoon, frankly, was the very end when Porky gives his two cents to the dog, too.
Otherwise, there isn't much to this..
Emotional Roller-coaster.
Who would have thought an 8-minute cartoon could produce such emotions?
At first I was sad and really felt the depression when sweet little Porky's heart is broken.
Porky takes some drastic measures, and ends up dreaming about his life with the girl he wants to marry, but doesn't want to marry him.
It is funny, and then heartbreaking if anyone's life would turn out like his dream.
Porky then wakes up to decide whether he still wants his dream girl.
I truly felt sad for Porky and understood his decisions.
I was angry at the girl, Petunia Pig, for she was only using Porky and breaking his fragile heart.
The cartoon, in only 8 minutes, makes the viewer think about his/her own life and suggests that you think about big decisions in your life before making them.
Perhaps the sweetest moment in cartoon/film history is when Porky goes to see his dream girl and she laughs at him.
He walks off her front porch only to first turn around and kiss a plate with her name written on it that is displayed by her front door.
Porky then walks off heartbroken.
What a greatly sad moment..
Porky's Romance.
While not one of my favourites from Porky Pig or Frank Tashlin, 'Porky's Romance' is still a good example of what makes Porky a likable character and why Tashlin is so under-appreciated.Am not crazy about the character of Petunia, it is very clear why she's like that and it is also clear that it is intentional, but one can't help thinking that even for what the cartoon was going for with her character that she was rather too cruel.
Also much prefer Mel Blanc's voice work for Porky, his voice and stutter more natural and more endearing than the overdone one provided here by Joe Dougherty.Animation on the other hand is great.
The black and white colours are lovingly done, the drawing is fluid and smooth and the backgrounds have some very nice detail.
The music score by Carl Stalling is bursting with lively character, beautiful orchestration, clever instrumentation and an unmatched ability to enhance the action and elevate material to a greater level.'Porky's Romance' is not what you call a funny cartoon, it is not that kind of cartoon.
What it is though is very emotionally poignant and sweet and it is very easy, well impossible not to, to relate to Porky.
One really hates the amount of hate and heartbreak he endures, which makes how he has the last laugh at the end even more satisfying.
Do have to agree that 'Porky's Romance' excels at how it tells its story.Overall, a very good cartoon if not among my favourites.
8/10 Bethany Cox. love's labor's crossed.
Love may be blind, but some people may need it like that.
Such is Porky Pig's fate in "Porky's Romance".
After he goes to all the trouble to buy his dream girl Petunia flowers, candy, etc., the holier-than-thou sow rejects him.
But what if she accepts him?
Apparently, she and her worthless dog Fluffnins (can't these women ever give their dogs better names?) spend all day eating candy - and both growing fatter than Rush Limbaugh - while Porky is their slave.OK, so this cartoon asserts that women are cute but shallow creeps (Petunia falls for Porky after seeing the candy), while men are angry jerks (look at what Porky does at the end).
Or maybe these two are like that just for this one cartoon.
Either way, it's a little bit weird, but not terrible.
Maybe the Termite Terrace crowd was on the verge of finding the zany path that their cartoons would take but hadn't quite found it.
I see that this got released a week or two before Daffy Duck made his debut; I guess that his debut solidified their wacky repertoire..
A great piece of story telling that runs the emotional gamut.
Frank Tashlin's 'Porky's Romance' opens with a special pre-credits announcement: "Ladies and Gentlemen, introducing Leon Schlesinger's new Looney Tunes star, Petunia Pig".
Petunia introduces herself in a routine not dissimilar to the nerve-wracked recital that shot Porky Pig to fame in 'I Haven't Got a Hat'.
Just how seriously the studio took Petunia's potential is unclear but, if she was intended to be a new cartoon superstar they didn't give her much of an opportunity to endear herself to the audience.
In 'Porky's Romance', Petunia is cruel, selfish, idle and greedy and, while this may not have been beneficial for the character's longevity, it is extremely beneficial for the cartoon.
'Porky's Romance' is a great and handsome piece of work in which Porky goes through an emotional roller coaster which even includes a suicide attempt when his proposal to Petunia is turned down.
While Porky spends most of the cartoon being dumped on by everyone, he finally gets the last laugh in one of the most satisfying final moments in any cartoon.
'Porky's Romance' is a film that aims to make audiences laugh, cry and wince in equal measure as we empathise with the nightmare of Porky's heartbreak and then the even more horrific glimpse at the possibilities of married life (a slightly sexist representation by today's standard but this was the 30s!).
Tashlin's talents as storyteller and crafter of characters is much in evidence but, despite turning up in a few more cartoons, Petunia never got to be that new cartoon star.
That title was snatched from her just two cartoons after 'Porky's Romance' when Tex Avery's 'Porky's Duck Hunt' introduced a certain little black duck with a penchant for scene-stealing..
"Porky Pig!
Pooh pooh!".
Directed by Frank Tashlin (Tash for short), "Porky's Romance" is one of the earliest black-and-white Porky Pig cartoons.
The fat Porky that we see in this film is nothing like the cuter Porky that we all know today, but he still looks funny!
The basic plot of "Porky's Romance" is that Porky wants to marry Petunia, but a dream sequence causes Porky to eventually reconsider, as he realizes just how shallow Petunia is.
If they had gotten married, Porky would have ended up frantically doing all the washing, cooking, & ironing, as well as taking care of all the screaming baby piglets, all the while taking a lot of blows from the abusive Petunia, who only loves Porky for his chocolates.Highlights: Porky is especially bouncy at the opening of this cartoon as he purchases a diamond ring, a bouquet of flowers, and a box of chocolates in anticipation of his date with Petunia.
During the film's prologue, Petunia explodes when she fumbles her radio speech and is gently told to not get excited.
Porky struggles with his own words as he gets down on his knees to propose to Petunia, whose dog Fluffnums sneers & growls at him as he tries to take just one piece of chocolate.
Finally, at the end, Porky runs away from Petunia, but he returns just long enough to give Fluffnums a good swift kick!
One final element of "Porky's Romance" that we must not overlook is Carl Stalling's excellent musical commentary.
The two popular songs that I recognize in this cartoon are "When My Dreamboat Comes Home" (heard when Porky & Petunia kiss in front of their hotel window while on their honeymoon) and "Oh!
You Beautiful Doll" (heard when Porky arrives at Petunia's front door, when the super-sized Petunia continues to stock up on chocolates during Porky's dream sequence, and when Petunia sweetly tells Porky she'll marry him at the end of the cartoon)..
Warner Bros.
tries to warn American men .
. of their fast-approaching DOUBLE INDEMNITY doom with this late 1930s Looney Tune, PORKY'S ROMANCE.
Back in the 1900s, ALL U.S. public schools were like Today's Red State Academies: woefully lacking in Sex Education.
Teachers were prohibited from informing boys that it was unthinkable to offer a girl a marriage proposal BEFORE at least sliding into Third Base with her.
Warner high-lights this short-coming by having Porky proposing to Petunia 58 seconds into their first date--when his nearest physical contact with her has been confined to petting her pooch, "Fluffnins." In Real Life, this kind of sexual ignorance led to many boys popping the question to their own first cousins, step-sisters, and half-sisters--even up North, as well as Down South, of course.
The onset of World War Two prompted thousands of such ill-advised pairings.
Even if these sexual rookies were NOT blood relatives, when the surviving instant grooms returned from the Front Lines at War's End, their now-experienced spouses frequently were less than thrilled.
As the Looney Tuners predicted, this led to hen-pecking, husband abuse, and often outright DOUBLE INDEMNITY-style murder, since wives had about as much respect for the Returning U.S. War Heroes as Donald Trump has for John McCain. |
tt0011841 | Way Down East | The rich, typified by the handsome man-about-town Lennox (Lowell Sherman), are exceptionally selfish and think only of their own pleasure.
Anna (Lillian Gish) is a poor country girl whom Lennox tricks into a fake wedding. When she becomes pregnant, he leaves her. She has the baby, named Trust Lennox, on her own.
When the baby dies she wanders until she gets a job with Squire Bartlett (Burr McIntosh). David (Richard Barthelmess), Squire Bartlett's son, falls for her, but she rejects him due to her past. Then Lennox shows up lusting for another local girl, Kate. Seeing Anna, he tries to get her to leave, but she refuses to go, although she promises to say nothing about his past.
Finally, Squire Bartlett learns of Anna's past from Martha, the town gossip. In his anger, he tosses Anna out into a snow storm. Before she goes, she fingers the respected Lennox as her despoiler and the father of her dead baby. Anna becomes lost in the raging storm while David leads a search party. In the famous climax, the unconscious Anna floats on an ice floe down a river towards a waterfall, until rescued at the last moment by David, who marries her in the final scene.
Subplots relate the romances and eventual marriages of some of the picaresque characters inhabiting the village. | romantic, melodrama | train | wikipedia | It's the kind of story that leaves itself open for spoofing, but Griffith approaches the story of a "mock marriage" and its aftermath with earnestness and a great eye for detail.Aiding Griffith in bringing this story to life are three great stars: Lillian Gish as Anna, Richard Barthelmess as David, and Lowell Sherman as caddish Lennox.
Kate Bruce is the staunch mother, Creighton Hale the ditzy professor, Vivia Ogden the town gossip, Burr McIntosh the intolerant squire, Emily Fitzroy runs the hotel, etc.The story of love, betrayal, tolerance, and redemption is slow moving and has (as usual in a Griffith film) subplots, but like the very river, all the actions and events slowly come together for the finale that left 1920 audiences in a frenzy.
Barthelmess is solid as the young and innocent David who falls in love with the servant girl.Their final scenes in the blizzard (filmed on Long Island in a real storm) on the icy river (filmed in White River Junction, VT) are totally amazing.
The entire sequence is as thrilling today as it was in 1920.Gish once wrote that her long hair froze solid from being in the river water and snapped off with the ice.WAY DOWN EAST is a great film..
The atmospheric splendor of the cinematography and the melancholy mood set by the original musical score (on the Kino Video release) lull the viewer into the sense of reverie essential to appreciating this charming representation of countrified America facing the encroachment of big city evils.The story is well-told by director D.W. Griffith, and the moral message of Woman's spiritual virtuosity is exploited without the sermonizing of some of his other pictures.
In bringing the sweetness of his famous one-reelers to a major feature film, Griffith captured an almost magical tone and ambiance that distinguishes Way Down East as a masterful piece of intimate storytelling, rivaling Broken Blossoms (1919) in its intensity and sheer beauty.However, it must be said that Griffith's sideline excesses in plot development are many and varied, hindering the progression of the central tale of Anna Moore's struggle to escape her past and search out a new life.
To do justice to her part, as well as to form an exciting contrast to the pastoral images to follow, Griffith went all out in the costume department, hiring top fashion designer Lucile (Lady Duff Gordon) to design glitzy gowns for the garden party and ball scenes.Despite some errors in continuity, Way Down East's celebrated climax of Anna's rescue from an ice-flow as it drifts toward a roaring waterfall, is perfectly paced and as thrilling as it must have been to audiences in 1920.
"Way Down East" will probably be a hard pill for many filmgoers to swallow, as it's a silent and very long, but I would recommend you give it a try, as it's also pretty entertaining.Lillian Gish gets put through her melodramatic paces by the granddaddy of modern cinema, D.W. Griffith.
A young woman, after being lured into a false marriage, finds the chance for happiness on a friendly farm WAY DOWN EAST.David Wark Griffith, the Father of American Cinema, had his last great financial blockbuster with this highly sentimentalized silent melodrama.
Always anxious to promote decency & morality with his epic films, Griffith here exposes & castigates male brutality against the weaker female, making this a stark portrayal of Good versus Evil as he follows the fortunes and misfortunes of his long-suffering heroine.Bird-like & fragile, Lillian Gish takes the brunt of the plot upon her young shoulders.
His stalwart decency is in strong contrast to the villainy of Lowell Sherman, the rich roué whose misdeeds nearly destroy Lillian.Griffith's broad canvas allows for detailed portraits by a fine supporting cast: a pharisaical squire (Burr McIntosh), his saintly wife (Kate Bruce), a butterfly-chasing professor (Creighton Hale), a dour landlady (Emily Fitzroy), a lazy, good-natured constable (George Neville), a jolly, oafish farmhand (Edgar Nelson), and a gossiping spinster (Vivia Ogden).The film climaxes with one of the most famous sequences in all of Silent Cinema: Barthelmess' rescue of Miss Gish as she lies unconscious on an ice floe, speeding towards a tremendous waterfall.
Never one to shy away from expressing his personal beliefs in his films, Griffith uses this simple story to sermonize about the moral character of men (basically they're all either doe-eyed innocents or total bastards) while also finding time to criticize the idle rich and prop up women as madonna figures.
For example, when Lillian Gish turns up at her rich relatives' home, no title card reveals her sense of being out of her depth, but Griffith often keeps her in long shot, emphasising the isolating vastness of the house, and this has an impact on how we view the scene.
Way Down East (1920) *** 1/2 (out of 4) Anna (Lillian Gish), a naive country girl travels to Boston to ask her rich relatives for some money but once there she meets a rich man (Lowell Sherman) who likes to play the ladies.
She lands a new job with a family but keeps her secret from everyone including a young man (Richard Barthelmess) who falls for her but soon gossip reaches the town and Anna's secret comes out.Being a huge fan of the director I'm really not sure what took me so long in watching this film.
I've read countless books on the director, silent era and Gish and everyone of them have mentioned the ending to this film, which has Anna stuck on a sheet of ice while is quickly goes down river and nearing a waterfall but more on this later.
The movie as a whole is imperfect - it's a bit too long, and is occasionally preachy - but it fits together well, and is a deserving classic of the silent film era.The story is openly moralistic, and would not have worked without good characters and acting.
Lillian Gish is deservedly remembered for her role, but Lowell Sherman is also important as the oily Sanderson - his understated performance makes his villainy more effective, and balances out the parts of the movie that are more heavy-handed (the title cards, in particular, leave no doubt as to how the director feels).
This film has a great reputation as one of the classics of the silent cinema - starring Lillian Gish as Anna, a simple soul from a poor family, but with rich relations; Richard Barthelmess as David, the son of a country Squire; and Lowell Sherman as Sanderson, an adventurer.Does it deserve its reputation?
Well, Lillian Gish was certainly an excellent actress, very natural and expressive, and while the film drags a bit in places (and has some comedy scenes which really don't belong), it does have one or two places where the emotion of what's happening on screen reaches across the distance of nearly ninety years and makes the film work very well.Beautifully shot, especially the final scenes out on the river as the ice thaws, this is perhaps DW Griffith's best film - without the dubious racist leanings of Birth of a Nation or the OTT leanings of Intolerance.
Sherman tricks Gish into a mock marriage, and leaves her pregnant
Deceptively subtitled "A Simple Story of Plain People"; possibly, director D.W. Griffith was seeking to enhance his film's dramatic twists and turns; since, while Gish's "Anna" could be considered of "plain" stock, what happens her could not be called "simple".
This film reunites Lillian Gish and Richard Barthelmess, after the successful "Broken Blossoms" (1919); their "Way Down East" performances are also stunning, though Barthelmess has less to do this time around.
The spectacular ending is still riveting after all these years; but, it works best after you've seen the preceding story of degradation and love.The flaw in "Way Down East" may be Griffith's overindulgence in ludicrous "slapstick"-type humor; this is most explicit in Edgar Nelson's "Hi Holler" character, which really lays an egg.
********** Way Down East (9/3/20) D.W. Griffith ~ Lillian Gish, Richard Barthelmess, Lowell Sherman, Creighton Hale.
One much watch silent films with a sympathetic view, understanding that much of the seemingly-sloppy editing, jarring grain changes, and nitrate deterioration are not the fault of the filmmakers - who had, by 1920, locked down the basics of film grammar still used today - but subject to the laws of nature, and must be imagined in their original state as one must do while walking through the ruins of the Roman Forum.One reel into this so-called "Victorian melodrama," and every jerky cut and washed out sky are hidden behind the remarkable acting talents of Gish as tragedy-stricken Anna Moore.
Squire's son David (Richard Barthelmess) falls for Anna, only for Lennox to show up lusting after another girl.It's hard for me to bring myself to criticise and evaluate a work of D.W. Griffith.
It's quite hard to swallow morality lessons from the man that made The Birth of a Nation (1915), a film that glamorised the Ku Klux Klan, and made black people out to be nothing more than loutish animals.Yet the film does display Griffith's film-making ability, especially in the famous climax that shows David rescuing an unconscious Anna from an ice flood.
A naive country girl (Lillian Gish) is tricked into a sham marriage by a wealthy womanizer, then must rebuild her life despite the taint of having borne a child out of wedlock.Although it was Griffith's most expensive film to date, it was also one of his most commercially successful.
(I realize now that this is just a product of the soundtrack; most silent films released today come with soundtracks that were recorded decades later that include appropriate music and sound effects.) KEVIN: On September 3, 1920, hotshot motion picture director D.W. Griffith released yet another film masterpiece, Way Down East, yet again with the wonderful Lillian Gish.
Lillian Gish offers one of the greatest performances in the history of film, not only for the famous scene where she is rescued while unconscious on the ice floes, but in countless other moments as well (most memorably when she desperately tries to blow life into her dying infant).
In the 1960's Time called "Way Down East" the greatest film ever made and had no less than Charles Laughton & Lillian Gish to back it up.
Terrible beginning in a story of a naive girl being hoodwinked into a sham marriage by the worst kind of pariah.Many lessons here about Money,Betrayal,Love,and Life being unfair.Musical score is too similar to a lot of Silents and Lillian Gish looks too much the same in her movies.The comical faces are too funny in this movie and I enjoyed the Party Scene where they all danced to old time tunes.For an early silent it is worth watching...
WAY DOWN EAST (United Artists, 1920), subtitled "a simple story about plain people," reunites director D.W. Griffith with his BROKEN BLOSSOMS (1919) co-stars, Lillian Gish and Richard Barthelmess, in an old-fashioned story based on a vintage play that turned out to become something of a commercial success and one of the true classics of the silent screen to be still remembered today.
Aside from the simple-minded story consisting of country people and snobbish relatives, with a tragic heroine, a farm boy and an interloper of society whose three specialties happen to be "ladies," "ladies" and "ladies," heading the cast, it's most crucial scene, set during a violent snow storm, is the key factor of the entire photo-play, given the most realistic effect filmed on location in Vermont during the dead of winter, with Gish suffering more in real life in the freezing cold than the heroine she was portraying.
Set in a remote village in New England, the story begins with Anna Moore (Lillian Gish), a poor girl living with her widowed mother (Mrs. David Landau) who has fallen into hard times.
Anna finds love and happiness with their son, David (Richard Barthelmess), but things start to fall apart upon the arrival of Lennox, along with Martha Perkins (Viva Ogden), the town gossip, learning the truth about Anna's past, thus spreading the news to the Squire, who then orders the grief-stricken Anna out of his house, into the cold.The popularity of WAY DOWN EAST prompted reissues in later years in shorter prints, with the trimming of some comedy relief and other scenes from its original 140 to 107 minutes.
Another scene worth noting is the crucial one where Anna (Gish) performs her own baptism on her dead baby, "Trust Lennox." In 1984, WAY DOWN EAST made news in movie magazines when, after five years of hard work, was restored to its original length and revived at the Museum of Modern Art in New York City, much to the delight of silent film enthusiasts.
However, comparing the two, the restored version gives credit to the leading players and their roles in the opening while the restored version, available on both VHS and DVD format through Kino Video, does not, although its re-recording to the original soundtrack sounds almost similar to the 1930s reissue, slightly slower in tempo, but good overall.Other members of the cast include: Josephine Bernard (Mrs. Tremond); Porter Strong (Seth Holcomb); George Neville (Reuben Whipple); Edgar Nelson (Hi Holler); and Creighton Hale (Professor Sterling).Unlike BROKEN BLOSSOMS, where the characters played by Barthelmess and Gish are of equal status, WAY DOWN EAST belongs to Gish while Barthelmess has little to do, except for the key scene near the end.
As famous as WAY DOWN EAST has become, the 1935 Fox Film remake starring Rochelle Hudson and Henry Fonda is something to consider in comparing to the original, but as remakes go, there's no comparison to the original, especially with the sincere performance by Lillian Gish giving one of her best screen performances of his career.
"Way Down East" doesn't touch on historical themes but he does candidly and openly explore moral issues that in his time were either evaded or resolved with harsh condemnation of those who strayed from the path of religious dogma-inspired righteousness.The wonderful Lillian Gish is Anna Moore, who loses her mother and seeks, being bereft of money, shelter from rich relatives.
D.W Griffith's outstanding 'Way Down East' is one of the best films produced by America in the silent era.
It is a monument to epic film-making, and the talents of it's director, Griffith, and it's star, the great Lillian Gish.In a plot very similar to that of Thomas Hardy's famous novel 'Tess Of The D'Urbervilles', Gish portrays Anna Moore, a poor farm girl who must leave her relatives in search of assistance from her rich city cousins.
Gish still had a successful film and television career in character parts for many, many years after the induction of sound, but her silent work will always be her lasting contribution.Richard Barthelmess, who Gish regarded as the best-looking man ever to grace the screen, gives an equally fine performance as David.
The most acclaimed sequence, however, is, of course, the film's climax, including the great ice-break scene, which has Richard Barthelmess saving Gish from death (thankfully not rape this time).
This is the climax, but it comes only after a long and occasionally dragging journey.The lovely Ms. Gish plays Anna Moore, a naïve small town girl, tricked into a fake marriage by notorious womanizing playboy Lennox Sanderson (Lowell Sherman).
When the young country girl Anna Moore, played by early big movie star Lillian Gish, for the first time goes to the big 'moder'n town, things go from bad to worse for her.
Through a combination of her talent and Grifftith's direction her gaga-babies, such as Anna Moore in "Way Down East" continue to compel audiences decades later, long after many of the great vamp roles (that, ironically, were once seen as a modern alternative to Griffith's good girl parts) have been forgotten.In "Way Down East," Gish, in a story very reminiscent of Thomas Hardy's "Tess of the D'Urbervilles" plays a naïve country girl who suffers, among offer things, the snobbery of rich cousins, a sham marriage, an illegitimate pregnancy and social ostracization.
Gish is also helped by a good supporting cast including Lowell Sherman as the cad and Richard Barthlemass as the decent farm boy who courts Anna ,but particularly memorable is the gossip whose open glee when she learns the truth about Anna is chilling (here as in "Intolerance" Griffith recognizes that the zeal of the righteous often has more to do with the pleasure of crucifying wrongdoers than anything else.) "Way Down East" bears comparison with Gish's better known films, but avoid the cheap Alpha DVD whose score consists of a few mournful bars of music played over and over..
But despite all this, it still is a very good film.WAY DOWN EAST begins with a poor cousin (Lillian Gish) going to the big city to spend time with her rich relatives.
There were moments in D.W. Griffith's "Way Down East" that could inspire me similar sarcasm, but there is something in Lillian Gish' performance that carries so much sincerity there's never a temptation to look down at the film.But as much as I want to put my so-2010s cynicism aside, I've often wondered whether D.W. Griffith considered himself as a prophet or a filmmaker.
Nothing against the whole build-up but one can look at it as a peaceful ice floe, breaking first, then carrying a poor creature to a doomed ending before a spectacular rescue, the climax plays like the film in microcosm."Way Down East" is a heart-pounding movie about pounding hearts..
The story revolves around Anna Moore (Lillian Gish), an innocent country girl who goes to the city when she and her mother need money.
Anna Moore (Intolerance's Lillian Gish) is the innocent poor country girl who meets Lennox, who convinces her he has feelings, and she is tricked into believing a fake wedding, and he just he just uses her, has his way with her, and then he leaves her when he finds out she is pregnant with his baby. |
tt0067224 | The Hunting Party | The film begins with a disclaimer: Only the most ridiculous parts of this story are true.
After years of covering one armed conflict after another, American journalist Simon Hunt (Richard Gere) is in Bosnia and Herzegovina in early 1994 reporting on the Bosnian War. In parallel, he has managed to romance a local Muslim girl who is pregnant with his child. However, in the late stages of her pregnancy, she is killed by the Bosnian Serb forces when they overrun her village. Upon seeing the carnage, Simon vows revenge on the Bosnian Serb political leader Dragoslav Bogdanović —known as "The Fox".
Reporting on the gruesome event later that day in a live remote link-up, Simon loses his composure at the network anchor Franklin Harris' (James Brolin) suggestion that the Serb attack may have been a reaction to Muslim provocation attacks from inside the village. As a result of his on-air meltdown, Simon's journalistic career takes a tumble. While his professional prospects spiral downhill, those of his long-time camera man Duck (Terrence Howard) go in the opposite direction. Duck gets a cushy job at the network, while Hunt is left following war after war, as a freelancer, in an attempt to get back on US network television map.
In fall 2000, Duck, now a professional, travels to Sarajevo to shoot a "puff piece" of the network anchor Franklin Harris covering the fifth anniversary of the Dayton Agreement, along with fresh-out-of-Harvard young journalist, and son of the network vice-president, Benjamin (Jesse Eisenberg). Duck runs into old buddy Simon. Once a US network star reporter, Simon is by this point, a desperate half-drunk cynic reduced to filing freelance reports for underfunded news outlets in places like Jamaica and Poland.
All the while, he's looking for a story big enough to propel him back to the realm of credibility. He tells Duck that, through a source, he has located Bogdanović, who is now wanted for war crimes with a US$5 million bounty on his head, and that he'd be interested in trying to score an interview with the fugitive. The Fox is assumed to be in the village of Čelebići in Serbian entity of Bosnia, near the border with Montenegro with various stories circulating about him, such as that he enjoys fox hunting (hence the nickname) and that the head of his security detail is a ruthless psychopath with a tattooed forehead.
Convinced by Simon, Duck comes along to shoot the interview, with Benjamin in tow. On the way, Simon confesses his plan to capture the Fox to collect the bounty — something Duck and Benjamin consider insane even to think about. Along the way, the group is mistaken for a CIA hit squad by several groups, including the United Nations police force and the Serbs themselves; at one point, at the initiative of Benjamin, they claim to be CIA agents themselves, using a threat to avoid paying a fee for a tip. Still, Boris (Mark Ivanir), the local area UN commander, puts them in touch with a woman claiming to have been romantically involved with the Fox's main bodyguard Srđan.
Simon, Duck, and Benjamin are then captured by the Fox's guards and taken to a barn to be executed where axe-wielding Srđan — who has the phrase "умро пре рођења" ('died before birth') tattooed on his forehead in Cyrillic alphabet—is preparing to kill them through torture. At the last moment, a team of CIA assassins, tipped off by Boris, storms the barn and frees the journalists, but Fox escapes. It quickly becomes evident to the journalists that, even in the international community, there are people who do not wish the Fox to be captured.
The CIA orders the journalists to board an airplane bound for the US but they run away to carry out their plan to catch the Fox. They capture him while he is hunting in the woods without his guards. The journalists then release him, with his hands securely bound, in a village called Polje filled with the surviving family members of victims of his war crimes, where he is lynched by the vengeful mob.
As the movie ends, before the closing credits, the screen goes to black and the following message is shown:
In theory, the official hunt for war criminals in Bosnia continues to this day...However, the two most wanted men — Radovan Karadžić and Ratko Mladić, continue to elude the U.S, The United Nations, The European Union, NATO, The Hague and all in the civilized world who claim to be looking for them. In the ten years that Radovan Karadžić has been on the run, he has published two books and one play Perhaps if the International Community opened a summerstock theatre...But they're probably too busy "searching" for Osama Bin Laden.
Ratko Mladić was arrested on 26 May 2011 and Karadzic was arrested in Belgrade on 21 July 2008 and brought before Belgrade's War Crimes Court a few days later.
The film ends and is then followed by a montage of people and events seen in the movie with words such as 'really existed' flashed across the screen as various characters are shown throughout the film. | violence, revenge, murder, sadist, romantic | train | wikipedia | One of those "lost" films that only shows up on cable once in a while, THE HUNTING PARTY is a blood soaked western that is an obvious response to Sam Peckinpah's THE WILD BUNCH.
Made in 1971 by Don Medford and starring a young Candice Bergen, a vicious Gene Hackman, and Oliver Reed with an American accent.
But when you steal his "property", you sign your own death warrant.That is something that a notorious outlaw (Oliver Reed) and his gang have to learn in the worst way possible in THE HUNTING PARTY, a 1971 British/American western that, even by 21st century standards, is still incredibly violent.
And as he is a man driven by extreme jealousy (Bergen is his personal "property", whom he physically abuses on more than one occasion), the fact that Bergen is beginning to develop a rapport with Reed now gives him whatever license he feels he needs to kill her as well, though he drags it out for the sheer sadistic fun of it to a very cynical and blood-splattered conclusion.There isn't too much doubt that THE HUNTING PARTY was made to take advantage of the "market" opened up by THE WILD BUNCH and its director Sam Peckinpah's choreography of violent action, as well the spaghetti westerns of Sergio Leone.
Where THE HUNTING PARTY falls short, however, is in a crucial area that Peckinpah knew was vital to his film being successful: the action and plot must be character-driven and made to feel real to an audience.
Absent the complex psychological and character-driven narrative that propelled THE WILD BUNCH to a controversial but well-deserved glory, THE HUNTING PARTY can so easily be tagged, as more than a few critics have done (albeit perhaps too zealously), as an extremely bloody sagebrush shooting gallery in which violence is staged for the sake of violence.The film does succeed in giving us good performances from the three leads (notably Hackman, whose role is credibly sadistic to the highest degree); good cinematography done on location in Spain (as a stand-in for Texas); and supporting roles for L.Q. Jones (a member of Peckinpah's stock company); Simon Oakland; Mitchell Ryan; and William C.
And one can't fault the long-distance shooting that occurs, or the way it so ingeniously borrows a great old-world story (THE MOST DANGEROUS GAME) and puts it into a WILD BUNCH-type western format.
Had the filmmakers only paid a bit more attention to complex characters and motives here as Peckinpah had in his epic film, however, THE HUNTING PARTY might have been a bit more than a good, if incredibly and graphically violent, post-Peckinpah/Leone addition to a Western genre that was rapidly changing during the late 1960s and early 1970s..
Oliver Reed is stunning as Frank Calder, the tough leader of an outlaw gang who wants to learn to read.
Though his friends start to sicken of the game and beg him to stop, Rudger won't be deterred from the game.As the movie develops, Oliver Reed's scenes crackle with tension, energy, and a depth of sexuality that may surprise those who are more familiar with his roles as the heavy or antagonist.
A group of hired gunmen travelling north to participate in a range war (presumambly someplace like Kansas or Wyoming, as the story by all accounts seem to take place in the early 1880's) kidnap a hapless woman from a small town while her husband, a mean, sadistic sonofabitch cattle baron, is engaged in a hunting trip with his upper class buddies.
Seeing how this is the pessimistic and violent movie world of the early 70's we're talking about, if it's going to be predictable, you can at least be sure it's going to be bloody and grim and nihilistic in the process.You know it's a grim movie you're going to see when it opens with a shot of Gene Hackman roughing up his wife a little in that particularly mean-spirited way that made him such an endearing villain in the early 70's (and which he reprised for Clint Eastwood's UNFORGIVEN winning his second Oscar) intercut with shots of a cow being slaughtered.
The Hunting Party is dinstictly a product of its time, a loyal retracing of the steps back to THE WILD BUNCH instead of taking the genre to new areas, belonging to that particularly bloody and violent American western niche that followed in the wake of Peckinpah's film (along with others like Chato's Land, The Revengers, The Deadly Trackers etc).
Subverting and taking off the rose-tinted glasses the far west mythos was seen with by people like John Wayne, who cared so much about perceived values and ideals he had to make RIO BRAVO in response to Gary Cooper throwing down his star in HIGH NOON, taking a closer, more realistic look, if not at authentic period detail, then at least at how people were shot and killed.All blood and clamor aside however, The Hunting Party is just not a very good movie.
That Brandt Ruger (Gene Hackman) curiously refrains from shooting Frank Calder, the man who kidnapped his wife and whom he specifically set out to kill, when he gets plenty of chances to do so, seems to occur for no other reason than to stretch a final showdown that could have taken place in the first half hour into almost two hours.
It has a good plot, albeit obviously a response to "The Wild Bunch" and basically just another (western) interpretation of the legendary classic "The Most Dangerous Game", the cast is excellent with both Gene Hackman and Oliver Reed in great shape and there's plenty of rough and gritty violence.
Gene Hackman was never as vicious as here in this movie, portraying Brandt Ruger; a rich, obnoxious and egocentric bank owner who enjoys throwing hunting parties for his selected circle of equally depraved and wealthy friends.
When a posse of bandits, led by the ever handsome Oliver Reed, kidnaps his wife, Brandt alters the route of their planned hunting trip and goes after them.
Not so much because he loves his wife (played by the ravishing Candice Bergen), as he actually neglects and abuses her all the time, but because he's Brandt Ruger and nobody is supposed to touch what belongs to him.
The three leads are amazing and "The Hunting Party" comes with my highest possible recommendation if it were only for witnessing the final showdown between Reed and Hackman, two of the greatest actors that ever lived..
Gene Hackman and Oliver Reed face off in this hard-hitting Western from Don Medford (!).
When the outlaw named Frank (Oliver Reed) kidnaps his wife (Candice Bergen) for teaching him to read, Hackman forms the hunting group.
It´s a cool flick about an outlaw (Reed) who kidnappes rich farmers (Hackman) wife, but soon find himself attracted to his beatyfull hostage, while he finds himselv mercyless hunted by the enraged husband.
The version I watched, the MGM DVD issued in 2005, includes the scenes that IMDb lists as cut from earlier, European versions.>>> Mild Spoiler follows <<<Gene Hackman's character, Brandt, is obsessed with punishing the men who kidnapped his young wife.
Brandt Ruger (Gene Hackman)is a rich farmer who clearly doesn't give a damn about his wife (Candice Bergen).
After he have left on a hunting trip, his wife who helps out the school teacher is kidnapped by a gang of outlaws so she can teach their leader Frank (Oliver Reed) to read.
Infuriated and equipped with the long range rifles he and his rich pals for a hunting party with the mission to kill the entire gang and save his wife.This must be one of the darkest films ever made.
When Frank Calder steals his wife Ruger and his men start hunting down the gang.
Gene Hackman plays land baron Brandt Ruger, an amoral sadist living in the rural town that bears his surname, who leads a somewhat-leery pack of well-wrought gentleman friends on a hunt to kill the gunslingers responsible for kidnapping his wife (he also appears to want his wife killed as well, since she's obviously been raped and now may be carrying a bastard child!).
The "Hunting Party" of the title is led by coward rancher Brandt (Gene Hackman), who along with his gang, track down the dangerous bandit Frank Calder (Oliver Reed), kidnapper of Brandt's wife (Candice Bergen).
Brandt's reckless hunt to Calder (who has a bigger group of men) has one point in his favor: a collection of special rifles that can shoot to long distances, an unseen invention at the time, and unknown to Frank and his pals.No heroes, no villains.
The movie feels staggered for a long time, the plot takes a whole while to reach its best and most exciting parts - the hunting - but we can't deny that Don Medford made an impressive picture, filled with action, gory slow-motion shootouts like Mr. Sam P., with brief humored scenes (all effective) and greatly acted by Reed, Hackman, Mitchell Ryan and Bergen.
Frank Calder and his gang kidnap the rich rancher tyrant Brandt Ruger's wife Melissa.
On a hunting party with some wealthy friends, Brandt learns about this and their sights turn on Frank his men to demonstrate their new high-powered rifles that can shoot from over 800 yards.
Her husband Brandt Ruger (Gene Hackman) pursues the gang with a hunting party, aided by the latest and greatest rifles which can blow a man apart from long range.
Violence is not glamorized in any means and the film has moments that people in support of gun control would envy (i.e. Reed is forced to shoot his best friend, played by an excellent Mitchell Ryan, who is dying.
There is also another scene in the film where one member of the hunting party is seen vomiting after he has massacred several of Reed's gang members.
A straight off the 'French Connection pre- Poseidon Adventure Gene Hackman is the wealthy and salacious Rancher Brandt Ruger who departs on a hunting party leaving his beautiful trophy teacher wife a post 'Soldier Blue' Candice Bergan she's abducted by the famous outlaw Frank Calder a superb Oliver Reed who is looking to be taught how to read by Bergan.
But this 1971 movie is a western and there are no similarities between the two.Brandt Ruger (Gene Hackman) is a rich, ruthless, cruel, sadistic, womanizer rancher who sadomises his wife Melissa Ruger (Candice Bergen).
Candice Bergen looks beautiful.Another mention should be made of the original score, sound and songs all are very pleasing and nice.If someone wants to see a real good western action movie this could be the one, to spend an afternoon or evening on.(Stars 6.75 out of 10).
The genre is Western, the ripoff is of "The Wild Bunch," and excitement is distinctly lacking as a deep-south Oliver Reed kidnaps stressed-looking Candice Bergen (pretty much all she does is look stressed) so that the mysteriously dislikeable Gene Hackman can come and kill everyone with his newfangled high-powered rifles.
Oliver Reed has kidnapped Gene's wife, Candy Bergen.
Hunting Party, The (1971) * (out of 4) This Western is pretty much forgotten by everyone except for fans of violence and gore, which this thing has plenty of.
The story centers on a bandit (Oliver Reed) who kidnaps a teacher (Candice Bergen) so that she can teach him to read but her sadistic husband (Gene Hackman) is worried about her being raped and bringing home a bastard child so he and his friends form a hunting party and using their long-ranged rifles go after the men.
It's an awfully flawed movie: beautifully photographed locations alternating with appallingly cheap process shots, a totally wasted supporting cast of wonderful character actors (Mitchell Ryan, L.Q. Jones, Simon Oakland, G.D Spradling), main leads with different acting styles that don't completely jell (with Reed being the most exaggerated, Hackman the most effective, Bergen the most detached), and violence so horrifyingly mean and relentless that it kicks down the rather slim scaffolding in which the movie is built (and which was reused again in "The Man Who Loved Cat Dancing", another Bill Norton-scripted movie).
Still, those who are big fans of "The Wild Bunch", and don't mind stories with a nihilistic feel, should find this to be somewhat interesting.Oliver Reed (oddly cast, but not bad) plays Frank Calder, an American outlaw whose gang kidnaps Melissa Ruger (Candice Bergen), a young woman married to rancher Brandt Ruger (Gene Hackman).
Brandt is an extremely determined man, so when he gets wind of Melissas' kidnapping he swings into action, using a revolutionary high powered rifle and his hunting buddies as the rest of his posse.We'll see that, for all of his flaws, Frank has a sensitive, caring side, and is really a more appealing character than Brandt, who doesn't so much care for his wife as get angry that his property was taken from him and will get "spoiled".Only some draggy pacing ("The Hunting Party" doesn't need to be quite as long as it is) works against the film.
Candice Bergen is the poor wife of sadistic Gene Hackman.
When Hackman learns that Oliver Reed and friends have kidnapped his wife, he proposes a "Hunting Party" to take them out.
Q. Jones and the good Mitchell Ryan kidnap the bride of the wealthy Western entrepreneur and big game hunter, Gene Hackman.
Occasionally bloody and nail-biting Western performed by a great cast -- Hackman, Reed, Bergen, Oakland and LQ Jones (one of Peckinpah's favourites).
Hackman plays a rich, impotent brute whose wife (Bergen) is kidnapped by Reed.
Substituting his limp penis with a long gun that can shoot eight hundred yards, Hackman and his wealthy buddies start hunting Reed and his band of horny miscreants at long range.What's admirable here is the way director Medford handles both Bergen's developing relationship with Reed (shades of Stockholm Syndrome) and Hackman's gradual realization that he can't compete with the younger man on any level.The score, by Riz Ortolani (CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST), is sensational, and perfectly captures the sense of big trouble in a harsh land and the bloody inevitability of these men's lives.Aside from the inclusion of some awful process shots on an exterior train scene, the film's technical credits are top notch and cinematographer Cecilio Paniagua's dusty vistas are powerfully evocative.For me, the film's stand-out dramatic scene is Reed's "rape" of Bergen and its ambiguous aftermath.Pretty damn good..
The first hurdle to overcome for this viewer had to do with the idea that Melissa Ruger (Candice Bergen) could actually fall for an outlaw thug like Frank Calder (Oliver Reed).
The cattle baron is Brandt Ruger(Gene Hackman), his wife, Melissa(..the lovely Candice Bergen).
So Ruger assembles a group of his friends as a hunting party to seek after Frank and his outlaws, not knowing until much later that Melissa has become quite attached and affectionate towards her kidnapper.
But, if you want your fix of bloody violence with plenty of people blown away by long range rifles(..mostly by Hackman, who's a crack shot), then "The Hunting Party" might just be what the doctor ordered.
Like a lot westerns coming out in the 70's, I reckon "The Hunting Party" suffered as the genre was starting to wain, it very much an example of "The Wild Bunch" influence..
The movie contained an existential story, disguised as the story of a queen (Melissa) kidnapped by a charming thief (Frank, played by Oliver Reed), where the king (Brandt, played by Gene Hackman) following them to rescue the queen became a vile avenger, which in its turn was disguised as a story with guns and cowboy hats; but the chain of disguises became along the way somewhat sloppy.
Well, the more I think about the movie under this allegorical reading, the better it seems...Other things that bothered me about The Hunting Party were some random scenes of overacting (like the whole scene of Doc's death, where everybody seemed to have suddenly moved from the Western desert into a Shakespearean play on Broadway), mixed with moments of natural tenderness and human awkwardness (like the scene with the peaches, or like the love/rape scene between Melissa and Frank).
**SPOILERS** Coming across like a combination between "The Searchers" and "Wild Bunch" the western revenge movie "The Hunting Party" never quite matches, in blood gore and bullet ridden body's and body parts, either one of those movies.
Not that it lacks the vital ingredients of both but because it's so ridiculous that you have a hard time believing it.Riding through the town of Ruger outlaw Frank Calder, Oliver Reed, and his gang of desperado's kidnap Mellissa Ruger, Candice Bergen, for the sole purpose, in mistaking her for an elementary school teacher, of teaching Frank to read!
Getting the shocking news that his old lady, Mellissa, had been kidnapped Brandt shoots right back to Ruger, with his not too willing friends, to track and gun down Mellissa's kidnappers as well as save her from a fate worse then death; Being gang raped by Frank and his motley crew.Gunning down, at long range, most of Frank's men Brandt is shocked to later find out-from one of them- that his pretty and abused, mostly by him, wife has fallen in love with that dirty foul mouth and illiterate slob Frank Calder!
With the big winning prize, since by then a couple dozen persons had been killed over her, being non other then Brandt's kidnapped wife and Frank's lover the beautiful and now suffering from a serious case of sun stroke Mellissa Ruger!Not that bad of of film if you don't take it at all seriously and just watch it for laughs which I think that "The Hunting Party" was really intended for.
Oliver Reed kidnaps schoolmarm Candice Bergen and finds himself and his band of motley outlaws pursued by Bergen's lunatic husband (Gene Hackman).
No sooner has illiterate outlaw Frank Calder (Oliver Reed of "The Three Musketeers") kidnapped a gorgeous woman, Melissa Ruger (Candice Bergen of "Soldier Blue"), so she can teach him how to read than the woman's hypocritical husband (Gene Hackman) pursues them with a vengeance.
*** SPOILERS *** I liked the first half of this movie, bolstered by an excellent cast of Hackman, Reed and Bergen. |
tt0054446 | Visit to a Small Planet | Kreton (Jerry Lewis) is an alien from outer space who is fascinated by human beings. Against the wishes of his teacher, he repeatedly visits Earth. During his latest visit, his teacher reluctantly agrees to allow him to stay and study the humans. Kreton becomes friends with a suburban family and stays with them after they agree to keep his alien status a secret. Along the way, he falls in love with their daughter (Joan Blackman). However, there is a force field around him that prevents any physical contact. His race has abolished any form of affection.
After repeatedly breaking his teacher's rule against never getting involved in humans' lives, all of Kreton's powers are stripped away. This so that he can discover for himself that being human comes with other, less desired, emotions like pain, sadness, and jealousy. Once his cover is blown on Earth, and he is reported to the police, Kreton decides that those emotions are not worth the trouble, so he returns to his own planet. | romantic | train | wikipedia | The idea of Jerry Lewis popping in from 8 million light years away in his saucer to help Gen. Lee's troops fight the "damn yankees" should be enough incentive for anyone to make time for this and it doesnt disappoint.
Unfortunately Jerry miscalculated and landed on Earth 100 years later-he's a student, not a very smart one but he is majoring in the "Earth" so his natural curiosity brought him down for a short stay, much to the frustration and eventual amusement of his mentor Mr. Delton on his home planet where his every move is monitored on the first 60" wide screen I can remember seeing.
I thought I was going to fall out of my chair watching Jerry take his first glass of whiskey and then walk up the wall and stand on the ceiling to have a conversation with his host.
Earl Holliman is very funny in an early role and Joan Blackman is scrumptious as Holliman's love interest that he can never seem to keep his hands off of.
Just a great movie and I think ranks in Lewis' top three with The Bellboy and The Errand Boy. Don't miss it.
A bumbling, clowning alien visitor named Kreton observes the ways of humans here on Earth.
Arriving in Richmond, Virginia in Civil War costume in 1960, he believes he is just in time to witness the beginnings of the Civil War, but is off by 100 years.
He then decides to observe the customs of 20th Century American life, including such things as lovemaking rituals and what people do for entertainment: he watches two people romantically involved with each other (Holliman & Blackman), billing and cooing at one another, and ends up getting between them; he goes to a Beatnik nightclub, and realizes that the Beatniks are more like the aliens he knows than humans.
Lots of hilarious Jerry Lewis mugging, sight-gags and comedy routines, terrific special effects work by the master John P.
Terrific counterpoint with Lewis' Kreton and his professor back home, Mr. Delton, played by the distinguished English actor John Williams; a few Lewis gems: "Keep your nose out of other people's planets", even if you think "the grass is greener on the other side of the galaxy"!
Too bad it wasn't filmed in Technicolor; that's really the only flaw I find in it - it was made in b&w.
Great fun for the whole family, with a terrific cast.
This was Lewis' last studio picture under his old Paramount contract before he formed his own independent production company; he made "The Bellboy" in six weeks completely on his own, right after completing work on this movie, and sold it to Paramount.
Delightful for Jerry Lewis fans, and a delightful music score by Leigh Harline.
Curious Jerry Lewis enterprise is better than most....
Goofy alien Jerry Lewis lands on Earth, decides to try the suburban way of life for awhile, angering his superior officers in space.
Screenwriter Edmund Beloin adapted Gore Vidal's play, but it doesn't seem directly tailored for Lewis' mugging talents--which is a blessing.
The material is actually quite sophisticated, with a fair amount of witty lines and good supporting performances by Joan Blackman, Earl Holliman and Gale Gordon.
Jerry Lewis himself isn't bad; he had yet to be reeled-in by a strong director, but he isn't grating or overtly offensive here.
Film version of Gore Vidal's stage hit was later re-made as TV's Mork and Mindy.
UFO movies in the 50's and early 60's usually dealt with unfriendly, intellectually superior aliens out to kill helpless and somewhat naive humans.
Then comes Jerry Lewis as a friendly, intellectually lacking alien who is out to study the "human condition." Most of the gags have been used and reused again on countless sitcoms but they are done well.
Great character actors give hilarious supporting performances.
Supposedly Gore Vidal was not happy with this version of his play.
I've seen Vidal on TV many times over the years and never once ever seen him laugh or smile so maybe he has a different definition of comedy than the rest of the planet..
Jerry at his best working for someone else.
I was five years old when this movie came out and was intrigued more by the special effects (Jerry floating in air and walking up the wall and onto the ceiling).
It was also of not that this was his last film for many years where he had someone else direct the film (the veteran Norman Taurog).
From this Jerry went to make his kind of movies.
This film also had a good supporting cast and had a "stagy" look befitting its origins as a play.
Although somewhat funny because of the typical Jerry Lewis antics, it bears very little resemblance to the original TV and Broadway plays which was supposedly the basis for the film.
The premise is that an alien (of superior intelligence) comes to earth and makes rather scathing comments and conclusions from his observations about American (and world) cultures and societies.
Most likely rather accurate reflections of the author's (Gore Vidal) thoughts on the subjects and issues.
The film version vaguely touched on some and made the alien a very naive buffoon which turned a great satire into a comic farce for laughs only and of little intellectual value.I keep hoping that someday a video version of the TV broadcast will be released.
What must Gore Vidal have thought?.
Back in 1955 Gore Vidal wrote a television play that later went to Broadway for 388 performances and starred Cyril Ritchard and Eddie Mayehoff.
It was meant to be a satire on McCarthyism with an alien miscalculating a visit to Earth's American Civil War and arriving in Virginia a century later.
So what must he have thought when his Broadway play wound up a vehicle for Jerry Lewis.
Not that it's a bad Jerry Lewis, not his best to be sure, but surely not what Vidal intended.Jerry plays a most innocent alien with powers akin to what Ray Walston had in my favorite Martian.
His people like his mentor John Williams are just below the Organians from Star Trek in that they still have corporeal bodies.
Jerry wants to feel some earth like experiences so Williams gives him a chance.He experiences emotions all right, but a little too much for one Visit To A Small Planet.
How he copes with Earth and its Earthlings is for you watch the film for.I can see that the characters that are played by the cynical Fred Clark and the excitable and paranoid Gale Gordon might have made great counterpoints for satire.
But Jerry Lewis never has done satire and I doubt at his age he'll try it.
Carroll's wife in the television version of Topper.It's jealousy that does Jerry in, mainly the jealousy that Earl Holliman feels as his girl and Clark and Patrick's daughter Joan Blackman starts taking an interest in their outer space visitor.
Holliman must have felt ridiculous doing the part.Best sequence in the film is Lewis and Blackman's visit to a beatnik joint and the impression he makes on all those cool cats.
You'll get a chance to see ace drummer Buddy Rich in that scene and that should never be passed up.Visit To A Small Planet is a decent enough Jerry Lewis film, but far from whatever Gore Vidal had in mind..
Silly Fun. This has to be where Robin Williams drew his inspiration from for Mork of Ork. While this movie is by no means the funniest fish out of water film you could see, I think it still rates a look IF you could just find it somewhere....
Jerry Lewis was a big kid.
He believed that all he was doing was fun and that everyone would laugh.
His best film is "Which Way to the Front?" directed by himself.
I think I laughed a little when I've seen "The Ladies Man," but I'm not sure.
This "Visit to a Small Planet" is totally stupid, you have nothing to laugh about at all..
Not bad but the longer the film goes, the more tiring it comes..
"Visit to a Small Planet" is an early Jerry Lewis solo film.
Apparently, it was originally a teleplay and then a very successful Broadway play and I have no idea how close all this is to the film.
However, considering that the author was NOT at all pleased with the casting of Lewis, I assume the projects are very, very different.The planet begins in some sort of far off world across the universe.
A crazy guy (Lewis) makes a nuisance of himself and constantly talks about how fascinated he is by humans that the big boss-man (John Williams) decides to allow him to visit this insignificant place--to get it out of his system.
There, he meets a nice family and hangs out with them--getting into all sorts of adventures.Some of the film is quite funny (such as when Jerry drinks for the first time).
However, the longer the film goes, the less fun it becomes.
It's unusual to see a film fade like this one did, but the final portion lost momentum and had some flat moments that were clearly overdone.
Also, occasionally Lewis mugged a bit too much--something that he had a tendency to do a bit too often in his films.
I'm suspicious to talk about Jerry Lewis he make part of my life in my youthful days,and today a l have almost all movie from this true genius of the comedy whose many actors were inspired by him,like Jim Carrey....this time he came to the Earth as a clumsy friendly alien visitor,who didn't scary nobody except a fearful dog which he talk each other....great acting from veteran actor Fred Clark , the always fine Earl Holliman and John Williams as Alien leader who almost stolen the movie with a funny performance!!Just came out officially in Brazil with dubbed short version and extended subtitled version,sorry for a wrong choice for black and white photograph...as comedy works well in color!!Resume:First watch: 2017 / How many: 1 / Source: DVD / Rating: 7.25.
Jerry as a space man.
Jerry Lewis plays a space man called Kreton, who comes to this small planet called Earth.There he meets these weird Earth people and gets in troubles.Visit to a Small Planet is a nice Jerry Lewis comedy from 1960.It's not his greatest works, but it has some funny parts, as Jerry Lewis comedies usually.
Watch the movie if you're a Jerry Lewis fan and even if you're not.Give it a chance..
A must see for Jerry's fans!.
I didn't know this movie exists, so I'm very surprised, because as a boy I just loved Jerry Lewis.
Once, in my naivety, I even called Paramount Pictures and asked to talk to Jerry.
He wasn't there, they said.Some people commented, Gore Vidal wasn't happy with Jerry Lewis playing the main character.
I totally disagree: Jerry is trying very hard to save a script that simply isn't funny!
Yes, unfortunately this is a very unfunny comedy, but the little funny moments come all from Jerry.
Actually I think it was a mistake that Jerry accepted to play in this movie, because this story is too silly even by Jerry Lewis' standards!
So, watch it as a Jerry's rarity and try to enjoy it as such..
Not one of Jerry Lewis' best.
but don't expect the same quality as other Jerry Lewis movies.
Although there are some really funny scenes, Kreton is not half as funny as that other crazy alien, Mork (played by Robin Williams), and the movie lacks action and moves on very slowly through a thin plot a a lot of standard gags..
Bland Film Without Many Laughs.
Visit to a Small Planet (1960) ** (out of 4)Kreton (Jerry Lewis) is an alien who has always been fascinated by Earth.
Whenever he gets a chance he breaks away from his people to take a closer look.
Finally, he's allowed to stay on Earth and ends up inside the home of a man who doesn't believe there's anything out in space.Apparently this Gore Vidal script was originally meant for the television and it's easy to see that.
VISIT TO A SMALL PLANET is a pretty forgettable film on many levels, although I'm sure die hard fans of Lewis will still want to check it out.
Sadly, the interesting premise is pretty much ruined by a film without too many laughs and an overall cheap look.As I said, it's clear that this was meant to be something for television and what really hurts the picture is the fact that it just runs out of gas around the thirty-minute mark and things can never pick up.
The film goes on way too long and that's a problem when it clocks in at just 85-minutes.
There are a few funny moments with the alien experiences a few things for the first time but this isn't enough to carry the picture.Lewis is fairly bland and boring in the role of the alien.
IT's pretty easy to see why VISIT TO A SMALL PLANET has been forgotten over the years..
The stage play (expanded by Vidal from his TV script) opened on Broadway at the Booth on 7 February 1957 and ran a most successful 388 performances with Cyril Ritchard (who also directed) in the lead.
COMMENT: When it relies more on the original play and less on the "talents" of Jerry Lewis, Visit to a Small Planet is moderately entertaining.
Lewis fortunately is assisted by far more able comedians in Fred Clark and Gale Gordon who make the most of the risible situations and cynical dialogue.
Miss Blackman is an agreeable heroine, whilst Earl Holliman has one of his meatiest parts as her jealous but not over-bright suitor.
The extraneous incidents tacked on to the play, particularly a tediously long "beatnik" interlude in which Lewis gets to dance with - well not so much "with" as "around" - Barbara Lawson, were better left on the cutting-room floor.
Some of the special effects are quite attractively contrived, though others are constrained by the film's obviously limited budget.
Many of these effects sequences feature John Williams who seems to be acting at half steam.
OTHER VIEWS: By the humble standards of Jerry Lewis, this is a fairly engaging comedy for half its length.
But after a boring and tedious and overlong visit to a beatnik dive, the film loses just about all its steam and resorts to a replay of the romantic situations plus a mild attempt at a slapstick climax which doesn't come off.
The special effects are fairly effective and the support playing is adequate though Miss Blackman is not a particularly attractive heroine either in looks or personality and players like Clark, Gordon and Cowan act in a broad caricature manner which doesn't jell so well with the less animated playing of Blackman and Holliman.
Mr Lewis is a bit more restrained than usual, though director Taurog still allows him a full quota of close-ups in which he mugs away to his heart's content.
Aside from a bit of by-play with a glass screen in front of the camera, the direction is ruthlessly routine.
.. I like Gore Vidal, but in this one, I prefer Jerry Lewis's version..
I remember seeing this move in it's original rum in the Central Square Theatre when I was a kid, but I read the play years later in my high school library in a book of plays from that year.I still remember Fred Clark as the Dad whom I knew from TV shows like The Burns and Allen Show.
There where many sight gags in the movie which made me laugh uproariously at the time, and I remember sharing many scenes to old friends in the projects just afterwards.One I remember particularly was when Kreton (Lewis) played some bongos without touching them as the drummer(Buddy Rich, whom I didn't know THEN) angrily played the drum.I also remember Joan Blackman's boyfriend as Earl Holliman.
He was one of those who I knew better in television on a lot of westerns and an early Twilight Zone episode, and a character part in Forbidden Planet.Many actors I learned about much after the fact from TV versions or reruns.I loved this movie then, and I love it even more now.I still don't understand or get those who hate Jerry Lewis in films, but I certainly understand those who didn't like him as a person.Having met him one time in a local TV Show when I brought him a portrait I had done, he didn't look at me much as he told me his wife took those.
She even introduced me to her son, whom I believe is now working for Jerry's business answering fan mail.I think this is one of his best, and it only gets better with each viewing.
I don't think Gore Vidal's play would work since it was more of a satire of the McCarthy hearings, and wouldn't hold as well as this movie..
Jerry Lewis, Gore Vidal, and a talking dog....
A mildly entertaining film based on a Gore Vidal play.
Jerry Lewis is an alien visiting Earth to observe the inhabitants.
He causes some mayhem for pompous TV host Fred Clark and gets involved in a romantic triangle with Joan Blackman & Earl Holliman.
There's not much more to it...Lewis performs some tricks, mostly involving levitating things.
There's a talking dog (and cat!), Gale Gordon as a nosy neighbor and a very funny sequence in a beatnik night-club ("shave my beard and call me normal!") Lewis goons it up in a role that seems to have been tailor made for him, though it wasn't.
Directed with a tiny bit of panache by old-timer Norman Taurog (he won the 1931 Oscar for directing SKIPPY), who spent the last fifteen years of his career helming Martin & Lewis films as well as a fair amount of Elvis films. |
tt1274295 | Kaminey | Charlie and Guddu are twins who were raised in Mumbai. Charlie lisps while Guddu stutters. Charlie likes to take shortcuts to fulfill his dream of becoming a bookmaker at the racecourse where he works for three criminal brothers who fix races. He is closer to the youngest brother Mikhail than to Guddu, to whom he is hostile. A jockey deceives Charlie when he bets ₹100,000 (US$1,600) on a horse during a fixed race, losing all of his savings. Seeking revenge, Charlie locates the jockey in an upmarket city hotel.
At the same hotel, policemen Lobo and Lele kill three drug dealers and collect a guitar case containing cocaine, which they must deliver to drug lord Tashi. Charlie and his men invade the jockey's hotel room and take all his possessions. The ensuing chase leads to the hotel car park where Lobo and Lele are placing the guitar case in their van. Charlie and his men seize the van to escape from the jockey's men and realise they had stolen a police vehicle, whilst also discovering the cocaine, which Charlie steals to sell. The policemen, upon returning, discover that the cocaine is missing and set out to find Charlie.
Meanwhile, Guddu's lover Sweety, sister of the politician Sunil Bhope, reveals that she is pregnant with Guddu's child and expresses her wish to marry Guddu. They marry later that night. Bhope hears about his sister's actions and sends his men to apprehend the lovers. Bhope's men gatecrash Guddu's wedding and beat him, then realise that he is a migrant from Uttar Pradesh. This enrages Bhope, who orders his men to kill Guddu and return Sweety to his house so he can arrange a marriage for her. Sweety fights off her brother's henchmen and escapes with Guddu.
Charlie tells Mikhail about the cocaine, who is delighted. When Charlie returns to retrieve the case, Bhope and his men are waiting inside the van. One of Bhope's men recognises Guddu as Charlie's twin and Bhope demands that Charlie reveal Guddu's whereabouts. An inebriated Mikhail interrupts their conversation and is killed by Bhope.
On the way to the airport, Guddu realises that Sweety has faked her stutter. At a petrol station, Lobo and Lele notice the pair. Mistaking Guddu for Charlie, they arrest him. They assault Guddu, refusing to believe that he is Charlie's twin brother until Guddu's mobile phone rings; the caller is revealed to be Bhope. Lobo and Lele agree to exchange Charlie for Guddu and Sweety on a train. The policemen take Guddu and Sweety to Bhope's house, where Bhope reveals that a local builder will pay him ₹50 million (US$780,000) to marry Sweety to the builder's son. Guddu bargains with Bhope—if he retrieves the cocaine-filled guitar case for Bhope, he will get Sweety. Bhope sends his henchmen with Guddu to retrieve the guitar case from Charlie's house.
The policemen assault Charlie, who refuses to negotiate, realising that the policemen are in as much trouble as himself. Charlie outwits the policemen, takes them hostage and negotiates with Tashi to exchange the guitar case for ₹1 million (US$16,000). Charlie sends the policemen to deliver the details to Tashi and returns to his house to retrieve the cocaine. At Charlie's house, Guddu arrives with Bhope's men. Sweety hears about Bhope's plans to kill Guddu and shoots at the members of her household. Guddu finds the case and fights Charlie, who lets Guddu go. Guddu takes the cocaine to the police, who bug him. Guddu arrives at Bhope's house the same time as Tashi and his gang, with Charlie as their hostage. Bhope and Tashi negotiate to trade the drugs, but Charlie snatches the guitar case and threatens to destroy it if Guddu and Sweety are not released. The lovers escape as the police arrive, leading to a shooting spree in which the cocaine is destroyed. Charlie's bosses arrive to avenge Mikhail's death, but are killed along with Bhope, Tashi and their henchmen. Charlie is shot and wounded.
Sweety gives birth to Guddu's twins and Charlie opens a bookmaking counter at the racecourse. Charlie is engaged to Sophia, a woman earlier featured in his dream. | cult, neo noir, murder, flashback | train | wikipedia | Shahid Kapoor has always been a good actor in the simpleton Guddu type roles,but here he literally burns the screen as the whacko race-bookie Charlie.The tremendous passion which he brings to screen really keeps the viewers riveted to this scintillating saga of twin brothers.
Special mention would go to Priyanka Chopra, who plays Guddu's love interest Sweety, who nails the role to perfection.The movie shows the parallel lives of identical twins Guddu and Charlie who detest each other and haven't seen each other in years but how circumstances lead them to face each other.
Shahid, Vishal Bhardwaj & the background score has created a landmark in the industry for centuries to come in terms of cinematic excellence..I cannot agree anymore with Mr. Taran Adarsh when he says "Vishal Bhardwaj picked up the characters & executed them like Tarantino & Guy Ritchie.." You'll totally agree with that!It is clearly visible how hard the whole crew has worked to attain perfection, because the movie WAS PERFECT in every aspect!!
Upcoming directors have one of the biggest threats Vishal Bhardwaj in their way, if they at all touch a subject close to this..Shahid, Priyanka, Chandan Roy Sanyal (Mikhail), Amol Gupte (Bhope) were truly, truly outstanding!!I feel short of words to describe this movie..
After tense stories of Maqbool & Omkaara, he takes a deliberate take away from Shakespeare and delivers instead an awesome dark and twisted tale of two brothers each with his own share of mess to take care of, not to mention their speech impediments that provide some great sounding dialog to the audience and depth to the characters.
The mixture of comedy and action in the same scene is something that is extremely unique, and it shows that little bit of realism that people can see in their normal lives.The sound-work has been off the hook, mixing old Hindi songs and eerie tracks into the movie has really made the movie look different, and keeps you wondering what thrill will pop up.To be honest, in the start of his career, I found Shahid Kapoor to be a very over-excited actor, and he even threw in the occasional over-acting here and there.
All the promos and the rocking 'Dhan-te-nan' promised me that I was about to experience an intelligent Guy-Ritchiesque, Tarantino-ish thriller.But no words I can put here can sum up the movie better than the comments of my film loving mother: "What a mess!!" OK..OK..i'll go back a little..and give the film it's due, although it's awe-fully tough to pin-point the things I liked about this mess without putting a 'but' & 'if-only' after the statement.The film starts off rather well..the initial pace with which the plot is gradually unraveled is handled very well..the 1st half present an enthralling tale of drugs, deceit, quirky characters and well shot frames with a rather likable dark undertone.
Damn.I can go on & on & on about all the little things I disliked or barely-liked which would, in essence break down the facade of this whole film which, according to me was a badly executed, half-baked mess (all due to the 2nd half).However, full makrf to Fahid Kapur for a brilliantly execufid role as Charlie..and to Vishal - all I can say is that you're a brilliant director no doubt & my salute to you for making Omkara & Maqbool - 2 of the finest Hindi movies made, ever..but with Kaminey, you've certainly lost some credibility in my eyes.In my eyes, there are only 2 ways to enjoy this movie: 1) Watch the 1st half, eat some pop corn and go back home.
To the director's credit, the movie has its tiny bits – the hotel room shootout scene which must be the most intense, the cinematography of Dhan Te Tan with invigorating visuals and the Guddu- Sweety wedding ceremony clash before the intermission that involved the relentless beating up of Guddu and a high octane performance by Priyanka Chopra in her career best 2 min on screen.
PS : Watch this movie as it was the first time Shahid Kapoor came out of his chocolate boy image and delivered a superb performance with likes of our desi girl Priyanka Chopra
shahid kapoor has been most overrated actor .who has failed to live up to his reputation...but things turned out to be magical as kaminey hit theater's...the portrayal of guddu and Charlie by shahid kapoor....makes one fall in love with the portrayal of the movie..while one roots for sex magnetic Charlie and other fall for the innocent stammerer guddu..priyanka again sweeps the show and proves why she is the one the best actress ever..the surprise package is amol gupte as the baddie of the film.no one can say its his debut looking at the glimpse in his eyes..watch out for surprise package the third Bengali brother....!!!!!!
Kaminey directed by Vishal Bharadwaj is one of the best movies that has been brought out in the Indian Cinema.Excellent performances,brave writing,stylish narration,engrossing background score and superb cinematography makes Kaminey a must-watch not once but twice,thrice..Story: Guddu (Shahid Kapoor) and Charlie (Shahid Kapoor) are identical twins born and raised in the slums of Mumbai.
The music by Vishal Bharadwaj is very good.The dialogs are witty.The cinematography is good too.Performances: Shahid Kapoor does an excellent job as Guddu and Charlie.It would have been a tough job for acting as both, Charlie who lisps and Guddu who stammers,but yet Shahid Kapoor manages to take both Guddu and Charlie to another level with his excellent performance.Amole Gupte as Bhope Bhau is an actor to watch out after Shahid.He is superb,mind-blowing,awesome...I am falling short of adjectives to describe his performance.Special mention of Tengzing Nima who portrays the role of Tashi is fantastic.Priyanka Chopra,although having a minimal role is fine.Her Marathi accent is good.Deb Mukherjee as Mujeeb,Shiv Subramanium as Lobo,Chandan Roy Sanyal as Mikhail are excellent in their respective roles.All in all,Kaminey is a must-watch not once but twice or thrice because it has the guts to be something different from the other Hindi movies.I am giving it a nine on ten.Thumbs Up!.
i think Kaminey was the best movie of the year 2009 and will remain one of the best movies that Indian cinema has ever given.Shahid Kapur and Vishal Bharadwaj are the stars of the movie.A movie works because of its script and Kaminey has an excellent story and screenplay.The movie is on par with a classic Hollywood movie in all aspects.i was saddened when the movie lost the best movie award to 3 idiots.as we all know,Dhan Te Nan is a chart buster.Vishal Bharadwaj's direction is simply superb.His music is excellent.The movie's story is so simple yet so complex that you actually have to take a few minutes to explain the movie or say nothing at all!
Simply superb story and screenplay.coming to the performances,Priyanka Chopra is elegant as is Amol Gupte and Chandan Roy Sanyal but it is Shahid Kapur who stands out as the soul of the movie through his renditions of Charlie and Guddu,two contrasting characters played so convincingly by Shahid that you feel they are played by different people.it is Shahid's best performance till date for which he deserved a Filmfare award but Indian cinema does not honour excellent movies instead they honour some totally insane and senseless movies.i would say that if you want a taste of cinema,watch Kaminey,an simple story told in a way you would least expect it to be told.marvellous,excellent,fantastic and fabulous!!!.
First of all I would like to extend a big "THANK YOU" note to director Vishal Bhardwaj for acknowledging the fact that this film was inspired by an idea of Cajetan Boy. I absolutely hate and detest those Bollywood movies which become blockbusters and shamelessly copy from other Hollywood movies without even giving them credit and acknowledging them.2) Acting: What to say about it !!!
The effort from Vishal Bhardwaj is also commendable that how in all his movies he manages to extract such superlative performances from all his actors and actresses (Tabu in Maqbool, Kareena Kapoor and Konkana Sen in Omkara, Shreya Sharma in Blue Umbrella and Priyanka Chopra in Kaminey).3) Sound: The background musical score and the songs were fantabulous !!
I would like to make a big REQUEST to Vishal Bhardwaj that "Please sing more in movies !!!" I was really surprised and thoroughly enjoyed his singing the title track of the movie.(In fact I think the song of this film which I have heard the most is 'Kaminey' sung by Vishal Bhardwaj) 4) Humor : The lines are very witty and humor is never forced in the movie by performing silly slapstick sequences.P.S.:- I can go on and on about the movie for hours (maybe even days !!) it is so good.
After multiple viewings, this aspect of Kaminey gains more prominence than any other and that includes the more exalted - Bharadwaj's TarantinoRitchiesque approach to the screenplay, Shahid Kapoor's research behind the execution of the speech defects, Amol Gupte, Priyanka Chopra and Dhan Ta Nan. The elderly Bengali brothers Mujeeb and 'Fumon' are avuncular in their adoration of Mikhail who prefers Charlie's company much like Charlie himself.
The non-linear screenplay is filled with unfamiliar twists and confusing turns that are likely to baffle you along the way; yet they're all neatly tied up and culminate in a thrilling climax which is violent and comical in equal parts.The film's dialogue is top-notch; writer-director Vishal Bharadwaj finds a way to make the lines humorous without ever seeming to ask for a laugh.Kaminey boasts the best performance you will see by an ensemble cast in a long time, and that includes even the bit players.Of the central cast, Amole Gupte is fantastic as the demented Jai Maharashtra-spouting gangster-politician Bhope, and Chandan Roy Sanyal hits all the right notes as the coke-addicted Mikhail.Also delivering impressive turns are Tenzing Nima as the charismatic drug-smuggler Tashi and Shiv Subramanium as the vulnerable corrupt cop Lobo.Shahid Kapur rises to the challenge of creating two entirely different characters out of Charlie and Guddu, and delivers a credible performance as each.Breaking out of his chocolate-boy image, he gives evidence of his potential when trusted with well-written roles.Springing a delightful surprise in a smaller part is Priyanka Chopra as the feisty Sweety, who sprinkles her lines with a smattering of fluent Marathi and emerges one of the film's most lovable characters.For an audience numbed by predictable Bollywood potboilers week after week, Kaminey might take some time to settle into; go in with an open mind and enjoy the ride.With unchoreographed action scenes and dances, and long portions with no background score at all, it's a wildly imaginative, original offering from a fearless filmmaker who doesn't insult your intelligence.I'm going with 10 out of 10 for director Vishal Bharadwaj's Kaminey; amidst all the bloodshed and bullets, this film has a full beating heart.
It is violent but not gratuitously shown...it is funny (without being broad)...it is definitely a very stylishly put together movie...nothing is slammed in your face...its for you pick the nuances and enjoy it...Above all the writing of the individual characters is the best - charlie, guddu, sweety, dhope (my favourite of the lot), mikhail (great name for a bengali gangster!) and tashi...
Vishal Bhradwaj's Kaminey is one of those tense, rich entertainments falling in the genre Quentin Tarantino and Coen brothers bred since their emerging heydays.A departure from dark, his previous two superb back to back adaptations of Shakespeare's great tragedies (Maqbool-Macbeth, Omkara-Othello) supremely talented writer-director reinvents himself with his latest.
the latest flick from Vishal Bhardwaj who is widely considered to be one of the best directors to emerge from the Bollywood factory in recent years.It has been widely compared to the work of Guy Ritchie which is true to some extent in its style of storytelling and something of a novelty for the majority of Indian audiences.It has been also called a very hollywoodish film (whatever that means!)..if that it means better production values yes Kaminey delivers..
That's really a good news for the Hindi Film Industry since after a long time, this kind of response is seen for a complete out of the box, dark and witty thriller coming from the thinking director, Vishal Bhardwaj.So all geared up, we got seated excitingly in the theater, expecting a complete new chapter to unfold on the screen.
So the viewer keeps waiting for some funny dialogues or humorous sequences to be there but instead they have to laugh on the deliberate stammering act by the second Shahid (in double role).The other major point to be considered is the unimpressive use of the Smash Hit song "Dhan Tan Nan" in the movie.
The surprise act of Amol Gupte is quite pleasant since he delivers a fine controlled performance as The Bhai.Musically, keeping the cult track "Dhan Tan Nan" aside, I found the soundtrack a bit less scoring then the earlier works of both Vishal Bhardwaj & Gulzar.
The performances were decent or may be the best of their life times for the actors, I don't give a damn but the plot, the character development, the story the concept for which I was craving all through was so flawed and I am still not liking it...should I dare to watch it again I would be more angry After, coming out my initial reaction was he screwed it all up and he was the biggest KAMINA as he cut the ass of viewers like me and made an illusion as the best movie of the year nope not you mister Vishal Bharadwaj.
no clichés and most of all is relative and meaningful to the common man of 21st century...Omkara was much better work and each of the characters had a special impression on the audience ...was a very Forceful movie in a nutshell right from the Hijacking start ...for all i know Blue umbrella could have won an Oscar if it was released at the right place and at the right time with of course with the right budget...this is just my side of opinion which in no way overshadows your previous Masterpieces ..u still a genius.
Well they can be ..Kaminey is not the usual bollywood which has come to be recognized with senseless love stories...Its a masterstroke ...a movie which leaves u gasping for breath and asking for more...Shahid finally does it ..
The music is awesome and goes with the flow of the movie.The first half is pretty good but its the second half that blew me away especially the last 20 minutes with the exceptionally well shot climax scenes and the way humor is used even when everybody is shooting bullets.I want to thank Vishal Bhardwaj and the cast and crew of Kaminey for restoring my faith in Bollywood..
U don't expect such movies out of bollywood !If there ever is a word "engaging" in the English dictionary , n if u think of it in terms of screenplay in bollywood ; it has to be Kaminey.I have never seen a more engaging , ferociously fast n splendid screenplay ever for a long long time.Kaminey tells us the story of Two brothers - Guddu ( the sweet innocent boy ) n Charlie ( a local goon who works for the underworld) .
Amol Gupte who plays Bhope typically stands out and makes the villain look crazy enough to start admiring the actor, but then others fail to reach there.Coming back to the twins, i like the character of Shahid both Guddu and Charlie to stand out, like the dialogue in the movie, "Ek Haqlata hai, Doosra (f)Totla hai." In English, "one stammers, the other lisps".
The director manages to use certain styles developed by the two iconic directors and blend them into something that is the cinematic equivalent of tandoori chicken, which for those who don't know, is really tasty.The acting was excellent, Shahid Kapoor truly comes of age as the stuttering Guddu and the lisping Charlie, pulling off the dialogues and mannerisms without a hitch, Priyanka Chopra too was excellent as the fiery Sweety, in fact hers was the stand-out performance of the movie.
As the name suggests this film may seems “kaminey” to all those producers who released their films recently.This film is original,speedy,dark ,humorous and looks international.Vishal Bhardwaj with his previous great films like Omkara and Maqbool already sets a very high standard for himself, again comes out with a great script,.”Kaminey” is the first Indian film with noir texture(Partly).Shahid Kapur who plays twin brother(Guddu and Charlie) one with dark shed and other with light romantic shed, delivers his best ever performance till date.Priyanka chopra plays a bubly crazy but not so stupid girl sweety,also done a great job with perfect marathi mulgi expression and attitude.Amole Gupte(the real man behind Taare Zamen Par)also make a great comeback.Good story with unique twists and great background music (also By Vishal Bhardwaj) makes it really a pleasure to watch.Great lighting and cinematography by Tassaduq Hussain completes its international look and gives another reason to watch that film.The main problem with the film is its bollywood masala ending where all the character comes together and makes a clumsy silly ordinary ending.After great 2hr this ending really disappoints.Another problem is involving too many characters and not able to justify few of them properly(Like Character Played by Rajatava Datta just wasted).Though typical bollywood ending,this film has great substance and really worth a watch.Hats off to Mr Vishal Bhardwaj for such brave and different attempt..
An almost perfect direction and power-packed performances from Shahid Kapur & Priyanka Chopra, make this one of the best movies Bollywood has seen.
Bhardwaj has expended valuable screen time building up characters like 'Tashi the Great' and the crazy Bong brothers — and you see nothing of their individuality or agency in the climax where they supposedly play an important role (this is another area in which the movie falls way short of Reservoir Dogs — a film Kaminey has been compared to — where the explosive climax works precisely because it derives from subtle characterization). |
tt0425132 | Inside | The film opens with gloomy footage of night-time Dublin and a female radio DJ talking about three girls who recently went missing in the city centre. While in a pawnshop a young man (Eoin Macken) pawns his ring for cash, offered €50 he demands €200, and eventually accepts €75 and a second hand camcorder. He discovers a tape still inside, sits in a cafe, plays back the footage on the camera and watches the film.
In the footage, a group of girls; Sienna (Kellie Blaise), Cara (Tereza Srbova), Louise (Vanessa Fahy) and Sian (Natalia Kostrzewa) are heading out for the 21st birthday of Corina (Siobhan Cullen). As a gift, Sienna and Cara have bought Corina a video camera, with which they plan to record the evening's events. They blindfold Corina and instead of going to a club they break into an disused, abandoned and ramshackled warehouse on a secluded back street, much to Sian's disapproval. Once there, they start drinking, Corina's boyfriend Barry (Sean Stewart) arrives, and they reminisce and share secrets. After Barry leads Sian to a toilet, the remaining girls complain and back-stab about Sian. Louise then takes the camera and discovers Barry having sex with Sian.
Then three vagrant, violent men; Eamo (Brian Fortune), Scat (Karl Argue) and Hughie (Emmett Scanlan) break in and gatecrash the party. They terrorise, verbally torment, abuse, and physically and sexually assault the women, and the women scream and wail in fear and despair. Sienna tries to confront them only to be head-butted by Hughie. When Barry tries to intervene, Hughie beats him to death and instigates a game of spin the bottle to rape the women. Whilst Sian is being raped by Eamo, the lights go out, odd sounds emanate from the building, old televisions switch themselves on and a baby's haunting cries are heard. Moments later, Eamo is yanked from Sian by an unseen force, quickly followed by Sian herself.
The negative energy from the brutality of the vagrants awakens a dormant, malevolent, demonic, supernatural force with a thirst for flesh and souls within the building. A brave Cara and hysterical Louise take the camcorder around the building, and try and escape using the narrow beam of the camera's built-in light via the labyrinthine, brick basements with decrepit corridors. They are approached by a Scat who is hysterical about something he has seen and begs them not to leave him alone. After shutting the door behind him, they find a dead Corina with her eyes gouged out. They then notice arches and ominous, arcane symbols and shapes signs on the walls in the dark. Louise enters a trance and is approached by a shambling, ghoulish, gore-covered, malign, emaciated naked figure (Patrick Moynan).
A distressed Cara runs away and finds Sienna, they continue trying to find a way out from room to room but are trapped in the building. They are found by Hughie and shortly followed by The Creature. They break through a door leaving them behind, Sienna picks another lock, then Cara also enters a trance and is taken by The Creature. Sienna runs off through decrepit brick basements to a catacomb in an effort to evade The Creature, she discovers a dead workman and hides from The Creature before being followed and stalked by it, she then runs back, escapes from the warehouse and abandons the camcorder.
After finishing watching the video, The Man uses the footage as a guide to retrace the steps to where the events occurred. The man tracks down the warehouse and makes his way into the basement. He walks into the aftermath and finds Sian and Louise. Sian cries for help as The Creature approaches, The Man tells her to be quiet and hides, she is then attacked and consumed by The Creature. After The Creature leaves, The Man then tries to rescue Louise, but while in a hypnotic trance she hits him over the head with a stone, escapes from the warehouse and is hit by a car. | insanity | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0096866 | The BFG | As the book starts, a young girl named Sophie lies in bed in an orphanage. She can’t sleep, and sees a strange sight in the street. A giant man is walking in the street, carrying a suitcase and what looks like a trumpet. He sees Sophie, who runs to her bed and tries to hide. This doesn’t work, and the giant picks her up through the window. Then, he starts to run incredibly fast, until he reaches a large cave, which he enters.
When he sets Sophie down, she begins to plead for her life, believing that the giant will eat her. The giant laughs, and explains that most giants do eat human beings, and that the people’s origins affect their taste. For example, people from Greece taste greasy. The giant then says that he will not eat her, as he is the BFG, or the Big Friendly Giant.
The BFG then explains that he must stay with her forever, as no one can know of his existence. He warns her of the dangers of leaving his cave, as his neighbors are sure to eat her if they catch her. The BFG then explains what he was doing with the trumpet and suitcase. He catches dreams, stores them in the cave, and then gives the good ones to children all around the world. He destroys the bad ones. The BFG then explains that he only eats snozzcumbers, which are disgusting vegetables that taste of frogskins. Another giant, the Bloodbottler, then storms in. Sophie hides in a snozzcumber and is nearly eaten by the Bloodbottler.
After this, Sophie and the BFG vow to make the other giants disappear. The BFG and Sophie then partake in some frobscottle, which is a carbonated liquid that causes extreme flatulence. After this, the two go to Dream Country to catch some dreams and the BFG shows Sophie his collection of dreams. Later, Sophie has an idea on how to beat the other giants. She has the BFG give the Queen of England a dream that shows the malevolent giants. This frightens the Queen and wakes her up, at which point Sophie explains that her dream was real. The Queen then vows to help the two.
With other countries' assistance, they construct a giant pit. With the BFG’s help, they lure the other giants into the trap, where they can’t eat anyone else. Instead, they must eat snozzcumbers. At the end, it is revealed that the BFG and Sophie live in a mansion, where Sophie is teaching the BFG how to read and write, and the BFG is actually writing the book. | good versus evil, psychedelic | train | wikipedia | I had just finished reading the original Roald Dahl novel (which I thought was brilliant), and at the video store I found the DVD of an animated version.
Curious to see if it would be as good as the book, I checked it out.I can't say I wasn't a little let down with it.
The animation bothered me a little in some scenes (jerkiness, etc.), though in general it wasn't too bad (I really liked some of the backgrounds).
Thankfully there's only two, so it could have been worse.I thought the BFG was very much in character, but the Queen and Sophie were a bit more interesting in the book.
The evil Giants also had a lot more to them in the book, and were even more sinister, yet a bit funny too.
I very highly recommend the book, and once you've read it, you might want to check out this cartoon, but you may be let down (or you may not.
Nobody questions why a big creepy giant would want to hang around with a little girl.
The times we live in are so paranoid this film makes us remember why we all need a granddad figure of out own.David Jason's performance as the BFG is remarkable.
I think he gives it that extra something that really shines through.The beginning was really Richard William's like, with the cloaked giant running through the streets.
It's based on the book by Roald Dahl and the book is much better but I think you could say that about most films which are based on books!
Worth watching if you're a small child (which I very much doubt you are)(he he), otherwise i'd read the book (whatever age you are!).
The film remains faithful to the book, something most Dahl adaptations fail to do, (eg.
the witches in while being a great film has a different ending to the book) and the animation, while not being up to todays standards, doesn't interfere with the viewing of the film.
Overall I would say this was a fantastic family film, definately aimed at children but true to the book which is something any 5-12 year old Dahl fan will love..
I have two criticisms of this movie, one is that the animation sometimes is a little flat, and the second is that Sophie and the Queen while well voiced by Amanda Root and Angela Thorne are more interesting in the book(which I loved as a kid).
His BFG is somewhat charming, but especially in the whizzpopping scene where he is hilarious, and his grammatical errors are a delight to hear, as some of them are very silly.
Roald Dahl's books are often victims of horrible screen writing and I feared the BFG would be the same kind of movie but I shouldn't have worried.
I've read The BFG several times but didn't see this movie until recently.
I heard that Roald Dahl himself even liked this adaptation and I can certainly see why.
I found this film highly enjoyable, keeping a similar tone to Dahl's writing and adapting it for the screen very well.
Like I said in the title, it's not a perfect film but it's good..
It's hard to actively dislike this adaptation but compared to the funny and grotesque novel by Roald Dahl, there's a definitely a lack of energy to the film.
It's all very well scrubbed and nicely behaved, lacking the bite that the best versions of his children's books have, such as "Matilda" or "The Witches".
The film was originally made for TV and sadly the animation has a decidedly flat look.
This is an animated film based on a Roald Dahl tale.
It's nothing too special, nevertheless a decent alternative to other more popular animated movies.The character Sophie is cute and endearing and the best drawn character of the movie.
The "BFG" of the title means "Big Friendly Giant" and refers to the movie's only good giant.
The others are vicious.The BFG is like a giant "E.T.".
Fleshlumpeater is the biggest and scariest, but somehow he doesn't gross me out as much as the other mean giants.There is some nice soundtrack and the artwork is generally very good, with some magical special effects and some more special visuals in certain scenes.The story, without being "solid as a rock", is however entertaining and involving.
A little disappointing compared to the book, with primitive animation for its time, but I still think it deserves some credit.
This cartoon adaptation of one of Roald Dahl's children's novels was released when I was only three years old, seven years after the book was published and the year before the author's death at the age of 74.
I first saw this film in the early 90's, probably when I was around six or seven years old, and remember seeing it a good number of times.
When I first watched this adaptation of "The BFG", I was totally unfamiliar with the book, but remember some of it being read to me around 1993 or '94.
I never got through the entire book until this month, and then I watched this 1989 film for the first time in maybe more than fifteen years, this time on DVD, a format which had probably not yet been introduced when I last saw the film.
At first, the girl thinks she is going to be eaten, but luckily, it turns out this giant is the Big Friendly Giant, or BFG, the only giant who doesn't eat humans.
While the other giants, all much bigger than him, go out at night to find humans to eat in different countries, he goes out to blow dreams into children's bedrooms.
Since the BFG refuses to eat people and steal food, he has no choice but to live off a repulsive vegetable called the snozzcumber, the only thing that grows in Giant Country.
Mind you, there are some nice backgrounds, such as the Dream Country one and the BFG's dream cave with all the colourful lights, and music that really fits these scenes.
The voice acting is good for the most part (even if it's not great), and the BFG is a likable character, with David Jason providing a voice that fits him.
There's another song in the film called "Sometimes, Secretly" featured in the flying scene in Dream Country.
It's like a radio-friendly pop ballad, and as such, it seemed out of place to me, but fortunately, that's just one part of the film.This piece of animation certainly isn't the most famous Roald Dahl adaptation, and it seems to be a polarizing one.
It has clearly disappointed some fans of the children's novel, and that often happens with film adaptations of books.
However, even though I now think this adaptation of "The BFG" is inferior to the book it's based on, after reading it and watching this again (I know many people would agree), and it could have been better in more than one way, I certainly don't think the film is an insult to Dahl and his novel.
Some viewers obviously wouldn't like this animated movie at all (I think it's more fun for kids than adults, judging by my latest viewing compared to the previous times I watched it, all over a decade earlier), and it might not help if they've read the book first, but even if that's the case, this adaptation still COULD be at least somewhat fun..
it is cute, however, but this isn't the perfect family film for kids under 4 because of some big scary giants.
As I said, when a movie has a song about flatulence, it is really meant for little kids..
I never saw the 1989 film adaptation of Roald Dahl's children's book The BFG when I was growing up, and I don't know whether or not that's a good thing.
I did, however, read the book as a young nipper, along with other Dahl classics such as Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and Matilda, so I'm familiar with just how good a word-smith Dahl was, and how he managed to forge these often creepy and macabre tales into something that children could enjoy without being too terrified.Brian Cosgrove's adaptation, for all its sporadic charm, has faded into obscurity since its 1989 release with good reason.
Beginning at an orphanage run by the nasty Mrs. Clonkers (Myfanwy Talog), young girl Sophie (Amanda Root) sees the outline of a gigantic figure blowing a trumpet through the window of a house down the road.
Lucky for her, she was taken by the Big Friendly Giant (David Jason), who is the only vegetarian giant in his world, and whose day job it is to blow happy dreams into the minds of sleeping children.
But with the knowledge of the rest of the giants gobbling up scores of children, Sophie hatches a plan with the BFG to notify the Queen of England (Angela Thorne) and put a stop to the evil giants for good.The first twenty minutes or so of The BFG is actually quite delightful, as we meet the lovable lunk and learn of his diet of the disgusting snozzcumbers, and he is wonderfully voiced by national treasure David Jason.
The song 'Whizzpopping' isn't particularly good or catchy, but there is a giddy delight to be had with watching the BFG and Sophie farting with glee.
Yet, without Dahl's written narrative, the film quickly becomes tedious and the story grinds to a near-halt.
The story was fun and the boys didn't seem to mind that the central character, Sophie, was a girl.
Dahl knew that himself so it was good that the film stuck to that.
All three of us agreed that the human eating giants were a lot of fun, though.All in all a good little film for little boys and girls.
But when you have Roald Dahl as the writer that generally is the way..
One of the best movie adaptations of a Roald Dahl book.
I loved reading Roald Dahl's novels when I was younger, especially Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, and I also liked the film adaptations of some of them (most notably 'Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory' plus the 2005 remake, 'Matilda,' 'James and the Giant Peach' and this one, 'The BFG').
I had this on video as a child, rented the DVD when I was 18 and watched it on YouTube for the first time in eight years earlier today.Although the character animation was often flickery and sometimes slow, the backgrounds were well-drawn and the scenery of Dream Country was absolutely beautiful.
The story was mostly faithful to the book, albeit Sophie having short red hair instead of long blonde hair as shown in the book illustrations, but I found the climax where several helicopters drop the mean human-eating giants in the pit forgettable.
In spite of this, most of the scenes are memorable and the Bloodbottler entering the BFG's cave startled me today and it also scared my brother when he was 16 and watching this film with me when I rented it.
The standout scenes were those involving Sophie being snatched from her orphanage by the BFG and the BFG showing her around his cave, offering her some Snozzcumber and Frobscottle (leading to the scatological yet funny Whizzpopper scene), making her a new dress and making a little boy (who has a Danger Mouse poster on his wall if you look closely) dream of becoming invisible when pressing his belly button and frightening his teacher.
The music was full of charm and tension, even though some of it had late 80s written all over it, and I liked the Whizzpopper song and the dreamy 'Sometimes, Secretly.' As for the dialogue, the BFG's was the funniest due to it being grammatically incorrect and containing hybrid words.
When I saw this as a child, I cried towards the end when the BFG said goodbye to Sophie and she wanted to be with him forever and always.
Even though I didn't cry at that scene earlier today, I still found it a touching way to end the film.Like 'Igor (which I enjoyed even more second time around),' this is another film where I increased my rating due to finding it a nostalgic delight that was worth a re-visit after several years.
A brilliant Roald Dahl book falls curiously flat in this animated adaptation..
The BFG is one of Roald Dahl's most cherished books, but in this animated adaptation the magic just isn't there.
This version remains pretty faithful to Dahl's original story so one can't lay the blame on John Hambley's script.
Children who are not familiar with the story should definitely read the book first!
All the film will achieve is to put them off read what is actually a children's' classic.Young orphan Sophie (voice of Amanda Root) lives in a none-too-friendly orphanage under the cruel supervision of Mrs Clonkers.
Sophie soon discovers that she has been kidnapped by a giant from Giant Country, and fears that he will eat her.
The BFG refuses to eat people, instead restricting himself to foul-tasting vegetables known as snozzcumbers.
Sophie and the BFG become great friends, and soon they come up with a plan to thwart the other giants.
Together they go to the Queen of England (voice of Angela Thorne) with their remarkable story and beg her to send the army and the air force to fight the man-eating giants.
The Queen agrees and so begins a dangerous operation to capture the bad giants before they can harm anyone else.Jason voices the BFG quite well (one of the few pluses in the film) but his good work is almost ruined by somewhat poor sound quality.
The rest of the voice work is decidedly uninspired, with very little to bring the characters to life.
Similarly, the BFG is the only character that is imaginatively animated - Sophie lacks appeal, and the giants are boringly designed (and look almost indistinguishable from each other).
One chapter in the book deals with the BFG's love of "whizzpopping" (farting) and is laugh-out-loud hilarious.
Following from Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory and Danny the Champion of the World, this was the third feature length adaptation of one of the works of the great Roald Dahl, and the first to be a cartoon, from the creators of Danger Mouse and Count Duckula.
Basically young orphan girl Sophie (Amanda Root) is taken from the orphanage, run by cantankerous and abusive Mrs. Clonkers (Myfanwy Talog) by a cloaked giant she sees blowing a trumpet into a bedroom window across the street.
Sophie is taken to Giant Country, and into the cave of the giant (Sir David Jason), he tells that all other giants are eating children, but he is a nice giant, he is the Big Friendly Giant, the BFG, he will only eat the disgusting tasting "Snozzcumber".
The BFG explains that he took Sophie to stop her telling others that she saw a giant, they are suddenly interrupted by the Bloodbottler Giant (Don Henderson) who overheard talking, he is eventually repelled from the cave by being tricked into eating Snozzcumber, Sophie hiding in it is almost swallowed before he spat her out.
While cleaning herself, the BFG tells Sophie about his job of blowing dreams into the bedrooms of children, when she asks for a drink he treats her to a taste of fizzy drink "Frobscottle", its bubbles go downwards, causing the drinker flatulation, or "whizzpopping" as BFG says, and to soar.
The next morning, the BFG takes Sophie to Dream Country to catch more dreams, on the way the other giants torment him, notably by the Fleshlumpeater Giant (Don Henderson), the largest and most fearsome.
In Dream Country, the BFG shows his skill for dream-catching, Sophie joins him floating, but they are forced to go back to his Dream Cave when he catches a nightmare, or a "Trogglehumper", his cave is surrounded by hundreds of colourful dreams, all labelled to be mixed together to make stories for children.
The BFG demonstrates his dream-blowing duties, Sophie watches with joy as children are made happy with their dreams, but they are interrupted and hide when the Fleshlumpeater has come to eat children, the BFG runs, leaving the giant to devour a child.
Hearing that the giants have been talking about eating children in a school, Sophie comes up with a plan for the BFG to make a dream to blow into the bedroom of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II (Angela Thorne), following the nightmare the Queen meets Sophie, meets the BFG, and believes their story.
In the end the giants are dropped into a large metal pit, and will be forced to eat Snozzcumbers from now on, Sophie has the opportunity to live in Buckingham Palace where they will create a new home for orphaned children, while the BFG must return to blow dreams, but Sophie wishes to remain with the BFG, and they go back to Giant Country together.
Jason gives a great light-hearted voice with plenty of "gobblefunk" (his language with mixed and muddled words) to the lovable gigantic friend to the sweet little girl voiced by Root, and it is animated well enough, it does have it's slightly slow spots, but for the songs "Whizzpopping" and "Sometimes, Secretly", the adorable friendship and the nice simple story, it is good fun for all the family, a very pleasant animated fantasy.
THE BFG is the first adaptation of the famous Roald Dahl novel of 1982.
The rest is fun, a bit childish in places, but good for Dahl fans..
It seems that Roald Dahl's books are never going to be faithfully made into films.
The book has the BFG stay in England (living in a large house next to Buckingham Palace) and with a pet elephant for him to ride.
I'm a huge fan of Dahl's books and would prefer his genius to remain untampered.
Next time a Dahl book is picked for filming, have someone who respects the book. |
tt1291465 | Raajneeti | The film begins with the life of Bharti Rai the daughter of chief minister Ramnath Rai. Influenced by leftist ideology, she rebels against her father and joins the rival party of leftist leader Bhaskar Sanyal . Bharti develops an illicit relationship with Bhaskar, who, guilt-ridden over taking advantage of the younger woman, leaves for parts unknown, having unwittingly gotten Bharti pregnant. Upon the child's birth, he is abandoned in a boat by Brij Gopal Bharti's brother. This leaves her devastated. Bharti later marries Chandra Pratap, the younger brother of Bhanu Pratap . Bhanu leads the Rashtrawadi political party. The story tooks a turn, when the state government collapses and Bhanu suffers a stroke. In the hospital, he hands over power to his brother Chandra. Chandra's son, Prithviraj Pratap tries to take advantage of his father's power and starts to impose his own decisions on the party, which results in a clash with Veerendra Pratap. Chandra also take side of his son, sidelining Virendra. When Prithvi rejects the nomination of a local leader, Sooraj Kumar, who is chosen by the common people, Virendra gives his support to Suraj. Unknown to all, Suraj is Bharti's abandoned son, who was found and whose upbringing was done by Pratap's family driver Ram Charittar. Then comes the younger son of Chandra, Samar Pratap from America and meets his childhood friend Indu . Indu loves Samar and thinks he loves her too. When Chandra and Prithvi try to kick Virendra out of his father's party, he ask Sooraj for help. Sooraj ends up assassinating Chandra in his car, while he is returning from the airport after seeing off his younger son, Samar. In an ensuing drama, Prithvi is arrested by police under the influence of Veerendra and put on trial for raping a party worker. Samar comes to the rescue and tricks Veerendra into dropping all charges upon his brother, promising that his brother will resign and that he will move with his family to the U.S. However, Samar does not keep his promise and he, with Prithvi, begins rallying public support. After that Bhanu officially expels Prithvi, the latter splits from the Rashtrawadi party and contests elections under "Jana Shakti party", a new party with Gopal as his mentor and Samar as the executive. Meanwhile, Samar's American girlfriend Sarah (Sarah Thompson) arrives in India to see the situation. To raise funds for the new party, Samar shrewdly ensures Prithvi's marriage to Indu. Though Indu had always loved Samar, Samar only thought of Indu as a friend and loved Sarah.
The circumstances gets murkier with both sides trying every trick to ensure their victory in upcoming elections. Allegations and counter-allegations are made. Subsequently, Samar uncovers that the real murderers of his father are Sooraj and Veerendra, and decides to take revenge. On the other hand, Prithvi executes the former police officer, who had arrested him, and the woman worker at a farmhouse. Veerendra again seeks help from Sooraj and Sooraj makes a plan to assassinate Samar, being aware that Samar was behind all the tricks .A car bomb is planted in Samar's car. Prithvi goes to save Samar and Sarah, who were to be dropped off at the airport in that car. He manages to save Samar but is killed while trying to save Sarah in vain. Devastated by the loss of his brother and girlfriend, Samar decides to retaliate. He suggests Indu to take the reins of the party and arranges the election campaign single-handedly.
Meanwhile, Sooraj is revealed to be the first child of Bharti, who implores him to join his younger brother Samar. Sooraj refuses to part ways with Veerendra and asks his mother to leave. Exit polls predict a victory for Indu's party. On the counting day, Samar lures Veerendra and Sooraj to an unused factory by spreading a rumour about electronic voting machines being hacked. They fall in the trap, and Veerendra gets shot by Samar and his men. Sooraj has an open opportunity to shoot Samar, but can't bring himself to do it since he knows Samar is his brother. Sooraj requests Samar to leave him and Veerendra till they reach the hospital, but Veerendra dies on the way. Gopal prompts Samar to shoot Sooraj who questions the morality of the act, but Gopal convinces him to take revenge for the destruction of his family. Samar shoots Sooraj.
The election results are declared, and Indu emerges with majority and becomes CM. Samar is seen asking forgiveness and is seen attempting reconciliation with Indu. They show Indu accepting Samar's apology and the two reconciling. Explaining his decision to return to America, he reflects that he always wanted to stay away from politics as politics is a game that brings out the "inner devil]]. Indu is revealed to be pregnant with Prithvi's child, while Samar leaves India to look after Sarah's mother and settle there. | allegory, violence, murder, romantic | train | wikipedia | An ensemble cast comprising of Nana Patekar, Ajay Devgan, Manoj Bajpai, Arjun Rampal, Ranbir Kapoor, Katrina Kaif, Naseeruddin Shah and an impressive lot of others play today's warriors in the great battlefield of Indian politics.
Anyone can turn against anyone or may be kill each other just for greed of votes.5) Public is a complete moron; people vote for that person who gives them a cunning speech and not to that person who genuinely wants good for them.6) There are no human beings in politics, just a bunch of 'escaped-from-hell' devils fighting against each other to attain powers not for using for benefit of public but for personal greediness.I am not sure whether the things I concluded are correct but you will sense trueness in them once you watch this movie.
Prakash Jha( Mrityudand, GangaJal and Apaharan), famous for making movies on serious topics and getting success for every film, fails this time.
But, in Raajneeti he did a different thing, he assembled a huge star cast with every actor having a potential of pulling of any movie well and a strong topic: politics, which was great but he didn't give preference to MAIN story this time which went wrong.Raajneeti is supposedly based on the epic Mahabharata in which brothers went for a long brutal war against each other because of their personal differences.
Prakash Jha had so much scope of showing the inside story of the dirty politics going on in the country, people would have been satisfied with that but we all know there very few politicians who come from the same family or may be there is no one.
So, instead of showing the movie on politics Prakash Jha ended up making a movie in which a group of brothers play conspiracies against each other to become the group leader.I am not indicating that Raajneeti was a complete failure.
The film had so many brilliant actors that Prakash Jha didn't do full justice with everyone, he wanted to include everything in his movie: romance, suspense, and some scenes which were completely unexpected and unwanted.I know you will watch this film, so there is no point of saying anything on this but yeah this film has its moments which will remind you of old Prakash Jha. That's why I say he didn't go for politics, he went for polymorphism!
It feels like a typical Hindi movie with no character development, no good story, there was neither any twist nor any surprises to audience.
Its a brother kill brother world out there.Acting wise everyone has done a good job I must say but special credit goes to Ranbir Kapoor who has shown that he can actually act in films other than romantic comedies in which he plays a chocolate boy lover trying to woo a girl standing in the balcony.
Dialogues were average and seemed stupid in many scenes, like the conversation between Ajay Devgan and Ranbeer's mother, and the conversation between Katrina and Ranbeer in one of the last scenes where she announces her pregnancy.Arjun Rampal was looking out of place, and wasn't carrying the aggression and rawness required for his character, he was too polished.
Dialogues and character development is the basic flaw along with not so good editing, or the movie could have been very good.That scene of Arjun Rampal after killing the police officer was executed well and had the necessary terror element, however there was so much of blood bath in the movie that it came and went like an ordinary scene.Nana Patekar was OK in his role.I would rate 6 out of 10..
Came after watching Prakash Jha's latest offering "Raajneeti" starring Ranbir Kapoor, Katrina Kaif, Arjun Rampal and Ajay Devgan in the lead...
While watching this movie you will get a feeling that the whole plot and characters are heavily inspired from the epic story Mahabharatham and the classic "The Godfather"..."Raajneeti" is basically a complex game of politics where human relationships are challenged to achieve the ultimate power...Story rolls on with a flashback where, Bhaskar played by Naseruddin Shah, an old leftist, challenging the most powerful leaders together with the support of a young lady who considers him as God..
Duration of the film should have been taken care of by some trimming...On the whole, watch Raajneeti for the sincerity with which Prakash Jha has made this film and also for the excellent performances put up from Ranbir, Arjun, Ajay, Katrina and Nana Patekar...Verdict : Contemporary Mahabharatha..
Ranbir is above average, Katrina obviously still can't act, Arjun Rampal is the shining underdog, Patekar good, Manoj and Ajay at the same level: that isn't necessarily bad!
After all, it has references such as the bloody bed scene (without involving a horse head), deaths of similar characters, and of course, the story of the rise of the youngest, most promising child of the household, here played by Ranbir Kapoor, into the bitter orchestrator of his political party's campaign for the Chief Ministership, complete with an overpowering vendetta of revenge and honour.
Ranbir's Samar Pratap role is perhaps the juiciest of the lot here, given his transformation into someone cold and calculated, who will not hesitate to give up his emotions in order to manipulate others into doing his bidding, all moves played out like a chess game in order to advance his cause.And the other persona in the film given a transformation at that level, is Katrina Kaif's Indu, an impetuous girl deeply in love with Samar, who also has to give up feelings more as a matter of instruction by her industrialist father, who sees donations to political campaigns and marriages as a sealing of alliances for favours and benefits, highlighting the clout that campaign donators wield over the politicians they support.
What more, these are the two characters that experience change, much unlike the others who play seasoned politicians who are entrenched into the way they work and operate, leaving room for schemes to enter through the blind side, in a game of threats and counterthreats that you can easily see looming, to gain the upper hand leading to ballots being cast.Prakash Jha crafts a web of character relationships that you'll need to mind-map as the film moves along, introducing key characters and influencers in this family dynasty politics, where the early generation of alliance between brothers, break out into a power struggle for party leadership amongst the next generation between cousins.
It's an extremely dirty business, and it's somehow a sneak peek into how Indian politics get played.The ensemble cast shouldn't be overlooked as well, with Arjun Rampal's Prithviraj the hot- headed brother of Samar who on one hand is being propelled to lead his breakaway party and yet having a character that's less than noble, and Manoj Bajpai is excellent as Veerendra Pratap who's constantly finding himself not in the driver's seat of events, and have to rely on heavy muscle to keep the competition away.
Nana Patekar's Brij Gopal also shined as the unfailing mentor who has experience to count on in his repertoire of tricks up his sleeve, and has a key role to play in the falling out of the established dynasty.I suppose a film like this cannot possibly be made here until our state of industry and politics mature to a stage where filmmakers can tell a story without the innate fear of harassment, though Jha did get requests by the censors to tone down some scenes and change some dialogues, which was complied with.
Thrilling,exciting & what not..this movie has certainly set a landmark for Indian cinema.Director Prakash Jha has taken 5 years since his last film & seeing rajneeti, i can say that he used the time really well to come up with a film of this stature.
Others are good..nana patekar & manoj vajpayee are big stalwarts & katrina kaif played her part of the politician willing to do anything(apart from seducing ranbir) to help her family's political ambitions..
The acting was great, with talents like Nana Patekar, Manoj Bajpai, Ajay Devgn and Ranbir Kapoor.
KARNA is the most powerful warrior and most focused person in MAHABHARAT, on the other hand Devgan in the movie was confused, it was not sure if he wanted to uplift DALITS or just wanted to become there leader or just wanted to lick feet of Duryodhan (Manoj) >Nana Patekar tried to play Krishna but lack any kind of spark...
Rajneeti is an ambitious, engaging, entertaining, pertinent, and well made film, though at times clichéd and theatrical.The ensemble cast delivers above expectation, especially the consummate performance by Ranbir Kapoor and aided by the adept ones by Manoj Bajpai, Ajay Devgan, and Nana Patekar ; Arjun Rampal is also surprisingly convincing, with the performances by the female cast ranging from the adequate to the weak.Further, while the director and screenwriters do a skillful job of weaving the political commentary (mostly accurate albeit broadly generalizing), the moralizing (unwelcome and hackneyed), the scheming and vendettas, and the classical mythos (its main inspiration is the epic Mahabharata), into an entertaining and finely paced film; however, it's somewhat protracted and overly theatrical second half, lowers the intensity, with the generalizations and pauses detracting from its focus and the theatrical violence lowering its credibility, which coupled with an ending that's rather tame and platitudinous, the film falls short of the masterpiece category.Nonetheless, in an industry where condescending, vapid and "timepass" movies are the rule, and political correctness construed as deference and social aloofness, Rajneeti is a relatively bold, refreshingly frank, and an entertaining exception.Kudos to Prakash Jha and the production team for their ambitious, riveting, and fine piece of work..
Touted as Prakash Jha's take on Indian Politics with inspirations from Mahabharata as well as The Godfather,the movie turns out to be a disappointment.
No doubt Katrina acts well in her difficult role of a one sided lover, still I found her stressing more on her political appearance scenes than the other ones.Musically the film has no place for songs and therefore the few tracks are well used in bits and parts running in the background.
Only keeping Ajay Devgan's character apart (which I feel could have been more powerful), all the other characters in the script are able to leave a solid impact on the viewer only because of a balanced script and direction.But before watching this Prakash Jha's modern-day epic, you must get prepared for its rough, dry and cunning treatment of the subject which truly justifies its title called "Raajneeti".
Though there were rumors in the media before its release that the theme of the movie will be based on Mahabharat but no body had imagined that even based on a somehow similar theme the movie has been able to perform well on commercial aspects and all credit goes to the Director Prakash Jha. Also the stunning performances by the intense Ajay Devgan,Manoj Bajpayee, Nana Patekar.
Naseer is just superb in his role as a revolutionary even if it was small,Nana Patekar shows us why he's still regarded as one of the finest actors even when he doesn't has to speak much,Arjun Rampal ,Ajay Devgan and Manoj Vajpayee too hold their acts together.Katrina's lovely to watch sans much glamour and Ranbir Kapoor too portrays his journey from a rank outsider to a shrewd calculator of the game of politics brilliantly...The music of the movie esp the background scores are at par the other aspects and having 4 composers for 4 diff songs in a single movie also works well In all if you love good cinema and not those mindless ones, u r in for a really good treat my ratings 4.2/5 .
In the acting department Nana Patekar shines and is undeniably the best actor in the movie.The movie to be fair seems a shameless rip off from films like Virasat, Sarkar, Sarakar Raj among many others.Jha would have served his cause better by sticking to his own style of storytelling and not resorting to plagiarism in a subdued form.The movie in it's style and presentation hardly comes close to being titled a Prakash Jha work.
as individual character ....tremendous job by nana patekar , katrina looks stunning , bit of overacting by ajay but still fantabulous expression,ranbir improving day by day ,arjun's career best after rock on long awaited manoj also looks good .....
Raajneeti directed by Prakash Jha is just brilliant.The story is very good.The screenplay is well penned by Prakash Jha and Anjum Rajabali.It manages to be watertight right from start to end.Talking about the length of the movie,the movie is a bit lengthy which have could be shortened.But in short,it is a must watch.The movie has only one song,which is good.Performances-Each actor deserves a special mention.But the ones who stand out are Ranbir Kapoor,Arjun Rampal and Manoj Bajpayee.Ranbir is excellent.Arjun Rampal is outstanding!Such an amazing actor.Manoj Bajpayee is terrific.
But yes, there have been Flawless, Outstanding Performances by Arjun Rampal, Nana Patekar, Manoj Bajpai but above all, Ranbir Kapoor surprises and impresses you by delivering the Best Performance in the Film.
you are surely going to love this movie because of its heavy script and powerful dialogues!!!!The Audience may react to it lukewarmly but actually its a powerful movie!!!rajneeti has that charm that keeps you going through the movie..the ending is a bit disappointing but throughout the movie you will enjoy the excellent acting skills portrayed by ranbir,katrina,nana patekar,manoj bajpai and others.....Politics---the dark side has never been acknowledged in any movie but rajneeti has done it once again..!!!!!!!!!!!!!Loved it thoroughly.....Worth watching!!!!!!!
Each and every actor performed to their fullest potential.Manoj bajpai,Nana patekar,Ajay Devan are their usual best.Arjun rampal is a surprise package.Katreena is good.But the clear winner is Ranbeer kapoor.he gave the performance of his lifetime.The movie have some very strong one liners.watch the kabhi ankhiya churao act by rampal.This is one movie that each and everyone must watch.Don't give it a miss,Mahabharata returns in new avatar.10 on 10..
If you are Looking for a change from Typical Prakash Jha Films....den ma friend u should catch this flick.One of the Best Directions seen so far the movie has it all.Its a Turmoil or better yet a " Hurricane " of Emotions...Action....Drama...n POLITICS.This movie depicts the face of MODERN Indian Political System.Jha Beautifully has somewhat adapted The Masterpiece "Epic"...Mahabharata..Into his Direction n created this Flick with a mix of all.SO final verdict.It gets a decent 8.5\10.Catch It...You will Love it..
In fact from the way the movie starts it looks like its gonna be a sooraj (the director took so much time developing this character and his back story) movie but then something happens and we don't see him for almost an hour.
This film is a ruthless political Mahabharata set on a grand stage---the politics of north India ,the heartland of the planets largest democracy.There is a Kunti ( i did not catch the name of the actress ) ,who gives birth to Karan (Ajay Devgan ) ,begotten from Suryadev ( Naseeruddin shah )..................and true enough , the Karna grows up as a Sutputra ( son of a Mercedes driver ,to suit the modern era) ,to take the side of Duryodhan ( Manoj Bajpai), in his battle against Yudhisthir ( Arjun Rampal ) and his arch rival through the ages ,Arjun ( played with aplomb by Ranbir Kapoor ),who are helped by Krishna ( Nana Patekar ).....and there is even a Draupadi ( Katrina Kaif ) ,who gets tossed between brothers.the lesson for the modern era--politics is dirty ,and not even can the good people let their hands remain unclean in the process.......the lesson from the Mahabharat---victory in a brutal war can be won only on a pile of dead bodies.........nobody is really a good person here---neither Yudhistir ,nor Arjun.........the show is undoubtedly stolen by Ranbir Kapoor ,who plays a suave behind-the-scenes political operator with a cold-hearted bent ( shades of Michael Corleone from godfather ) to perfection .Nana gives a restrained performance ,Arjun Rampal is handsome ( who said he does not look good ?
) ,katrina .........in the end she acts more like Sonia Gandhi in sari and foreign accent ......but Ajay Devgan is not at his best.the characters may be in the mold of the Mahabharata ( they are not really named Arjun Kunti etc in the movie ,they are just playing their roles ) ,but some fighting scenes are copied from the godfather .sadly ,women's position has not changed from ancient times--they are just pawns in political games.........and the men ,even the best ,love their politics more than their women ........but they all look good ,especially Katrina ......she looks oh-so-divine......so does Ranbirs foreign wife......verdict-----satisfying.
Cast is very strong starting from Naseer, Nana Patekar, Ajay Devgan, Ranbir Kapoor, Katrina Kaif, Arjun Rampal, Manoj Vajpayee and so on.
Rajneeti,the multi starer movie by Prakash Jha lives up to the expectation of people who have never seen Godfather & Mahabharatha.For the rest of the people who have seen both will never be satisfied with this film.Most of the relations & the concept is based on the epic Mahabharatha.Also political games played in Mahabharatha have been shown here as well.And a lot of scenes have been simply copied from the Godfather.The movie looks good in the beginning but then its the same old ending you can always make out.The movie prolongs or stretches in numerous occasions.The movie & a multi starer has overshadowed some great performances like that of Ajay Devgan.These kind of movies,he always lives up to the expectations but his role is not fairly that big enough.Nana Patekar again was good.Manoj Vajpayee was excellent.Arjun Rampal looked like a college politician,he never looked a chief minister.Also,Ranbir Kapoor looks very slow to react and hardly has any presence on the screen.Katrina Kaif is good but only in some parts.Overall the movie is a bit shabby & you can predict it from the beginning.Prakash Jha delivers but both Apaharan & Gangaajal were far better then this.In short,if you have not seen Mahabharatha & Godfather then you can go for this.But beware,after watching this first you might loose a lot from the suspense of Godfather & the epic Mahabharatha.. |
tt0763840 | Home of the Brave | Shortly after learning their unit will soon return home, American soldiers Lt. Col. William Marsh (Samuel L. Jackson), SGT Vanessa Price (Jessica Biel), SPC Tommy Yates (Brian Presley), SPC Jamal Aiken (Curtis "50 Cent" Jackson) and PVT Jordan Owens (Chad Michael Murray) are sent on a final humanitarian mission to bring medical supplies to a remote Iraqi village. On the way they are caught in an ambush by insurgents. The forward vehicles of the convoy are trapped in the narrow street where they are forced to fight the attackers. The rear vehicles manage to escape the initial barrage by taking a side-street, only to be met with an improvised explosive device hidden in the carcass of a dead dog. SGT Price, the driver, is seriously wounded, having been somewhat protected from the blast by her front seat passenger who is killed instantly. While pursuing the young boys who left the bomb along with other attackers, a soldier in their team is shot and killed. When Aiken, Yates and Owens head out to shoot down the attackers, Aiken trips on loose bricks from a broken wall and injures his back, so Yates and Owens continue on alone to find the shooters in a graveyard.
Wounded in the leg, Yates falls behind as Owens races after the shooter, thinking he knows the shooter's position. But the shooter has moved, and Owens is shot from behind. The shooter escapes before Yates can move forward to attack. Yates comes upon Owens, who is bleeding profusely from his wounds, but it is too late. Owens dies in Yates's arms.
At a field hospital, a mortar attack injures multiple personnel and destroys many vehicles. The medical staff is struggling to address the urgent care required of the wounded and dying as mortars rain down upon the compound. A young soldier carries his squad-mate into the trauma care ward. When the doctor (Samuel L. Jackson), turns to address another soldier's wounds, the man draws a Beretta side arm and threatens to shoot Dr. Marsh if he doesn't take care of the dying soldier right away. Another squad-mate comes up and pulls the threatening soldier away.
Price and Aiken are each transported via medevac helicopter to a field hospital, where Price loses her right hand to amputation. Aiken survives his wounds, and returns to the unit when they rotate back to the states. Price is remanded to a formal hospital for physical therapy and fitting for a non-functioning rubber hand.
Upon returning home, each of the main characters struggles to deal with their transition back to civilian life. Price struggles with day-to-day things, like learning to unbutton her clothing with only one hand while trying to resume her job as a crippled P.E. teacher and a one-handed basketball coach. Tommy struggles with employment, having lost his job at a gun shop during his deployment. His father pushes him towards the police academy, but Tommy, witnessing the self-destruction of Jamal who had become frustrated and angry at being denied VA benefits for his back injury and the rejection of a girlfriend, walks out of the academy's entrance exam.
Dr. Marsh begins to slip into self-destructive behavior as his son, angry about the senselessness of the war and what it's done to his family, gets into trouble at school. Drunk on Thanksgiving Day, Marsh brings home three yard workers for dinner to the dismay of his wife and family and afterwards his wife catches him in his study with a loaded pistol, implying that he was contemplating suicide. He agrees to go to therapy for PTSD, where he reveals that he doesn't feel any emotion over the soldiers that died, but as a doctor he believes he should. The conflict had slowly eaten away at him until he couldn't control it anymore.
Jamal is shot and killed by the police at the small fast-food diner where his girlfriend worked; a result of him taking her and her co-workers hostage when he brought a pistol to the diner to force her to talk to him. The doctor's wife reaffirms her love for him and that she will help him through his counseling. Price finds new love in another coach at her school, whom she had rejected when she had first returned because she was still trying to transition back to her life. Tommy, after an emotional outburst at his father's shop, decides to re-enlist.
As the movie ends, Marsh's son is happily playing in a soccer match at the school where Price teaches. She introduces her new boyfriend to Dr. Marsh's wife and confirms dinner plans with them. The scene changes to show Tommy going through basic training again, then continuing to patrol the streets of Iraq so that other soldiers won't have to go through what he's been through.
Prior to the credits, a quote of Niccolò Machiavelli appears briefly: "Wars will begin where you will, but they do not end where you please." | thought-provoking, violence, boring, action, flashback | train | wikipedia | It is, without question, an important, thought- and emotion-provoking film, certain to be controversial.Regardless of its merits, "Home" is brave, worthwhile, even admirable in its pioneering coverage of 150,000 soldiers "over there," and roughly the same number of returnees, who are trying to return in fact, not only in name.This story of a group of National Guard soldiers from Spokane serving in Iraq and returning home is a schizophrenic experience: you are watching scenes straight out of last night's TV news, and yet feel as if you were back in the 1940s, in the era of "The Best Years of Our Lives" war movies, and the 1970s "Born on the Fourth of July" type Vietnam veteran sagas.Given the subject, it's to Winkler's credit that "Home of the Brave" (a confusing title choice, considering the many movies with that name) remains firmly neutral about the current debate central to all politics.
After suspenseful (and depressing) Iraqi war scenes, shot in Morocco by Tony Pierce-Roberts, in a remarkably focused way that allows rare visual clarity in the midst of combat confusion, the film shifts to Spokane.There, we follow - among many others - the lives of a combat surgeon (Samuel L.
Feeding off of the topical debates over the war in iraq, the script is ridden with clichés and feels like a Lifetime Movie gone wrong.
I think maybe this film is misunderstood to a significant extent by most people who had never been in the army, because they can never be aware of the shock and stress on the battlefield and the anti-social effect upon you when you are in the army and you don't think about daily problems, but you only struggle to survive and the only hope that keeps you going is one day to get home, see your family, friends, relatives.
The War Inside, November 6, 2007 By Grady Harp (Los Angeles, CA United States) - See all my reviews (TOP 10 REVIEWER) (REAL NAME) HOME OF THE BRAVE is one of those films that is difficult to critique: the message of how war permanently alters the minds and bodies of soldiers and their families is a meaningful one and one about which we need to be reminded.
Jackson) is in a truck driven by Vanessa (Jessica Biel) and accompanied by soldiers Tommy (Brian Presley) and Jamal (50 Cent AKA Curtis Jackson) when a roadside bomb explodes, maiming the hand of Vanessa, killing Tommy's best friend, making Jamal witness unnecessary civilian deaths, and placing Will in an impotent position as a doctor.
Flash forward to Spokane, Washington where each of these four wounded people try to piece their lives together in a world that loathes the Iraq war (not at all unlike the treatment of soldiers returning from the unpopular Vietnam debacle), trying to make sense of it all.The problem with the good idea for a movie lies in the too traditional plot lines.
Quite a few members of the convoy are injured or killed and one of the vehicles gets hit with an IED before the convoy is able to escape to safety.This all takes place in the first 20 minutes of the movie, and the rest of the movie is what happens when the group returns stateside, and the effects of this one incident on each of them.What makes this film noteworthy is that it sheds light on an issue that isn't commonly addressed in films about war, and more particularly the war in Iraq: namely, the difficulties that National Guard and Army Reserve soldiers face upon returning home from an overseas tour.There is just no way to relate to what happens in war, the unimaginable horror and sheer brutality and cruelty of it, but yet somehow there is an expectation that these citizen-soldiers can somehow just come home and magically reintegrate back into their former lives as if nothing ever happened.The movie shows so beautifully how it is probably often not possible for this to happen because people who have lived through these kinds of experiences are changed forever.
At the end of the movie, one of the characters comes to the conclusion that the only place where he even feels "normal" anymore is back in Iraq, and he re-enlists for another tour, choosing the comfort of hell over the agony of pretending everything is okay.War IS hell, there's no denying it, and our amazing heroes in the Armed Forces have been living with this for years now, thankfully with steady backing and support from the rest of the country.
The film is made in a very proactive way, i hope people will learn from this movie, the pain, of all whom live, die and suffer from war.
I think the film accurately portrays the struggle of soldiers returning home from Iraq and serves as an eye-opener for people who do not know what it's like to be "over there." Be it as it may, the subject matter is a little slow but very, very sad and powerful at it's core.
PTSD seems to be an overlooked area of soldiers returning from war, and I think this movie shines a lot of light on the importance of offering psychological support.
There is some very good material in the movie, the acting was not superb but still well-done nonetheless, and the message isn't biased like one may have expected.If anyone is weary of seeing this movie due to "50 Cent's" role in the film, you really needn't be concerned.
50 Cent's role is fairly limited in the movie and his acting isn't nearly as bad as the reviews would have you believe, though you can tell he has a ways to go when you look at the other polished members of the mostly-veteran cast..
But this makes vets appear to be crazy people, virtually out of control, which is absurd and which doesn't engender the kind of respect for their sacrifice and for the honor they deserve for serving their country -- and in fact for returning here and being positive contributors to society, in the wide majority.In all, this movie is too cliché and what you would expect from those who seem to oppose only wars their chosen political parties don't start or often try to blame on someone else.
I just wanted to see it because of the actors (Samuel L Jackson, Jessica Biel, Chad Michael Murray and 50 cent).You should know one thing before considering of seeing this movie; This is not a war movie, It's a drama.
This movie is about 4 persons life after the war of Iraq, how they deal with their problems after the war, and how bad the society treats the ex-soldiers.
Now, granted i only saw about parts of this film (as it is, my father had it on, and i was in the basement working on a project), from what i did see, it was just so grating.Perhaps this movie was directed towards certain people so they can have something to watch, and feel better about themselves, or perhaps it was directed towards the normal viewer so they can better understand the plight of the soldiers.Whatever, and whoever it was directed towards was irrelevant.
Despite strong actors in Biel and Jackson there is very little acting going on here, seems like a badly made episode of outer-limits if they let a lobotomised martian make a gulf war 2 movie.
Oh it must be terrible to be a soldier and have to actually kill or get killed by people This film is the worst waste of time ever the acting is shoddy and the characters are out of a scriptwriters dream, you have the angry white guy who doesn't get on with his father , the young black man who ens up with a gun , the alcoholic professional and of course the maimed woman Don't go to see this and save your money and time you've been warned....I don't understand how a movie can be pitched and filmed and the whole while the actors director producers etc all know its going straight to the bargain bin at the local wal mart.Samuel l Jackson plays the same angry black man that he has played all through his career.
Next time a movie like this is made, please consult with some REAL soldiers first and stop making us look so bad.
And I liked how it connected everyone for the remainder of the movie, which follows 4 separate veterans and their very different stories as they struggle to readjust to life after returning home from a lengthy tour in Iraq.I was impressed with Jessica Biel here for the first time ever and Samuel L Jackson, damn I had forgotten that the man can actually act, its been so long since I've seen him be anything other than Samuel Mother F'n Jackson, he did a great job.
Thats one of the rare action sequence of the movie and all the rest is a drama about how they have to readjust to there previous lives...Now i will give that to the writers and people involved, the story is not bad, and for the kind of person that do enjoy these types of movies, I'm sure this one is a good one.
Winkler has good intentions with this film, he doesn't try to send a political anti-war message or anything like that but rather focuses on the pain the soldiers have to face when they return home and how difficult adapting can become for them.
I couldn't connect with any of the characters in this film and was disappointed with Winkler's direction.The story follows a group of soldiers in the Iraq War who are pleased to receive the news that their tour of duty is coming to an end in two weeks.
Rowell stood out, ably playing one of the most-unsung heroes of the war, the military wife.Beware, though: after an initial burst of action in the beginning, the pace slows down a great deal, and the movie's focus turns more to character development and examining Veterans' problems, rather than to plot development and resolution.
The most difficult part of facing war is not the actual war itself, but rather how one must come to terms and deal with the images that haunt them--all while attempting to live a normal life amongst friends and family that will never truly understand the trauma that he/she experienced.The central theme of the film is not centered on combat, but rather the effects that combat and post-traumatic stress (a.k.a.
While other actors are featured, Samuel Jackson runs the show in a scene-stealing moment when Will faces down his son's vice-principal.Soldiers from Iraq return home to Spokane, Washington and face difficulties from the many changes.Tackling a film such as Home of the Brave is a difficult one.
If you want a more honest, emotional, homecoming movie, watch "Coming Home" (1978.) There's lots of war films better than this film--hell, "Halls of Montezuma" (1951) is better than this film.
The opening sequence which takes place in Iraq is almost a joke, as at times It felt like it was in East LA, now I don't know where they filmed it, but that's not a good way to start off a film.
After a tour of duty in Iraq a group of soldiers come home and find that life isn't what it used to be.Well acted TV movie bumped up with language and violence, this is a movie with its heart in the right place but with a script that uses short hand and cliché to get its point across.
While I can't add anything to my summary, it requires 10 lines to submit a rating so I have to add more comment.This movie is a major distortion of the Iraq war.It is depressing, bringing out the worst part of any war, and is not representative of what our brave troops do, or what the vast majority of them live with when they return to our country.It is a cliché.It offers the worst of what the Vietnam War offered viewed through the Communist propaganda of that time, pretending to be about a war against the Iraqi people.It is a battle against anti-freedom Sadam supporters and the terrorists that attacked our country.
Thank you but I can make up my own mind!If this was the first film ever made about soldiers returning home from a war and their struggle to fit back into society then it would still be awful, the fact that it's been done countless times before but with much more success makes this a complete stinker and probably a little insulting."I was there....." Yeah it's that bad!.
The scene in the vice-principal's office is well played, and there are a couple of insightful moments, but everything looks too familiar, as if the film has been cobbled together as a kind of homage to the best of previous 'coming home' movies.While no one questions the bravery and dedication of the troops from all countries in places like Afghanistan and Iraq – and there is no suggestion that this film is anything other than a genuine attempt by the makers to depict how it feels to find yourself a stranger in your own land with emotions you can't control or understand – you can't really hope to create a successful film if you're not prepared to allow it to embrace the bigger picture.
These characters have returned home from service and are completely unstructured in a very emotional way, being haunted by the memories of Iraq.Many reviews say the war scenes are cheesy and badly down, but this is NOT a War film, it is a drama based around characters that have experience many different emotional and physical scars from war.The pace of this film at times is slow, but this reflects the slowness of the Characters adjusting to their lives, which are not new to them, but have changed due to their experiences.The only negative thing i would draw out of this is that the Cover does not reflect what this movie is about.
That's creepy,such as the girl commenting that so many people here in the States go on with their everyday lives and not once thinking about our servicemen and women in the war zone.That thought has been always with me since I returned.This movie is not about the acting,it's about the message.Watching this film brought tears to my eyes because I understand how our troops feel and the ordeals they faced.I know what it's like to lose fellow soldiers on the battlefield (It's like losing a family member),you become so close to one another there.I'm glad this film does not promote the war or against it,and it also says that us servicemen and women are not bloodthirsty killers,but just ordinary people changed by a traumatic experience..
In the end though her biggest problem is she is just too beautiful to be believable as a soldier serving in Iraq.This movie looks like it was slapped together just to get it out while the War is still going.
Poor Tommy Yates (Brian Presley), one of the heroes of the Iraq war drama Home of the Brave, has fallen so far after his return home that the best job he can get is (shudder) working the box office at a movie theatre.
I probably have a different point of view than most reviews, being an actual Iraq War veteran.This movie is quite terrible from the start.
In the leads: Samuel Jackson as army surgeon Will Marsh, who feels guilty about his powerlessness to save people and about having become desensitized to their suffering; Jessica Biel as supply runt Vanessa Price, who got her right hand blown off by a roadside bomb, triggered by a kid with a cellphone; Brian Presley as soldier Tommy Yates, who lost his best friend just days before the scheduled return home as a result of the same ambush that occasioned Vanessa's injury.That ambush of what amounts to a humanitarian supply convoy is what loosely connects the characters; as Marsh is the first to tend to Vanessa and she briefly catches a glimpse of Yates as well, before everything goes to the dogs of war.The first segment, in Iraq, portrays some of the pressures of being a soldier, at all levels and in all functions; always having to be on guard, because anything else will kill you.
If the movie is about the challenges that soldiers face coming home from a very real war, a more careful hand is required.
"Wars begin where you will, but they do not end where you please." Nice quote, but this is from the same guy who said "Before all else, be armed," "It is better to be feared than loved," and "the end justifies the means." It sounds like I'm making a petty point, but it's illustrative of the lack of depth that this movie has.***SPOILERS END***I know enough people who have been to Iraq and back (or who are still over there) to feel insulted on their behalf.
The combat scenes were adequate, not what I'd call "infantry tactics" but believable for the movie.Looking down the road and seeing the spate of anti war films coming this one maybe viewed as being one of the most pro-soldier films, just a pity it was done like this..
This movie shows you about the war in Iraq today and is shows it as great as I expected it starts out in the war over in Iraq and moves to the people who survived that were main characters in the movie and tells you how the life is over there its hell and it lets you know as much as it can about what is happening to our soldiers there and when they come home and how you will never be the same again.
There've been several movies that highlight the difficulties soldiers go through when they come back home after whatever war they fought in. |
tt0045468 | Abbott and Costello Go to Mars | Orville (Lou Costello) is the oldest orphan at the Hideaway Orphans Home. He accidentally winds up inside a truck heading to a top-secret laboratory, where he is placed under the guidance of lab worker Lester (Bud Abbott) to help load supplies onto a rocketship. While on board with Lester, Orville hits the ignition button and the rocketship blasts off, flying across the country to New Orleans, where Mardi Gras is in progress. They exit and witness "hideous creatures", which are actually costumed celebrants, and conclude that they have successfully landed on Mars.
Meanwhile, two escaped convicts, Harry the Horse (Jack Kruschen) and Mugsy (Horace McMahon), enter the rocketship, put on the available spacesuits, and head to New Orleans to rob a bank. Lester and Orville, also clad in spacesuits, are wrongly accused of the crime and rush back to the rocketship, where Mugsy and Harry force them to launch into outer space.
After landing on Venus, the four men are quickly captured by female guards and brought to Queen Allura (Mari Blanchard), who informs him that Venus is only inhabited by women, as men were banished a long time ago. She takes more than a liking to Orville, however, and decides that he can stay if he promises to be true to her. He agrees and has Harry and Mugsy imprisoned for their crimes. Mugsy then convinces one of the female guards to flirt with Orville to prove to Queen Allura that he cannot be trusted. Orville "takes the bait" and the Queen orders all the men to leave Venus.
Upon returning to the Earth, they are lauded as heroes, and Allura, who is watching the celebration from Venus, sends a spaceship to Earth that drops a cake on Orville's head. | bleak | train | wikipedia | The early 1950's saw the start of the atomic age rocket ship film genre with ROCKET X-M and DESTINATION MOON in 1950 and WHEN WORLDS COLLIDE and FLIGHT TO MARS in 1951.
Abbott and Costello start off toward Mars but end up back on Earth during New Orleans Mardi Gras.
Eventually they flee to Venus populated by beautiful women and all's well that ends well.The production values were very good, considering that studios were rushing out poorly produced imitations of ROCKET X-M and DESTINATION MOON after their success.
Though certainly not a classic and not on the list of best A & C films, for those tiring of the same routines this film is visually exciting filled with space-age fun, beautiful models and hilarious gags.
This film has been referred to numerous times as "the worst of Abbott and Costello".
The best thing about "Go to Mars" are the special effects, which are creative and at times even ingenious; before you complain about them from a "modern" perspective, consider that they are about on the same level with those of, say, "Superman IV" - and that was made 34 years later!
Unfortunately, much like "Meet the Keystone Kops", this film gives you the impression that more time was spent on the technical tricks and effects than on providing enough funny material and routines for Abbott and Costello.
Despite the movie's title, they don't actually go to Mars, they go to Venus -- and only during the last twenty-five minutes of the film.
Before they get there they waste thirty minutes of the story by landing in New Orleans -- which they think is Mars because of all the weird Mardi Gras costumes (a painfully unfunny gag).Two escaped criminals stowaway aboard the ship and try to hi-jack the rocket after a second accidental lift-off, but the boys outwit them and the finally lands on Venus.Admittedly Venus is worth the wait; all the Venusians are gorgeous contestants from the Miss Universe Pageant, and their queen is Maria Blanchard (`She Devil').
The men were defeated long ago in a war with the females, but some of the girls miss them so badly that even Bud and Lou look go to them.
The title remains a misnomer in that Bud and Lou only THINK their comandeered rocket has landed on Mars.
By the time they wing their bumbling way to Venus, there is only 27 minutes of the film left.Probably fair to say that ABBOTT AND COSTELLO GO TO MARS was made during the downside of their career and the "Space setting" was intended to net them a new generation of fans.
Abbott and Costello Go To Mars sees the popular duo tackle a sci-fi theme that was to be so prevalent in the 50s.
The plot sees Bud & Lou as Lester and Orville respectively, who accidentally find themselves on a rocket-ship bound for Mars.
A planet populated by a bevy of beauties.They were three years away from making what would be their last film together, but history dictates that the best of the film outings for Bud & Lou were long since past.
There's even a cheeky aside in favour of the ladies (the Venusian female race being contestants of Miss Universe) as the new male arrivals on Venus are compared to beefcake Adonis types on Venusian TV.Far from their best work but certainly enough good here to shoot down those "worst of the series" tags.
"Go to Mars" has been unfairly maligned as Abbott and Costello's worst film.
While it doesn't rate in their Top 10, "Go to Mars" has many funny and wonderful moments.Among the great gags: Costello asking Abbott for a nickel to go through the Lincoln Tunnel; The Statue of Liberty ducking out of the way of the rocket.
Costello's reactions to space flight are also funny.What drags the film down for me in the rankings are the following two items.
First, the "space map" the rocket scientist uses to point out Venus and Mars; How can he find the two small planets among numerous pictures of large galaxies?
Still, the comedy is classic Abbott & Costello, and the beauty queens are lovely to look at, a preposition!
Those costumed Mardi Gras characters are a real hoot and a good chance for Costello to react in his inimitable way.
First they land in New Orleans during Mardi Gras and mistakenly believe it's Mars.
Released in 1953 - This Sci-Fi/Comedy, with its weak storyline and inferior humor, was a clear indication that the end was just around the corner for Abbott & Costello's careers as one of Hollywood's most popular, slapstick comedy-duos.Following "Go To Mars", Abbott & Costello would go on to star in 4 more films together.
With all of them being big flops, "Dance With Me, Henry" would be the last, which was released in 1956.Playing characters Lester & Orville (respectively), our 2 dim-witted protagonists are menial lab-workers who are assigned to load supplies onto a high-tech rocket-ship.In a state of bewilderment Orville accidentally hits the ignition switch which immediately launches the rocket into the sky.Believing that they have actually landed on Mars (but it's really New Orleans during Mardi Gras), Orville and Lester don spacesuits and venture out of the rocket to meet the Martians (who are really just regular people wearing wild costumes).In the meantime, 2 escaped convicts, Harry the Horse and Mugsy, find the rocket and after putting on a couple of extra spacesuits, go out and rob a bank.As circumstances turn out, Lester, Orville, Harry and Mugsy, all end up together back inside the rocket and they blast off to Venus where they discover the planet to be inhabited by only scantily-clad women in high-heels.
(All men had been banished by Queen Allura long ago) Even though Venus appears to be a heavenly paradise for these men, it doesn't take long for the boys to get themselves back to Earth, where justice is finally served to Harry and Mugsy.This movie actually sounds a lot better than it really is.
While this one does not have Charles Laughton & a lot of terrible music to support the boys, it doesn't need either of them.This film actually holds up better because there is less music & more A&C comedy.
Even though there are a lot of attractive women on Venus, things slow down there.A critic when this film came out said "Go To Mars- And About Time".
It's true that they THINK they're going to Mars, but it's actually Venus.
It's interesting how they first appear in New Orleans during Mardi Gras.They think the people wearing the costumes are aliens.
The title was just a metaphor for going crazy.Onto Venus where low budget special effects made future aspects looked remarkably advanced even by today's standards.
this is another great bud Abbott and Lou Costello movie and because of all the same reasons it has great comedy in it it has good acting in it the actors in it are good it has a good story line to it everything in it is good.
so i'm sure that you will not be disappointed with bud Abbott and Lou Costello go to mars.
so make sure that you rent or buy bud Abbott and Lou Costello go to mars because it is really good.
This is, perhaps, one of the worst and most unfunny Abbott and Costello films.
And, unlike films such as Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein, this movie would ONLY appeal to younger kids.
It's pretty sad that the funniest(?) part of the film is everyone mistaking Costello ("Orville") with Dr. Orvilla--wow, that's funny.Our haggard team actually never even makes it to Mars but lands on an Amazon-infested Venus.
I'm feeling really tired and bored just thinking about it.I think this film has a respectable score on IMDb mostly because there are a lot of Abbott and Costello fans.
There has to be some kind of reality in comedy and many of Bud & Lou's movies had no basis in reality at all.This "Mars" outing has little to recommend it to their fans..
This Abbott and Costello movie is good.
Coincidentally two escaped criminals see what is happening and understand it better than Lester and Orville and decide to take advantage.It has been years since I last watched an Abbott & Costello film and I decided recently to record some of the various movie channels and watch them.
'Abbott and Costello Go To Mars', but land on Venus instead..
The film was definitely one of A+C's wort of all time.The ending is at an all time worse, where the Venus women are attracted to Bud and Lou after they were defeated in a war against the females.
As the rocket is in New York we see them go through Lincoln Tunnel and go pass the Statue of Liberty before it lands in New Orleans during the Mardi Gras.Bud and Lou think they really are in Mars because of the weird costumes.
Two escaped criminals get on to the rocket and this time the ship again blasts off and they all end up in Venus, a planet run by beautiful women.
I think the science here was a bit off, even in them days it would had been known the planet was full of carbon dioxide and a dense atmosphere.The production values in the film are quiet good, the film is not as bad as feared then again it is not really that funny with some of the jokes just being a riff on their who's on third shtick.I doubt the film will gain any new Abbot and Costello fans and is unlikely to restore the duo's reputation as funny-men..
Abbott & Costello play Lester & Orville, who somehow are on a top secret rocket-ship project.
Two equally bumbling bank robbers named Mugsy & Harry force their way on board the ship, which does take off for outer space, though Venus, not Mars, which is inhabited by beautiful women who have banished the men, making these four guys both feared but welcome.
The less than dynamic duo are accidently launched into space ,and first come down near New Orleans in Mardi Gras time ,while believing they are actually on Mars .
This is the best segment of the movie as they mistake the elaborate Mardi Gras costumes as signs of alien life.When eventually they do make the space voyage they have two escaped convicts on board and discover that Venus is a planet ruled by women .
There are some good scenes early on --the Mardi Gras scenes,a sequence involving slow motion speech and a less than speeding bullet etc .On arrival on Venus the movie becomes bogged down and not even the presence of several beauty queens of the day can lift the spiritsTired and lacking any inspiration ,this is routine and one for die hard fans only.
"Abbott and Costello Go To Mars" is one of the better remembered films from my childhood, along with their romp with Frankenstein, and other Million Dollar Movie favorites like "Godzilla" and "King Kong".
It's pure and simple fun, and doesn't use a lot of scientific mumbo jumbo to explain space flight, unless you rely on the comments by a couple of Orville's (Costello) young friends in the opening scene.The fact that the boys never do get to Mars is easily overlooked, particularly as they get sidetracked by a couple of bank robbers and take off for Venus.
Universal could have done a lot worse than populating the movie with an array of Miss Universe contestants.The funniest bit for me was probably meant to be serious; as the boys take off in their rocket for the second time, Dr. Wilson (Robert Paige) needs only about one second on a slide rule device to determine the ship is heading to Venus - huh, how'd he do that?
After having liked Abbott and Costello meet The Invisible Man.I was keen on seeing how this film would be.And,to my very pleasant surprise,i found this to be a very strong comedy,with some great laugh-out-loud moments.
The plot:Orville and Lester are two technicians that are doing a final check up on a rocket the is going to to be sent to Mars.(Though neither of them realise that there are two escaped prisoners hiding in the rocket.)Whilst doing the check up,one of them accidentally presses the ignition button!When they eventually land,they discover that they have "landed on Mars".Where,everyone is very tall,and they all have spinning heads,and very long necks (though this is actually people in costume,for the New Orleans Mardi Gras festival.)Due to seeing all of these terrifying things,Orville and Lester quickly rush back to the rocket,where they are held at gun-point,by the escaped prisoners who have been hiding in the ship.The prisoners explain to them that they are still on earth,and,they are then forced by the prisoners to re-start the rocket,and are told to program it to go to Mars.When they decide to land,they all realise the they have not landed on Mars,but,have actually landed on Venus.Luclay everyone becomes very happy,when they all find out the Venus is a planet that is only populated by stunning super-model looking girls!!.Though all of them star to feel a bit uneasy,when they find out why there are no men on the planet...
View on the film:The main thing that i feel makes the film very strong is the great screenplay by John Grant and D.D. Beauchamp (who also co created the story with Howard Christie.)Which has lots of strong comedy set-ups,the really suit the great cast in the film (the Mardi Gras bank robbery and the Venus lie detector being two of the highlights.)And,the story is also surprisingly quite original,with having them not get to Mars at all in the film,but instead setting it in New Orleans and on Venus!Final view on the film:A great comedy,with fun performances and a very interesting story..
The thing that let the film down however, is that the scenes on planet Venus were stupid and unrealistic and Miss.
Despite all of these good qualities, and some of the funniest sight gags in any A&C movie, the film also has lots of stale dialogue and the boys look quite tired.
And why the movie wasn't called "Abbott and Costello Go to Venus" will always be a mystery.
Still, it's much better than some of their worst films (e.g., Mexican Hayride, Jack and the Beanstalk, A&C Meet Captain Kidd), and when "The End" flashes up on the screen, true fans won't feel like they've wasted their time..
Bud and Lou finally decide to invade outer space and interplanetary relations will never be the same after Abbott and Costello Go To Mars.
They arrive at New Orleans during Mardi Gras and think they're on Mars because of all the colorfully costumed people.
That being done they go right back to the rocket ship and take off again this time with two escaped convicts, Horace McMahon and Jack Kruschen, who have just robbed a bank.Then they arrive on Venus where the planet is populated by Amazons, men having been expelled hundreds of years ago.
Upon landing, they discover that Venus hosts only beautiful young women(played by Miss Universe contestants).
As a kid I loved watching the Abbott and Costello films on a Sunday afternoon T V, back in the 70's.
Abbott and Costello Go to Mars ages well.
In one of their better 1950s features, Bud Abbott and Lou Costello are headed on a little interplanetary trip.
But first, there's a little sidebar where the lovable duo land their spaceship in New Orleans in the middle of Mardi Gras--and of course, Bud and Lou think they have landed on Mars.Meanwhile, 2 crooks who just busted out of the clink, find their way onboard the ship, steal a ray gun and hold up a bank and clothing store.
Certainly, these are the best looking "aliens" you will come across in a Hollywood movie.And the pleasing aesthetics of the planet Venus lead to Bud, Lou and the crooks getting banished back to Earth, where they receive a heroes welcome and a ticker tape parade.Overall, while the title of this film is rather confusing--maybe someone at Universal thought that "Abbott and Costello go to Venus" didn't have a great ring to it.
If Abbott and Costello lived on Mars and women lived on Venus, the women would make a bomb because this movie is so heinous..
They think they are on Mars for about half an hour because that's where the space ship was making its destination as before dumb Lou hit the button that made them crash, right in the middle of the Louisiana bayou.
Bud and Lou's space suits go in great with the Mardi Gras crowd, and the laughs come fast and furious.
The arrival of two escaped bank robbers who disguise themselves in space suits then proceed to rob a bank results in Bud and Lou being chased and the spaceship with the two robbers aboard taking off and ending up on Venus.
When Lou kisses one of the women goodbye, a curse from the queen turns her back into her real age, a funny visual to watch as she becomes an old hag in gold lame' with certain body parts changing location to reflect her true age.Having been around for well over a decade in the 1950's, by this time, Abbott and Costello were still popular but adults who enjoyed their hijinks during World War II were staying away.
Not Abbott and Costello's very best but a funny enough one any way.
When the two land near New Orleans during Mardi Gras they start seeing the people in the strange costumes that are typical for the time.
Such was the realm of our subject today, A & C GO TO MARS.THAT THE COMEDY Team of Bud Abbott & Lou Costello had been boffo at the old Box Office had been a well known Hollywood axiom for some years. |
tt0117437 | Raja Hindustani | Raja Hindustani (Aamir Khan) is a young man who works as a taxi-driver/tourist guide. He lives by his own simple code and is prone to violence when that code is violated. Aarti Sehgal (Karisma Kapoor) is a wealthy debutante who is seeking to connect with her past. Standing in the way of their love are a disapproving father and a stepmother bent on obtaining total control of the family assets.
Mr. Sehgal (Suresh Oberoi) lives with his daughter, Aarti, and her stepmother Shalini (Archana Puran Singh) in a grand palatial home. Aarti decides to go for a vacation to a small hill station town named Palankhet to discover the memories of her dead mother. Upon arrival, she finds out she has no transportation from the airport to Palankhet, and so she hires the services of the only available driver, Raja Hindustani. During her stay in Palankhet, Aarti and Raja bond and ultimately fall in love. One day, to Aarti's surprise, her father arrives in Palankhet and intends to take her home with him. Aarthi tells her father about Raja, but Mr Sehgal says that he will only accept the marriage on the condition that Raja goes to Mumbai and learns to become a respectable member of society. Raja refuses and forces Aarti to make a decision. Aarti chooses Raja, but begs for her father's blessings. Her father refuses to offer his blessings and leaves for Mumbai.
After some time, Mr. Sehgal forgives his daughter, and visits her in Palankhet. While there, he gifts his daughter and son-in-law a new house. Raja refuses to live in the house because he does not see the house as a gift, but rather as charity, since he is poor and Mr. Sehgal is rich. Shalini, her brother, Swaraj (Pramod Moutho), and her nephew Jai (Mohnish Behl) seek to exploit this conflict to gain total control of Mr. Sehgal's assets. Under the pretext of a birthday party, they bring Raja and Aarti to Mumbai and set in motion events which cause Aarti and Raja separate.
Aarti realises that she is pregnant but due to health problems, the doctor advises her not to travel, so instead her stepmother is asked to go to Palankhet to inform Raja about his baby and to request him to come to Mumbai. However, Aarti's stepmother chooses to tell Raja that Aarti wants to divorce him but, Raja refuses. After some time, Raja comes to know that Aarti has a had baby, and is under the impression that she indends to keep him away from the child. Fearing that he will never be allowed to see his baby, he decides to kidnap the child. Distraught, Aarthi goes to see Raja and begs him to let her have their child back. Ultimately, the lies and deception of Aarthi's step mother are all revealed and Aarthi and Raja reunite. | romantic | train | wikipedia | In my top 10 , my top ten most overrated Bollywood movies that is.
I saw Raja Hindustani way way back in 96 when it first came out.
It was a huge blockbuster and made Karisma Kapoor a major star.
In my opinion the songs are the only reason the movie became such a huge blockbuster because the story is pretty appalling and clichéd.
The story as it is involves Aamir Khan, a cab driver who falls in love with a rich girl who comes to stay with him.
They get married but then the rich girl's parents try to cause problems in their relationship and the couple eventually split.
The movie's main problem is that it can't decide whether it wants to be a remake of Jab Jab phool kile or Akele hum akele tum and it ends up as an uneasy mix of both.
The movie can't even be saved by the wonderful songs.
One of the greatest Bollywood films you will ever see..
Yes, some of the acting is over the top, the first 15 minutes of the film drag before the story kicks in and sure, some points are laboured for Western audiences.
However, petty criticisms aside, I keep coming back to this flick year after year as my all time favourite Hindi language film (after Khuda Gawah perhaps).
Karishma Kapoor in particular is a real treat to watch - beautiful and intelligent, and above all a very talented and convincing actress.
Perhaps the most outstanding feature of the movie is the fantastic music.
I can guarantee that even if you don't like the film that much the song & dance numbers will either enchant or entrance.
Forget the art house stuff and enjoy pure Bollywood at its best..
A pretty good Bollywood entertainer, I don't understand the criticism.
Raja Hindustani, released in 1996, was a huge blockbuster.
It swept nearly all the awards at Filmfare that year and the actors and songs became a sensation.But nowadays people look back and have begun to criticize the film, saying that it is cheesy, over the top, and stuff like that.
Sure, it has some faults, like a typical clichéd Bollywood love story that is up and down, cheesy dialogues, and some quality mistakes.
But honestly, it's a Bollywood film, so what do you expect.
I mean many of Shah Rukh Khan's films have all these things as well, but you don't really see people criticizing those.There were two reasons why I liked this film, and why it entertained me.
Karisma Kapoor did pretty good, she danced well, and looked good overall throughout the film.
Raja Hindustani also contains one of Aamir Khan's finest performances.
Who can forget Raja Hindustani's songs?
Nadeem-Shravan and singers Kumar Sanu, Alka Yagnik and Udit Narayan did great by singing songs such as Pardesi Padres and Aaye Ho Meri Zindagi Mein.
There was also some good comedy throughout the film.
Overall, I think Raja Hindustani is a pretty good entertainer, I don't understand why people don't like it anymore..
90's Bollywood was abysmal fare and Raja Hindustani typifies how bad it was.
Low budget, amateur, formulaic, melodramatic, artless, badly directed, loud, badly acted, bad writing, slapstick.
It pains me to admit but RH is Best film material of 90's Bollywood, having won 9 awards for god awful acting.
Johnny liver won for acting in a comic role playing the parody of a Punjabi sardar, supported by two jokers playing the parody of a gay man and a tomboy who pass of cheap slapstick as comedy.
Karisma Kapoor won best actress for an extremely loud performance and awful acting.
Her melodramatic scenes are loud and her attempts at looking beautiful and cute are borderline porn movie standard.
The only respites are Aamir Khan who is able to give life to an otherwise stupid character and the songs are melodious and iconic.The standards of contemporary 21st century Bollywood cinema compared to 90's Bollywood is literally a quantum jump..
Best film???
Just to make it clear, this is definitely a nice film, and has some very nice songs.
But it is just one of those ordinary B-grade films with good-looking actors and great costumes, which lack real story lines.
Shocking, and simultaneously laughable!Aamir and Karisma did pretty well and Karisma's flashy outfits added some value, but these two did not deserve the Best Actor/Actress awards for this film by any means whatsoever, especially considering the brilliant Nana Patekar and Manisha Koirala, who gave sterling performances in that same year's gem Khamoshi: The Musical, which was the most deserving film to win the Best Film award.
This was possibly the most pathetic year in the history of Filmfare and any Bollywood award.
It's so sad.The film disappoints big time.
It's not even close, and the biggest proof to that is that today nobody really remembers Raja Hindustani as such.
We remember Dilwale, Hum Aapke Hain Kaun, Kuch Kuch Hota Hai, but this film sucks in comparison.Watch it if you want to have some nice time, but don't expect to see an unforgettable, amazingly special film, or even a particularly good film, because your expectations will be disproved..
I liked this movie a lot.I know i made an another but i want to restart.I want to start with negative ones.The comedy was annoying.Veeru,Navneet,Johnny,The kid,Aamir(In a few scenes)were irritating and could have been cut.before the scenes where Karishma scolds Aamir for beating up those guys for criticizing her till that scenes the movie dragged.The very handsome Mohnish Behl is hardly there and could have been deleted.Karishma is less annoying than usual(Meaning she acted immature 2 scenes).Now the good points.Karishma is an actress who i don't appreciate(Except for sexy looks).I say she is overrated.In this movie she gives an amazing performance.The only good performance of her.She sucks big time.Aamir gives an amazing performance too.Archana who has a lot of negative shades in her role does a great job.Others are great too except Veeru,Navneet and Johnny and the kid.Direction is brilliant in a lot of parts.The music ,I LOVED IT.A fabulous musical score.Cinematography is excellent but it gets sloppy in a few scenes.Script is excellent.Pardesi song was a key part in the movie i\which showed the feelings very well."Kitna Pyaara","Aye Ho Mera Zindagi""Pucho Zara Pucho "brings in the feel good mood of the movie.THE MOVIE IS A WATCH.But make sure do fast forward the comedy ones they are annoying and unfunny.
Raja Hindustani.
I really enjoyed it weather the story, the music and the performance of the actors.
Songs like Pardesi pardesi, kinta Sona, ayoho Meri zindagi, also pucho Zara pucho were very popular.
Aamir Khan and Karishma Kapoor won their first best actor and best actress awards for this film.
Along side HAHK, DDLJ and this film Raja Hindustani were 3 of the all time blockbusters of the 90s.
A stupid movie i ever seen.
A weird same old stories.
Same old type story a rich girl loves the poor chap.
Or they will switch rich boy falls in love with poor girl.
Rich girl played by Karisma Kapoor and poor chap played by Aamir Khan.
As always they create situations how a rich girl meets the poor guy and always opposite attracts.
The situations are created and they will fall in love and then the parent of rich girl doesn't agree.
Suneel Darshan probably had earned money from that film but its a stupid movie.
As far as performance its brilliant by Amir, Karisma and Archana.
I watched the film just for its hit music.
Same old stories retold but they just make different situations and at end happy climax as always.
All movie is just waste of time and if you are fan of Aamir then watch him in Andaz apna apna and sweet karishma in that film.
Watch it if you like bollywood music and dances that sit.
darshans makes movies so people can dance only..
Aamir khan who is one of the better actors and Karishma who is easy on the eyes unlike her sister, also happens to be a good actress.
The Story is a typical Bollywood, where the girl meets a poor boy whose habitation almost always happens to be tourist spot that good looking Rich girls happen to visit.
They are invariably are snobbish or the Script writers make them that way till the 23rd reel of the movie to make way for the musical numbers-which just happens to be pure treat..
Only to remember for the music and performances.......
Considering the story and its treatment, "Raja Hindustani" doesn't rise above the average romantic movies from Bollywood.
The same plot of a poor hero falling for a rich girl, the opposition from the rich heroine's family, heroine's step mother's play to embezzle the property and create misunderstandings has been repeated in this one without much of novelty in the script.
The character of the hero, heroine, the misunderstandings created between them, and the climax all look pretty jaded.
If there is anything that you can praise of the film, it's the good music from the music duo Nadeem-Shravan and good performances from Aamir Khan and Karishma Kapoor who were awarded the coveted Filmfare Awards for their performances.
Anyway, the film became the most successful Hindi Movie of the year out-casting Sanjay Leela Bhansali's heart touching family drama "Khamoshi" taking the audience by surprise showing still the demand of old escapist dramas against good heart warming stories like "Khamoshi".Rating: 1 star out of 4.
All over good movie...
Raja Hindustani is one of the best film that Aamir Khan has played in.
The film offers very good music, acting and good chemistry.
The film has good plot but that could be better and some of the scene needs to be improved.
I liked Uddit Narayan's voice on the film (well done for that).
The film is like old 80s - 90s romance film.
And the film was some good jokes filled in.But the film is worth of while with Aaamir Kahn and Karisma Kapoor chemistry.
My favorite masala film of all time....
Some may find Raja Hindustani as the same tired and worn out 90's plot...
Aamir lights up the screen with a great character, Raja Hindustani, a poor villager who drives a taxi who falls in love with a rich girl from Mumbai.The rest of the story, I'm sure you can guess, as it is very predictable and nothing new.
However, songs are really great, and story is captivating.I will say the ending is stupid and Johnny Lever is as annoying as ever this time as Raja's annoying sardar friend.
Most of the film I wanted him to drop dead of heart attack.
But he never does...But either way this is just a fun masala film with Aamir in the lead.
It's not too serious, it's a great time pass and a good love story.
This film has all the usual masala elements of Bollywood - the fight scenes, the comedy etc - that we know and love AND one of the great erotic moments of Bollywood.
Karisma Kapoor plays the sophisticated bombayite rich girl and Amir Khan the poor man, a taxi driver, besotted with her.
They make a great pairing, Kapoor adorably cute and highly attractive (if not classically beautiful in an Aishwaira Rai sense).
Khan a fresh-faced young guy and the ideal lead.Most Bollywood movies avoid kisses or they're 'blink and you missed it'.
I have watched dozens of Bollywood movies and have never seen a kiss like it...it goes on...and on.The first 45 or so minutes of the movie is a slow burn buildup to the kiss.By the time the kiss comes Karisma Kapoor has teased Amir Khan almost beyond endurance with her coquettrey, in a variety of sexy outfits, like the time she goes shopping in town and changes into a red micro-mini dress and, seeing his embarrassment at not knowing where to put his eyes, teases him saying "You don't like my dress, my dress is very nice".The kiss when it comes is incredibly long ...
For my money it's one of the great erotic moments in all of Bollywood..
Some good and some bad points.
I remember watching this film in the theatres and coming out confused whether I liked the film or not.There were good points and bad points in the film.Good: Finally Karishma Kapoor has transformed from a childish and annoying girl from prem qaidi (debut film) to Sapoot (last film before Raja Hindustani) to a very beautiful and mature women.
She moved away from those pink flowery frocks to stylish dresses and sari's.The songs were fantastic and very catchy, especially "Pardesi, Pardesi".The kiss Although the kiss has been tried before in Vardi (Madhuri and Jackie) and Dayavan (Madhuri and Vinod), this one is something special.Bad: The story is the same old rich boy/girl falls in love with poor girl/boy and rich family is against and conspire to separate them, etc, etc, etc.I didn't feel any chemistry between Raja and Aarti and the story moved quickly to them getting married.
It was obvious to see that Raja adored Aarti, but she thought of him as a very close friend and there was no indication that she loves him until they kiss.I'm a huge fan of Aamir Khan, however, I don't believe this film did anything for him, like his earlier films such as Baazi, Jo Jeeta Wohi Sikander and Rangeela.All in all I will have to say you watch this film for the music and Karishma Kapoor only, nothing else.5/10..
I watched this because of its status as a Bollywood nostalgia film.
However, there really is much more bad than good in this movie.
The last hour or so the plot gets more interesting as the family manipulation really kicks in and the climax and resolution arrive, the rest of the movie just kind of feels like slap-stick time-wasting nonsense.
There are a few good songs thrown in, the classic being "Pardesi Pardesi." Thats where the good ends.
The first thing is Karisma Kapoor's acting in the whole first half of the movie- its painful.
the same laugh is usually reserved for villains in cheesy American movies.
Most of the characters are painfully stupid and are really just there for slap-stick, like the servants and Raja's best friend.
However, the part of this movie that leaves me the most baffled is Raja and why everyone treats his behavior as not that far out of the ordinary...
He almost beats like 6 guys to death and has to be pulled off of a guy he's about to stab with a broken bottle...just because they catcalled the Karisma Kapoor's character (Aarti).
This is the point that the movie starts to get interesting, but Raja's behavior is still grotesquely out of line.
He creates a giant,drunken, violent scene at the birthday party because he believes his wife asked him to wear a suit because she's "ashamed of him" even though shes demonstrated a thousand times before throughout the rest of the movie that she doesn't see him being a "lowly cab driver" shameful at all and has defended him before at fairly high personal stakes.
Yet, his own insecurity gets in the way and he ruins everyones night and becomes a publicly embarrassing spectacle over a trivial matter that could have been easily resolved if the situation involved a man with a temper thats not like a pile of dynamite about to explode.
After that, most of their miscommunication and misfortune comes from Raja's pride and unfortunate circumstances on Aarti's end, as well as familial manipulation.
Raja's baffling behavior progresses to kidnapping as he steps over the unconscious body of his wife, whom he is supposedly heart broken over, to steal his baby and run all the way back to his village, which is 3 hours away by car, with no clothes, blankets, or food for the baby.
At this point, he really acts like a crazed animal more than a person, with wide crazy eyes, no speech, and roughly clutching the baby when his well-meaning family try to reason with him.
like I said- bizarre.
I have to say I feel very confused as to why this is a "classic." I would say if you're still dying to watch it, read a summary and then skip to an hour and ten minutes or so before the end.
a great film.
This is one of the best films I have ever seen.
I is plenty of good acting roles, music, dance; and the most important i think: "sense", "romance" and "dream".
It is true that the film remains to 90s, but yesterday i saw for the first time, and the history was not so far for me.
I fell in love Karisma Kapoor again, she is a tremendous actress, her eyes expresses all the history needs.
Aamir Khan is a classic actor, the serious and comic scenes are done perfectly by him.
This film, these actors and this music won the film fare awards in 1997.
Raja Hindustani is one of that films that will remain in my mind and memory, always coming to give me a good remember.
I can't believe the stupidity of this film.
So, the extremely rich heroine falls in love with and actually marries a taxi driver!!!
Karishma Kapoor hams through the film.
I couldn't believe that the ever lovable and chirpy girl had such an arrogant expression on her face throughout the film.
And the cheesy dialogs like "haye main mar gayi" made me want to run away.
One for the excellent acting by Aamir Khan and Suresh Oberoi.
Aamir deserved the filmfare for his earnestness, no matter what people say.
Suresh Oberoi is a lovable father, despite his 'eccentricities' (who would want their heiress daughter to marry a taxi driver?) as always.The other star is for the exceptional music that has stayed with me till date.
Kumar Sanu, Alka Yagnik and Udit Narayan really made the music come alive despite the bad presentation on screen. |
tt0389860 | Click | Avi is an ace photographer who is in a live-in relationship with Sonia, a model. One night while returning from a party, the couple accidentally knocks down a young girl with their speeding car. As Sonia was driving the car, to avoid further complications, Avi insists on them fleeing from the accident scene. But trouble starts for the couple soon after. While strange white marks begin to appear in Avi's photos, Sonia starts having spooky experiences. Avi also develops a severe neck pain and even though he does not appear to be overweight, a scale reveals that he weighs 120 kilograms. Avi, too, starts having experiences similar to Sonia's. The couple is petrified when all of Avi's best friends commit suicide in a similar manner. It then comes to light that the spirit haunting them all has a connection to Avi's college life. Meanwhile, Sonia finds out that Avi was friends with a girl named Aarti during his college days. As Avi and Sonia are still being haunted by Aarti they go and visit her, but realize that Aarti is dead, having apparently committed suicide by using a knife. Aarti's mother believes that she is still alive, thinking that she is merely ill and will recover. On the way home Aarti continues to haunt Avi and Sonia, and again during the night at the hotel she also haunts him as Avi is sleeping, ending up with him being thrown off the fire escape.
Later Avi is in the hospital and Sonia tells him that Aarti will be cremated, and they visit her funeral before returning to their home town. Sonia finds some photos of Aarti, where she is crawling to get something. As she follows the pattern indicated by Aarti, Sonia discovers that Avi's best friends (who later committed suicide) are raping Aarti. When Sonia talks to Avi about this dark secret, he tells her that he only wanted Aarti to understand his feelings, but that when his best friends tried to talk to her, Aarti hurt Avi's friend Tarun, who became angry and with his friends raped her. Avi claims that when he entered the room he was shocked at the scene and tried to help her, but that Tarun then said that Avi had asked them to rape her as a way of avoiding jail, and accused Avi of planning to do this to her and having one of Avi's friends taking the pictures. Avi then tells Sonia that the reason he kept the photos was to remind him that he failed to protect Aarti and say he is the guilty one. But Sonia leaves him and wishes him that Aarti may forgive him. Later on Avi attempts to kill himself in the same way his best friends did, but as a Polaroid camera clicks towards him, he sees Aarti sitting on his shoulders. Avi is suddenly thrown through the window, and ends up in hospital, where it is revealed that the reason why she was sitting on his shoulders was that Aarti had still loved Avi. As Sonia makes another photograph of Avi, she speaks to Aarti, asserting that one day she will let go as the reflection in the mirror shows Aarti still leaning on Avi's back. | comedy, depressing, allegory, flashback, philosophical, romantic, entertaining | train | wikipedia | null |
tt2133326 | South Park: The Stick of Truth | === Setting ===
South Park: The Stick of Truth is set in the fictional town South Park in the Colorado Rocky Mountains. The main character, whom the player controls, is the New Kid—nicknamed "Douchebag"—a silent protagonist who has recently moved to the town. Befriending the local boys, he becomes involved in an epic role-playing fantasy game featuring wizards and warriors battling for control of the Stick of Truth, a twig that possesses limitless power.
The humans, led by Wizard King Cartman, make their home in the Kingdom of Kupa Keep, a makeshift camp built in Cartman's backyard; among their number are paladin Butters, thief Craig, Clyde, cleric Token, Tweek, and Kenny—a young boy who dresses as a princess. The humans' rivals are the drow elves, who live in the elven kingdom in the backyard of their leader, High Jew Elf Kyle; they also include the warrior Stan and Jimmy the bard. The boys conduct their game throughout the town, the surrounding forest, and even into Canada (represented as a pixelated overhead 16-bit RPG). Locations from the show, including South Park Elementary, South Park Mall, the Bijou Cinema, City Wok restaurant, and Tweek Bros. Coffeehouse, are featured in the game.
The Stick of Truth features the following historical South Park characters: Stan's father Randy Marsh, school teacher Mr. Garrison, Jesus, school counsellor Mr. Mackey, former United States Vice-President Al Gore, the sadomasochism-loving Mr. Slave, sentient turd Mr. Hankey, City Wok restaurant owner Tuong Lu Kim, Stan's uncle Jimbo, Mayor McDaniels, Priest Maxi, Skeeter, Canadian celebrities Terrance and Phillip, the Underpants Gnomes, the Goth kids, the Ginger kids, the Crab People; the Christmas Critters, and local boys Timmy, Scott Malkinson, and Kevin Stoley.
=== Plot ===
The New Kid has moved with his parents to South Park to escape his forgotten past. He quickly allies with Butters, Princess Kenny and their leader Cartman. Nicknamed "Douchebag", the New Kid is introduced to the coveted Stick of Truth. Shortly thereafter, the elves attack Kupa Keep and take the Stick. Cartman banishes Clyde from the group for failing to defend the Stick from the elves. With the help of Cartman's best warriors, Douchebag recovers the Stick from Jimmy. That night, Douchebag and several town residents are abducted by aliens. Douchebag escapes his confinement with the help of Stan's father, Randy, and crashes the alien ship into the town's mall.
By morning, the UFO crash site has been sealed off by the government, who has put out a cover-story that claims a Taco Bell is being built. Douchebag visits Kupa Keep and learns that the Stick has again been stolen by the elves. Cartman and Kyle task Douchebag with recruiting the Goth kids for their respective sides, each claiming that the other has the Stick. Randy agrees to help Douchebag recruit the Goths after Douchebag infiltrates the crash site and discovers that government agents are plotting to blow up the town in order to destroy an alien goo released from the ship. The goo turns living creatures into Adolf Hitler-esque Nazi Zombies; an infected person escapes government containment, unleashing the virus on South Park.
That night, Cartman or Kyle (dependent on which character the player chooses to follow) leads his side against the other at the school. Here, the children learn that Clyde stole the Stick as revenge for his banishment. Clyde rallies defectors from the humans and elves, and uses the alien goo to create an army of Nazi Zombies. The humans and elves join together to oppose Clyde but there are too few to fight him. Later, Gnomes steal Douchebag's underpants; after defeating them, Douchebag gains the ability to change size at will.
Out of desperation, Douchebag is told to invite the girls to play. They agree to join after Douchebag infiltrates an abortion clinic and travels across Canada to discover which of their friends is spreading gossip. Flanked by the girls, kindergarten pirates, and Star Trek role-players, the humans and elves attack Clyde's dark tower. Randy arrives and reveals that the government agents have planted a nuclear device in Mr. Slave's anus to blow up South Park, forcing Douchebag to shrink and enter Mr. Slave to disarm the bomb. After exiting Mr. Slave, Douchebag finally confronts Clyde and is forced to fight a resurrected Nazi Zombie Chef; Chef is defeated. Clyde decides he is not playing any more and Cartman kicks him from the tower.
The government agents arrive, revealing that Douchebag went into hiding to escape them because of his ability to quickly make friends on social networks such as Facebook, which the government wanted to use for its own ends. Learning of the Stick's supposed power, the chief agent takes it and bargains with Douchebag to help him use it. Douchebag refuses but Princess Kenny betrays the group, uses the Stick to fight them and infects himself with the Nazi Zombie virus. Unable to defeat Nazi Zombie Princess Kenny, Cartman tells Douchebag to break their sacred rule by farting on Kenny's balls, which he does. The resulting explosion defeats Kenny and cures the town of the Nazi Zombie virus. In the epilogue as South Park is rebuilt, the group retrieves the Stick of Truth; they decide its power is too great for any person to hold and throw it into Stark's Pond. | violence | train | wikipedia | If you are a South Park fan, there is no way you won't love this game.
It uses the same humor as the TV show, and had me laughing throughout the entire story.The storyline was well thought out and very fun to play.
The graphics are the exact same as the TV show, so it feels like you are actually in a TV episode.
I absolutely love this game, and would recommend it to all South Park fans..
Classic South Park.
South Park: TSOT was my obsession for 2 days straight.
Think of it as a mix between South Park and Pokemon during the action sequences.
You basically will run into the 'enemy' i.e. other fourth graders and when you do it puts you in an organized fighting sequence.
There will be times where you can utilize the environment to kill or K.O. enemies w/o getting into battle.
But the fighting will be funny and cool at first, but it sort of gets stale by the end.The open world is fairly condense, yet sometimes confusing so be sure to use your map often.
What I like about this game and is that it isn't a dull and mindless game.
They are not impossible, but remember if you cannot figure out how to get to something in the outside world, you probably just haven't gotten far enough into the game; be patient!
If you do not enjoy stupid humor this game will be mind-numbing to you (i.e. farting, unnecessary sexual content, etc...).
I won't give away anything but there are some really messed up things in the game but...
it's South Park so I should've known better.
If you are a South Park fan this game will definitely be right down your alley.
If you are an achievement/trophy collector, you most likely will have to do two full-game runthroughs so just be aware.
First off, I am highly surprised you can look up video games on this website since I have just now discovered this since I am still fairly new to IMDb (as an actual user).Now for the actual review.Well, what can I say?
'South Park' is and has always been one of my absolute favorite things on this planet.
I have enjoyed some of the games in my life (most being flash games), and the N64 game was lots of fun to me, but this one probably tops it all.The very best parts about this title are the following: references to the show, solid graphics while not lagging at all, funny and witty jokes everywhere, etc.
Simply put: South Park.
If you have /not/ seen too much of it, you will still consider most of it funny because, well, it is 'South Park' after all!Story-wise, this game is pretty good as well since it makes sense for the most part and the side-missions (which I did along with playing through the storyline at the very same time, btw.) are pretty fun, too.
This game is /far/ too short: It took me approximately 14 hours to get done with the story and all of its side-missions, which is not even roughly enough.
Plus, once you have played through the game, there is nothing left you can do.
That is the only reason I 'only' gave it 9/10 stars because the rest is, as stated above, very pleasant.All in all, I can only recommend playing through the entire game, for it is highly enjoyable!.
The definitive South Park experience.
I'm not sure if I'm the only one that feels like South Park has been stretched way past its limit or maybe I'm just getting old, but I haven't seen a truly funny episode in a very long time.
Perhaps the greatest achievement is that it hardly ever feels like a video game and certainly doesn't look like one.
The turn-based battles are a nice throwback to older rpg games while simultaneously feeling fresh and funny (especially when "Princess" Kenny is involved).
If you're a South Park fan and have been watching since the start, you absolutely should not miss this experience.
8 hours is pretty much the extent of it, but besides that, big love to Trey and Matt for giving us the South Park game we deserve.
I'm a fan of the TV show "South Park" it's one of my favorite TV shows of all time, this game was just a dream come true.
Not only is it one of the best licensed games but it's to me one of those fresh examples showing you can still do more with the RPG genre which is part of what makes the game one of my personal favorite RPG's and video games of all time because this game not just captured the spirit of the TV show perfectly to a tee but most importantly the game is actually fun.The graphics are great as it's basically just the regular animation like in the original TV show.
The game play is great as it pretty much the typical standard mechanics and elements of turn based action as well as any RPG, which isn't anything new but it's everything done right.
But to me what really made the game stand out is really in it's story line, humor, and execution which makes the game strong.This game just like the TV show is just hilarious, the dialog and visual jokes are just great.
It's sort of the main reason why I played the game which is the same reason I watch the show for the laughs.
There really aren't that many RPG's I can think of with humorous elements except for "Maniac Mancion" and the underrated NES game "Nightshade".
OK, those are more point and click games but they had RPG elements which sorta count.
But anyway I just loved hearing the dialog along with the actual voice actors from the show just say the lines, they are just deliciously crude and absurd.I really love how the game parodies and homages certain clichés and elements in the RPG genre.
One favorite scene of mine is when you go to Canada and it's an 8 bit over world which is awesome and hilarious as it's an homage to "Final Fantasy" and the "Dragon Warrior" games on the NES.Or even part of the story line in a way is an homage to the SNES game "Earthbound" just like in that game you have to deal with aliens in your hometown and the protagonists are kids.
And like in that game you have a few non cliché weapons and methods.
You have an ability option which is the branch for the super moves which are great like putting on a football helmet and charging at ramming speed toward an opponent.
And of course farting is the magic powers, yeah I'm not kidding who'd of ever though farting could actually be a tool of great use.I really loved having some of the essential characters act as party members.
However I also loved playing as Butters, the highlight of him is becoming Professor Chaos which is just awesome and with him he just has a vast number of powers that provide strong offense and defense depending on when and where you stop the roulette wheel.However what I also love about the story line is in a way it's somewhat of a love letter to both the RPG and fantasy genre.
It's simply about kids playing pretend fantasy to the extreme level literally.
But that's what most RPG games really are their really games where you use your imagination; someone reads off on a book on what's happening, you make your moves, roll the dies and imagine the outcome.
This game really captures that essence really well, I actually found myself engrossed in the fantasy adventure they were creating and almost wished this was a game that could go on forever, which to me is part of what a good RPG is.This game is an epic, well sort of.Rating: 4 stars.
Best South Park game yet does not make it a great game..
Even the newer games like South Park Let's Go Tower Defense Play!
and Tenorman's Revenge with there mediocrity game-play hardly stood out.Then onto The Stick Of Truth.The good...This really, really, really looks and feels like South Park.
This is the most accurate South Park game made to date.
The presentation is spot on and you do feel like you are interacting with the TV show.You can tell time and effort has been put into this to make it look and feel like the TV show.The Bad...They seem to have forgotten this is a game as the game-play is so trite and stale this plays like a game from the early late 90's.
Many of the game-play mechanics are so archaic they would have been outdated 15+ years ago.
To tired old fighting mechanics that RPGs from the late 90's learned just do not work.
This is an RPG first and foremost...and RPG with only about 8 hours of game-play as the story is so short and the side quests even shorter.
This game did not "need" to be an RPG and would have suited a simple button mashing beat em' up...which it essentially is as most of the battles you have do resort to simple button mashing.
There really are little to no RPG elements in this supposed RPG game.The map you can explore is only done so on a faux 3D plane, meaning you are really playing within a 2D environment...which does make sense given the show it is based on.
It's just not a big enough map for an RPG to be set in and does become very tiresome when you are back tracking over the same locales over and over and over with nothing to do to keep the exploring fresh.The difficulty setting in this game is unbelievably easy, even on the hardest setting.
There is no challenge to this game at all, so much so it may as well have just been an episode of the show you could just sit and watch.Overall, it's a very dull and uninspired game...South Park or not.
This should have been an arcade style game downloadable from XBLA or PSN, etc as that is what it feels like.
It's most definitely not worth the full retail price being asked.For a South Park game, it's full of references and jokes you can relive if you are a fan of the show...or you could just watch the show.
For an RPG game, it's just so flat it's not really worth looking into as there are FAR better RPGs out there and cheaper..
A great game let down by building boredom.
The Stick of Truth is so good in many ways, but is ultimately bogged down by very repetitive gameplay and logs spells between excitement.
I hate to complain about a game so imaginative and cute, but it did become a issue with me the more and more I played through it.You play as a new kid in town, customizable to your discretion, who makes friends with the South Park gang and becomes involved in their fantasy role-playing games when the precious Stick of Truth is stolen from Cartman.
A terrifying plot involving aliens, anal probes, zombie Nazis, abortion clinics, and ManBearPig himself, plus many side-quests make up the lengthy adventure which is a hilarious parody of fantasy RPGs, while being a decent RPG in its own right at the same time (but also retaining many of the flaws of the genre).The voice acting by Trey Parker and Matt Stone is, as expected, brilliant, as well as their cute animation style, and their humor which alternates between satirical and grotesque permeates ever scene.
You really will feel like you are controlling an actual episode of South Park.
Nods to 16-bit RPGs during the Canada scenes will appeal to older gamers too.The downside is that there is not enough variation during the short campaign in regards to weapons, armor, and power-ups.
Bad choices there from the developers.It's worth playing through once, and will appeal to all fans of the show, but boredom will set in at around the halfway mark and you'll probably be somewhat disappointed with it..
They didn't kill this video game!
A South Park game that's worth playing!
Don't kick the baby, play this game!
Based on the animated television series, South Park.
The Stick of Truth is a 2D role-playing video game in a 3D world similar to Paper Mario.
The game does manage to nail the South Park style that we've all grown to love.
The delays on South Park: The Stick of Truth was satirized in the 2013's "Black Friday" episodes trilogy of the TV Show where they denounces the pre-order system in "Black Friday", and skeptical of the game's proposed release at the end of "Titties and Dragons" episode.
It wasn't until Ubisoft acquired the game that it was release finally.
The game was everything, a South Park fan can ask for.
South Park creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone put nearly everything into this game, from the script, overseeing the project, and provided the voices of the characters.
The player takes the character of 'The New Kid', dubbed "Douchebag", a silent protagonist who has recently moved to the town with no memory of his past.
He befriend the local boys, he becomes involved in an epic role-playing fantasy game, featuring human wizards and warriors lead by Wizard King Cartman (Trey Parker) battling elves lead by Kyle (Matt Stone) for control of the Stick of Truth, a twig that possesses limitless power.
Meanwhile something mysterious from outer space crash in South Park, and turning people into Nazis Zombies which the government is covering up.
It seem that the game really try to cramped as much things in there, from playing satire or being meta of past video games, pop culture, and even politics.
The Game is Rated Mature for a reason, so it's not a game that young children should be playing.
There are lot of gross toilet humor.
Lots of racism and dark humor jokes.
Some of the gameplay is pretty out there, gross to point you might want to take a shower after it, like fighting in an abortion clinic, fighting dwarfs while your character parents have sex, anal probing, and last, fighting in a guy's anus track.
For the European and Australian versions of the game, during certain censored scenes an image of a statute making a face-palming gesture appears, along with text describing what you would have seen in the uncut version.
This game isn't for you.
The Stick of Truth features many characters from the history of the South Park television series, and there are tons of background references to famous episodes like the music, posters, and etc.
Lot of open world checking out, as you can visit anywhere you want, from City Wok to 8 Bit Canada.
The player has the choice of playing as four type of characters: fighter, theft, Jew, or Mage.
Varied customization, but limited in certain scenes of the game.
Combat player will have the opportunity to control the available South Park characters as buddies to help with the journey.
The best character to help you throughout the game would be your first friend Butters.
All the combat are supposed to resemble children play-fighting where something like a flaming tennis ball, in the mind of the child, is an actual spell or a fart is curse.
Weapons will have upgrades available, limiting the amount of loot available during the course of the game.
Still, the game has a slow weapon menu that kinda get annoying when enemies would mock you for taking so long to attack.
The combat is a turn-based system similar to that of Final Fantasy or Elder Scrolls type game.
The enemies in the game are challenging, but not too hard once you get the hang of the controller and fighting styles.
Lot of action, and not too repeatable enemies.
The game normally count in around 50 to 70 hour mark, with good players beating all the missions in less than 14 hours.
Lots of replay value as there are a lot side quests to do besides the main story plot liking hide & seek, finding Jesus, or catch Manbearpig.
The cut scenes might get annoying at times.
There were lot of downloadable content, but it seem like those plans were cancelled when Ubisoft became the publisher of the game.
According to Trey Parker and Matt Stone they do not want story DLC.
If they were to be available, you can get three packs that are based on the episodes "Good Time With Weapons'', "The Coon" and others.
Depending on what system, you're playing it, you might get bugs or glitches.
I had great fun playing it.
The Greatest RPG of All Time.
I am a big South Park fan, and this experience was such a treat.
You play as the new kid in town and fight for the stick of truth and also make many make friends on the way.
This is the South Park game us fans deserved, compared to the N64 game, The Stick of Truth outranks it completely.
The story in the game is so great and will make you chuckle as you proceed more into the game.
The abilities are all up to "you" in this game.
You get to go to Canada, battle Chef, fight nazi zombies, beat up gingers, fight aborted fetuses, fart on anything in sight, and dozens more.
I have played through it five times and cherish every moment of it.
Another thing you gotta love about this game is how it perfectly captures the look of the series.
I personally think South Park has the best artwork and animation in any animated series ever.
If you are looking to get this game i highly recommend it!
It is great for fans, and people who love role playing games. |
tt0485774 | Heartstopper | Sara Wexler is a lonely teenager who attempts to commit suicide by running in front of a car. However, she is only injured before being discovered by Sheriff Berger. He takes her to hospital, where the notorious serial killer Jonathan Chambers, whom Berger captured, is being detained. Chambers is then executed in the electric chair, but the police do not know that he survived by making a deal with the devil. Chambers now has supernatural powers and begins to slaughter everyone in the hospital, including Berger. Meanwhile, Sara and another teenager called Walter, who was sent to hospital after accidentally being impaled on his own rake, try to escape from the hospital but find that all exits are locked. Chambers then confronts Sara and explains that he needs her to help him because she has a power which will make him immortal. She declines the offer and flees from him. Eventually she defeats Chambers by opening a portal to hell and sending him through it. In the final scene, however, it is revealed that Chambers's personality has passed into her. | violence, murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0070155 | The Harder They Come | Ivanhoe "Ivan" Martin is a poor Jamaican man in search of a job. He leaves his rural home, after his grandmother dies, to live with his impoverished mother in Kingston. He meets Jose, who takes him to see Django, a Spaghetti Western. Excited by urban life, he tries to get work but fails. He finally gets a job after taking a broken bicycle frame and rebuilding it into a working bicycle, and uses it to run errands for a record producer. When the frame's legal owner insists that it is still "his" bicycle, the two fight, and Ivan slashes him with a knife for which crime he is sentenced to a whipping.
After this Ivan interests the record producer in a song he writes and performs, "The Harder They Come", but he only gets $20 for it. He dreams of stardom, but the stranglehold the producer has on the music industry condemns Ivan to work for a pittance. Eventually, Jose (played by Carl Bradshaw), one of the first people Ivan met after moving to Kingston, offers him an opportunity dealing marijuana, moving the drug from the country to the city on a motorbike. When Ivan complains about the pay and conditions, Jose informs on him to the police. On his next trip, when a policeman tries to flag Ivan to stop, he panics and shoots the officer.
Next, Ivan meets a woman in a hotel. While he is in bed with her, the police surround the room and try to capture him. He shoots his way out, killing three officers.
On the run, he returns to shoot and wound the girl he slept with, believing she and Jose betrayed him. He then finds Jose and pursues him, shooting at him, but Jose escapes.
Ivan returns to the countryside, but the police catch up with him, leading to another shootout and escape. Ivan seeks support from his drug-dealer friends, who help him hide out. The policeman leading the search cracks down on the drug trade, telling the dealers he will not relax the pressure until they give Ivan up. Meanwhile, the record producer re-releases Ivan's song, which rapidly becomes a hit because of Ivan's notoriety. Enamoured of his new fame, Ivan has photographs of himself made holding two guns in gangster poses, and he sends them to the press. He also steals a flashy car and drives it around a golf course.
One dealer friend advises Ivan to escape to Cuba. Seeing the ship he hoped to escape on leaving, Ivan swims out towards the speeding vessel. However, he cannot grab onto the ladder dangling off the side, and he opens his eyes to find himself beached ashore.
Ivan sleeps in the shade of a tree then awakens, alerted to the presence of policemen with rifles. He exchanges shots with the police while imagining himself being watched by an excited, applauding audience, just like the one he had watched Django with. Out of bullets, he comes out and challenges the police to 'draw' as in a Western. The police shoot him many times, and he drops. The film ends abruptly, cutting to a shot of a woman's torso gyrating to the sound of Ivan's song over the credits. | suspenseful, grindhouse film, realism, murder, bleak, cult, atmospheric, revenge, blaxploitation | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0358349 | Agent Cody Banks 2: Destination London | Agent Cody Banks (Frankie Muniz) attends summer camp, actually a secret facility for training CIA teenage agents. When a group of CIA soldiers attempt to abduct head counselor Victor Diaz (Keith Allen), Cody helps him escape, mistaking the CIA operation for a training exercise. The director informs Cody that Diaz stole disks containing plans for a secret mind-control device, and sends Cody to recapture him.
In the United Kingdom, Cody poses as a summer orchestra student at the Kenworth estate to spy on owner Lord Duncan Kenworth, suspected of working with Diaz, supported by his handler, Derek (Anthony Anderson) and Kumar, Derek's right-hand man, who are disguised as a chef hired by Lady Josephine Kenworth and a taxi driver respectively. Whilst keeping his mission a secret from his fellow students, Cody sneaks around the estate and confirms that Diaz and Duncan are working together and that they have a working prototype of the mind control device, evidenced when Duncan makes a dog serve drinks and play the piano.
The next day, Cody breaks into a lab owned by Duncan, where he sees the finished device: a microchip inserted as a filling into a tooth cavity by dentist Santiago. Shortly afterwards Cody and Derek chase Diaz, armed with a rocket gun, through London streets, but Cody is captured by the Metropolitan Police Service and taken to Scotland Yard. He is later freed by Emily (Hannah Spearritt), a fellow student who, similar to Cody, is actually a British MI6 undercover operative. While Emily buys coffee and soda, henchmen sneak up on Cody, knocking him unconscious by drugging him with spray. They kidnap him and implant him with the microchip.
Under Duncan, Santiago and Diaz's influence, Cody meets the CIA director, who is then also converted. This is witnessed by Emily, who explains things to Derek. To get the microchip out of Cody, Derek cuts one of Cody's gadgets, exploding Mentos mints, into a precisely minuscule amount to safely remove it. The group later realise Diaz's plan: to implant all of the world leaders, who are all in London for a G7 summit at Buckingham Palace, effectively giving him control of the world.
Deducing that with the CIA director under Diaz's control, they may be put on a most wanted list, Cody, Derek and Emily infiltrate the party before the summit. There, they realize that most of the dignitaries have already been implanted due to bizarre behavior and Duncan being appointed director of the Royal Mint by the British Prime Minister (upon accepting this, Duncan cruelly states to Josephine that he is leaving her). They explain the truth to the other students, who are performing for the guests, and urge them to keep the world leaders from attending the G7 summit. They later proceed to do so with an impromptu but rousing performance of War, accompanied by dancing and clapping from the assembled dignitaries and Queen Elizabeth herself, whilst Cody, Emily and Derek search for the villains. Derek is implanted with the microchip, and is set on Cody by Santiago. Before Santiago can kill him through Derek, Emily finds and subdues him, disabling the mind control software and rescuing the U.S. President, who was to be implanted.
Shortly after Cody kicks out Derek's microchip, the two of them remove the CIA director's microchip. Diaz, realising that his plan has failed attempts to flee, but ends up fighting, and being defeated by Cody in the Queen's gift room, destroying numerous priceless artifacts in the process. Duncan also attempts to escape, but is tripped by his apparently senile and blind butler, who turns out to be Emily's handler and is arrested, much to Lady Kenworth's delight.
After the villains are arrested, Cody returns to the camp, where Derek is now in charge as reward. Cody's parents pick him up, none the wiser about his dangerous exploits. Alex, Cody's younger brother tries to eat a few of his explosive Mentos, but Cody tosses them into the pond where they explode harmlessly. | violence | train | wikipedia | I only with that I could say the same for the sequel, Agent Cody Banks: Destination London.
I understand that perhaps Hillary Duff's paycheck had risen since the original film, but she did bring something (as embarrassing as it is to say) to Agent Cody Banks that kept the spark alive.
The first film carried with it some decent events that built a strong story which ultimately lead to a better than average film, but it seemed like in this sequel they aimed towards children and empty minds.
This story just felt as if it was unfinished, as if the original screenplay was not dumbened down for children, but instead built another strong adventure, but the studio wanted to capture the child audience, so the butchered the product, leaving frayed edges and unfinished segments, so that they could make room for Anthony Anderson's cheap laughs.
With unfamiliar characters, comedy that seemed forced and incoherent instead of funny, and a story that had that cheapened Velcro feel to it, Agent Cody Banks 2 proved that jumping to quickly into a sequel will place a black cloud on your entire series.
The acting is great especially with all three agents played by Frankie Muniz, Anthony Anderson, and Hannah Spearitt.
Agent Cody Banks 2 is a decent sequel to the original.
Frank Muniz comes back as Cody Banks in this lackluster sequel in which he comes out of kids spy school to track down a hispanic Dictator named Diaz who used to be in the Cia.Lame jokes are abound in this sequel as the jokes will pass you by without making you laugh, although kids might get them (like the chocolate surprise joke and millions of James Bond references)One aspect I didn't like in this sequel are the numerous racial insults and stereotypes in the film ranging from a middle eastern with a bad accent to a black Muslim who plays a trumpet!!
Man I don't know how this on screen, it also explains why Roger Ebert gave this film a thumbs down.Still if you like dumb entertainment check it out.PS: Speaking of dumb racial stereotypes that girl who plays the blonde dumb bimbo who belives the lies of Cody is a near riot, at the expense of dumb blonde stereotypes.A few laughs yes, but is the movie good?
Cody Banks (Frankie Muniz) is a friendly teen but he's really a CIA undercover agent .
Diaz (Keith Allen), Cody's CIA trainer at summer camp, robs a mind-control device from the CIA, and getaways to London.
It's a spoof of James Bond's films , there're even bizarre artifacts like in ¨007¨ movies , plus a role type ¨Q¨ , a weapon deliverer who teaches the various gadgets which Cody Banks will subsequently use .
Support cast is pretty good , such as : Hannah Spearritt as a music student , who is really a British secret agent working on the same case , and Anthony Anderson as Cody's CIA handler in London who becomes a cook at the house of the musical benefactor .
Atmospheric and lively musical score by Mark Thomas .This is a sequel to ¨Agent Cody Banks¨(2003) that directed Harald Zwart (One Night at McCool's , Commando Hamilton , Pink Panther 2) starred by Hilary Duff , Angie Harmon , Cynthia Stevenson , Arnold Vosloo , Keith David , Daniel Roebuck , Ian McShane.
After his appearance in "The Simpsons", I was beginning to think that maybe Blair was starting to line up a new career for himself for when he gets kicked out of Downing Street).And if I say that the only person not to disgrace themselves in this film is Hannah Spearritt, then you may some clue about how bad the performances are.
As for Hannah Spearritt, she makes an appealing easy on-the-eye replacement for Hilary Duff and isn't half bad as the flautist/covert agent, especially given the paucity of the material she was to work with.
Agent Cody Banks 2: Destination London is a weak sequel and its strictly for kids.
Cody Banks, the teen secret agent played by Frankie Muniz, returns with an undercover mission in London, posing as a boarding school student trying to stop a rogue agent who has stolen a mind-control device.
The material in this film is just so childish , which isn't a bad thing since it's a kid movie, but the writers don't even seem to attempt to entertain adults.
enjoyable for ages 7-14.AGENT CODY BANKS 2: DESTINATION LONDON- ***/****PG- action sequences and brief crude humor,language..
He and Anthony Anderson, who plays his CIA "handler" in this sequel, were obviously having fun making this campy tongue-in-cheek secret agent "thriller." This is a very simple movie -- there are no sub-plots, no complicated characters, no psychological complexities -- and I couldn't help but enjoy it.
Right, first things first, I enjoyed the first Agent Cody Banks movie, While silly and predictable, it was fun, entertaining and endearing.
When watching "Agent Cody Banks 2: Destination London" for the zillionth time on cable (okay, keeping it on in the background when there's nothing else to watch), I have to say that this film is one of the best examples of great cinematography I have ever seen.
There aren't blinding special effects like we saw in the first movie (a pack of exploding Mentos provides the best effects and drama throughout the film), but the director deserves an A+ with extra credit for presentation.As for the script, you can almost hear Hilary Duff in the background yelling "Don't do it, Cody!," but Cody went ahead and did it, bringing along a B-list cast to replace quasi-A-listers Duff and Angie Harmon.
The supporting cast this time around consists primarily of Anthony Anderson as Derek, who is looking to prove himself and get "back in the game," and relative newcomer Hannah Spearritt, she of wounded heart thanks to the director, who nixed the idea of a hookup between Cody and her character, Emily, a Scottish special agent of the hottie variety.
Banks has to go to London while posing as a Clarinet player (thanks to a Clarinet that plays itself) in a youth group that is to give a concert just prior to the G7 meeting, where an evil dictator (a very crappy Keith Allen as Diaz) plans to use a mind-control device to take over the world.
The unoriginal plot can be forgiven, however, since this is a Muniz/Banks vehicle, and to that extent the film stays true to the original.Without giving away the ending, the film's climax juxtaposes a beautiful orchestral, "extended remix" rendition of a rock classic with Banks doing battle with the bad guys in a scene that few will likely ever forget seeing, even if it doesn't immediately stand out in their minds.
Older viewers should appreciate the complexity and beautiful cinematography of the finish, while the kids will focus more on the action, but all should be left without any serious dislike for a film whose script could have been better, but whose execution would have been extremely difficult to improve upon.I actually wrote this review while watching "The Dentist 2," and if that story managed a sequel, this one surely has a right to exist.
this is a sequel to the original version(agent Cody banks).
"Agent Cody Banks 2: Destination London" is the sequel to a film that I confess I've never actually seen.
The London filming set was great for a sequel and may I say that even though I thought the plot was funny some parts were not but I laughed a little at the not so funny parts too.
In this case, the kiddie-spy is Malcolm in the Middle star Frankie Muniz, playing the title character Cody Banks.
I guess he had some adventure in the past, as this is the sequel to some movie I didn't see, of course called Agent Cody Banks.
Ever since Muniz started to do these Agent Cody Banks movies I truly believe he has offically lost the acting bug.
In Agent Cody Banks 2: Destination London, Frankie Muniz is on assignment in the British capital to chase down a defecting agent and the mind control device he's been developing.
The defector by the way is Keith Allen who ran the summer camp where the CIA trained its young agents and that the parents of same know nothing about its real purpose.One thing unchanged from the first film, parents Daniel Roebuck and Cynthia Stevenson are as clueless as ever and apparently as clueless as the rest of the adult parent population who send their kids there.
As for Anderson, he goes in as a cook and he introduces the British aristocracy to soul food and they actually like it.As Frankie Muniz was growing up and he did considerably between the first Cody Banks film and this one I'm guessing either he and his producers or both arrived at a decision that to keep this series going would be ludicrous.
Agent Cody Banks (Frankie Muniz) is at CIA camp.
Now Banks has to go to London as an undercover musical prodigy to get close to a scientist who Diaz needs to perfect a mind control device.
I ended my review of Agent Cody Banks by calling it exactly what it was, which was a direct-to-DVD, TV movie that had the luxury of being released nationwide in theaters.
"The Los Angeles Times" called the original film, "a clever and lively action-adventure," and preceded to call this sequel, "ingenious...a handsome, often hilarious comedy-adventure." Perhaps it was made for the staff of the "LA Times," who appear to be the franchise's biggest fans.Well, Agent Cody Banks 2 and its predecessor certainly weren't made for me.
Now Banks, with the help of the bumbling Derek (Anthony Anderson) and the obligatory beauty Emily (Hannah Spearritt), must try and retrieve the mind control disc and stop Diaz before this all gets out of hand.In the period of a year (exactly a year, seeing as this came out the same weekend its predecessor did), Cody Banks hasn't changed too much.
Cody Banks is the kind of kid you'd like to play as a child, running around your house, maybe with a few fake weapons, sliding on your mother's furniture, on her newly-polished floor, prancing around and starring in your own little show.
I'd rather watch three children play "Cody Banks" in their hours rather than watch a robotic sequel to a film that was already difficult to sit through.I suppose the main problem with this franchise is it's a TV movie playing dress up.
If you were to show the average Joe Agent Cody Banks or its sequel on a theater screen, providing them with no prior knowledge of the film, they'd likely assume it was a TV movie blown up on the big screen.Once again, Muniz is a bit charming here, which goes a long way in a film like this.
Anthony Anderson, a good-spirited but often shortchanged actor, remains the butt of almost every joke, and Hannah Spearritt doesn't have half the chemistry of Hillary Duff from the first film.
She has the blonde hair and a smile, but what she lacks is the irrevocable chemistry Duff had.There are way better films at your local video store than Agent Cody Banks 2: Destination London.
This is a film that provides about as much healthy nourishment to children as a bowl of cereal and a ten minute commercial break.Starring: Frankie Muniz, Anthony Anderson, and Hannah Spearritt.
talk about disappointing.this sequel has none of the heart of the original.the first one was silly,but at least it had a semblance of story,and the laughs were honest.here,it's all about the cheap laughs.this movie is slow and boring,with a lame story.if it didn't go direct to video,it should have.Anthony Anderson is in this one,and he can usually be counted on for some good laughs,but he has nothing to work with here.this is case where they should just have stuck with the original,or at least put some more thought into the sequel.it feels rushed,but then it was,considering it came out merely a year later than the first one.Agent Cody Banks 2:Destination London gets a 4/10 from me..
But Agent Cody Banks 2: Destination London, well it lacked that realistic effect Zwart brought to the first movie.
If there is to be a 3rd Cody Banks, I think it should involve the original cast and a more serious story with one liners.
Check it out if you liked the spykids movies, or if your gonna watch it check out Agent Cody Banks: 1 first!
I never saw the original "Agent Cody Banks," and don't want to after seeing this, one of the worst mainstream films of the decade.
It is an utter waste of time - a full-blown commercial effort at enticing young kids and their helpless parents into theaters to watch a half-"arsed" effort at a sequel.Oh, I feel for the people who will inevitably be subjected to "Agent Cody Banks 3 - Destination: Puberty," I really, really do..
The kids in the "band" were terrible at both accents and acting for the most part, the scripting in those scenes was diabolical, the gadget guy was enough to make me cringe and want to leave the theatre, and Diaz, well what can I say (did he even go to acting school, I am sure he must have missed the lecture on how to do a decent accent).I am English and I love London, and London looked great in this movie, but that aside, there wasn't a lot to approve of in this movie.I am sad to think that Muniz a talented young actor, following in the footsteps of other vertically challenged comic actors (like Michael J Fox), had to appear in this.
I give Agent Cody Banks 2: Destination London an 8 out of 10 stars.
Frankie Muniz returns as the junior CIA Agent Cody Banks.
Diaz (Keith Allen), Cody's CIA trainer at summer camp, steals a mind-control device from the CIA, and escapes to London.
Cody's CIA handler in London, Derek (Anthony Anderson), becomes a cook at the house of their musical benefactor and Diaz's partner.
It's a given that stars of TV shows acclaimed for their writing usually aren't so blessed when it comes to the movies they make during hiatus (what John Larroquette and Kirstie Alley thought of the script for "Madhouse" we can only guess at), but Heaven help us Frankie Muniz really takes steps down when he's not with "Malcolm in the Middle" - not that he can be blamed for taking on "Agent Cody Banks" or being, presumably, contractually tied in to any sequels.
Which brings us to "Agent Cody Banks 2: Destination London," MGM's hastily-slapped-together second adventure of the teen CIA agent, and a reminder of why it's been a while since there's been a sequel this quick (the first movie only came out last year); these things take time to do properly if you don't do them back to back and release them separately (as Robert Zemeckis, Peter Jackson and even the Wachowski Brothers can testify).
Though the gulf between Cody Banks and Carmen Cortez was pretty wide in the first one, in this movie it's even wider because of the bad writing; not only are the basics of the plot - Cody's camp master steals a mind-control device and plots to use it to control the world leaders, and our hero goes undercover as a music student in an international youth orchestra to flush him out - poorly worked out, but all the characters are flat and cliched, without even the attempts at building them up the first one had.
Cody Banks is back in an all new high energy adventure with new gadgets, slick special effects and wicked chase sequences.This film starred: Frankie Muniz, Anthony Anderson & Hannah Spearritt.Agent Cody Banks 2 is better than the first but it is still not that good of a film, again like the first film it is good when you are younger, but again as you get older this is a boring film.
Cody Banks is back in an all new high energy adventure with new gadgets, slick special effects and wicked chase sequences.This film starred: Frankie Muniz, Anthony Anderson & Hannah Spearritt.Agent Cody Banks 2 is better than the first but it is still not that good of a film, again like the first film it is good when you are younger, but again as you get older this is a boring film.
Agent Cody Banks 2: Destination London (2004): Dir: Keith Allen / Cast: Frankie Muniz, Anthony Anderson, Hannah Spearritt, Keith David, Cynthia Stevenson: Campy family fare with nothing to do with London other than its destination.
Teenager Cody Banks is sent to London to retrieve a disc that contains a mind control device.
This time around Banks seemed a little more grown up and his partner played by Anderson did a great job with one liners, in fact the whole cast was better than the original.
Much better music and the director seemed to aim more at the story than the action, which is good in a kids film.
Agent Cody Banks 2: Destination London.
Basically Cody Banks (Malcolm in the Middle's Frankie Muniz) this time poses as a gifted cello playing pupil to attend a music school, and at the same time foil some bad guys who are creating some mind control chips.
Joining Cody is less experienced Derek Bowman (Scary Movie 3 & 4's Anthony Anderson), and Scotland Yard counterpart Emily Sommers (S Club 7's Hannah Spearritt), and they go against rogue agent, now bad guy Victor Diaz (Keith Allen).
Agent Cody Banks 2: Destination London is a complete waste of your time unless you like crude jokes and nothing elsePlot: During a game of hide and go seek at the training camp a top secret mind control device has been stolen by Kenworth (James Faulkner) and Diaz (Keith Allen).
Agent Cody Banks (Frankie Muniz) is sent by the C. |
tt0104527 | Invasion of the Bunny Snatchers | The cartoon opens with a voice-over by Bugs Bunny explaining that strange carrots have traveled from outer space to Earth. Afterwards, Bugs goes to "work"—performing comedy routines with Elmer Fudd, Yosemite Sam, and Daffy Duck. During the routines, Bugs takes notice of a strange pile of glowing carrots, but ignores them. The next day, Bugs wakes up and returns to work, but Elmer, Yosemite Sam, and Daffy Duck appear as poorly drawn versions of themselves, including a brief segment where Daffy Duck is animated in the style of Syncro-Vox. They possess strangely friendly attitudes, and repeatedly offer Bugs Bunny a carrot. Bugs eventually accepts and takes the carrot home with him. The carrot rips open and expels a poorly drawn version of Bugs. The impostor attempts to kill the real Bugs with an axe, and Bugs runs off screaming (but pauses to state "You know something, folks? This is the scariest part of the picture."). Bugs finds tags reading "Made on Planet Nudnik" on the Elmer, Sam, and Daffy replacements, who have devolved into mindlessly spouting their catchphrases like a broken record. Bugs catches the impostors in a bag labeled "pale stereotypes" and sends it into outer space, where it gets swallowed by a black hole. The following morning, Bugs wakes up to find all of his enemies back to normal.
The song Mysterious Mose plays along with the credits, and afterwards a Porky Pig impostor in Monty Python-esque animation pops out of the Looney Tunes drum. As it tries to utter the line "That's all, Folks!", Bugs throws out the impostor and drags in the real Porky Pig, placing him inside the drum, where he delivers his line. | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0079366 | The Jericho Mile | Larry Murphy was convicted of first degree murder and is serving a life term in Folsom Prison for shooting his father, which he feels was justified because his father was raping his stepsister. In prison he is nicknamed "Lickety Split" by the other inmates, but remains a loner who has only one person he calls a friend: a black inmate named Stiles. The film centers around his obsession for running around the prison yard. Larry has no idea how fast he is actually running until the prison psychologist (Geoffrey Lewis) has the prison sports writer time him. Once the warden (Billy Green Bush) finds out just how fast Murphy is, he has the state track and field coach (Ed Lauter) bring up a couple of his distance runners to run against Murphy. Murphy beats them and ultimately allows the track coach to train him in anticipation of the upcoming olympic trials. Before that can happen however, a new track has to be built to proper specs in the yard for Murphy to run on so he can register an official time to be eligible to compete at the olympic trials. The Warden asks the inmates to volunteer to build the new track.
Stiles manages to swing a deal with the head of the white gang, Dr. D, (Brian Dennehy), to get a conjugal visit with his wife three months early so he can see his new baby. Instead of Stiles' wife showing up, one of Dr. D's drug "mules" is put in her place so that Stiles can bring in some drugs. Stiles refuses to participate and goes back to his cell resulting in the "mule" getting arrested.
Stiles tells Murphy what happened and Murphy convinces Stiles to go into isolation. Stiles is killed after the prisoners are let out however. The conflicts continue with Murphy and the white gang, and the black gang and as a result, the white gang boycotts the building of the track and forms a picket line that the other gangs refuse to cross.
As the story continues, the truth unfolds and a gang fight ensues as the blacks and the Hispanics challenge the validity of the picket line. The track is built and Murphy clocks a qualifying time while beating Frank Davies (considered to be one of the fastest milers in the U.S.) to be able to compete in the Olympic trials. Murphy is then called before the U.S Olympic board where it is learned that it was never the board's intention to let a convicted murderer compete at the Olympic trials. Murphy is antagonized by the board member to try to find out if Murphy is sorry for what he did to his father. In a fit of anger, Murphy admits he would "blow him away" all over again given the same set of circumstances.
With his shot at the Olympics over, life at Folsom Prison returns to normal. Murphy hears that Frank Davies qualifies for the Olympics with an exceptional time. He then goes to his cell and grabs the stopwatch (given to him by Dr. Janowski) and his spikes. Murphy sets himself up on the start line with the obvious intention of seeing how he would have done had he raced against Davies. Murphy races as hard as he can while grabbing the attention of the prison inmates once more. As he crosses the finish line, a group of inmates are waiting with huge anticipation as to how Murphy did. An inmate grabs the stopwatch and yells out that Murphy beat Davies time at which point Murphy throws the stopwatch against the prison wall, smashing it to pieces. | revenge, violence | train | wikipedia | I watch a lot of movies - DVD, features, and classics, you name it.
The night I watched JERICHO MILE, my wife (who had ordered it on the internet) said she remembered it from when she was in high school, that it had stayed with her all of these years.
She, who remembered the original, and our kids (18 and 16) who had no idea what the movie was about couldn't believe it.
Bar none, when peter Strauss so passionately bangs his fist down and says, "i'd do it AGAIN!".
It didn't advocate violence because it was a defense crime, but evoked such intensity we couldn't believe it...when his fellow cell mates gave him their food in support of his efforts, there wasn't a dry eye in our house.Someone please make more movies like this one.
Peter Strauss gives a great performance as a convict named 'Rain' Murphy who keeps to himself.
His cell is bare of any comforts that other inmates have like books and pictures.
The only time he feels in another zone is in running.
He does it often and can run a mile in under four minutes.
At first, 'Rain' wants no part of this, but when his best friend is killed, he shows interest.This is a good movie, period.
Strauss is very good (What did you expect, anything less?) and Michael Mann shows hints of greatness that would come full bloom years later.
This movie had that bit of realism (probably because it was filmed among convicts).
It almost feels like this was a true story.
There is a lot of notable names like Brian Dennehy, Roger E.
Mosley, and Richard Moll as well.My heart sank when some pompous board of directors wouldn't let him run because he didn't feel bad for his crime.
This was back when TV movies were actually good.
'The Jericho Mile' is a gem of a film.
ESPN Classic, PLEASE SHOW THIS FILM!!!.
Powerful Film 24 years later.
The power of this film stuns me even today.
It has all the trademarks of a Michael Mann film, including the line that appears in all his works about the 'man' inventing a hard time that some character cannot handle.
Rain Murphy is a man who denies himself all of the creature comforts of civilization.
He rejects the idea of running in the Olmypics, or even trying, because it would disrupt his new life.
A life where he runs until he cannot walk, then zones out until he cannot talk stretching his muscles.
A shock to Murphy's system changes all of this, he buys into the dream of competing, only to be cheated.
Murphy's final act of defiance is memorable.
Mann might have gotten more polished over the years, this film shows talent always delivers.
I've never given a movie a 10 out of 10 before....
I've never given a movie a ten out of ten before but this is the closest I have ever come (I gave it a 9).
There are very few movies that I truly love, this however is one of them.
With it's gritty realism, fantastic on-site locationing, and it's great soundtrack it literally blew my young mind when I first saw it in 1979.
At that point I didn't know about prisons, violence, racial tensions, or the struggle to survive & live free.
I doubt that anyone who is an adult, or for that matter anyone who is growing up in todays world could be impacted by this film in the same way I was all those years ago, but I will say this: "if you haven't seen this movie I envy you"; this is because you have the chance to see this great film for the frist time.
For each of us they're different, but here's to the rarest movies of them all: the ones we actually love....
One of the best TV movies ever made!.
This movie was exceptional.
It tells the story of a man who, after he was sentenced to life imprisonment for killing his father-in-law when he found him raping his sister, sets out to become a world-class runner.
It not only gave a realistic portrayal of prison life, but also deftly portrays the mentality of someone who is serving such a sentence.
Peter Strauss played the role perfectly.
Along with "Rich Man, Poor Man", this movie was probably the best performance of his career.Probably the best scene in this movie was when Murphy was before the civilian board trying to get permission to run in the race and he sees right through the man's preconceptions and bigotry concerning convicts.
This man did not see Murphy as a person but rather as something other than what he was.
Very rarely has such passion and intelligence come from a made-for-TV movie..
One of the best TV movies I've ever seen.
I've seen The Jericho Mile several times.
I've always thought it was one of the best TV movies ever.
Peter Strauss is outstanding in this role.To sum things up...if you haven't seen The Jericho Mile, it's definitely worth a watch..
A film that deserved theatrical release.
This made-for-television movie is a cinematic gem that exemplifies the technique of Michael Mann with stirring contemporary music tightly integrated to the visual images.
Always with Mr. Mann, the amplification of impact by the music is almost as if there is an invisible academy-award-winning actor added to the ensemble of cast, writer, director and cinematographer.This film is definitely one of my all time favorites.
While nothing is perfect, this film comes very, very close.Along with an excellent script, great direction and masterful acting by Richard Strauss, there is an all-star ensemble of character actors at their finest: Roger Mosely; Brian Dennehy; Ed Lauter; Geoffrey Lewis; Richard Moll; Miguel Pinero; William Prince; Burton Guilliam; Ji-Tu Cumbuka; Richard Lawson and Billy Green Bush.
You may not recognize the names, but you will recognize every face.If this comes on TV, sit down with popcorn, turn up the sound for an amazing soundtrack and score, and prepare to be riveted for the 97 minutes of the film.
great film, not common enough.
An interesting and involved film about a "lifer" just trying to live out his days peacefully.
Elements of the main character appear in Michael Mann's later films, like Thief (1981), Heat (1995), and so on.
My favorite prison movie..
I really enjoyed this movie - I like prison movies in general (I'm not sure why -- I'm sure some shrink could make something out of it!) I spent one night in jail more than 20 years ago, and I knew then I would never go back - I got the individual version of "scared straight"!
The soundtrack, specifically "Sympathy for the Devil" by the Rolling Stones, was the perfect backdrop for the film.
To this day, I think of "The Jericho Mile" every time I hear the song..
the Jericho mile is a great movie and this is what i have to say..
i love watching the Jericho mile.
i mean watching peter Strauss run the mile is like watching usain bolt sprint the 100 meter.
i think peter Strauss is a excellent actor and should do another running movie.
he is lightning fast has great energy and can run a mile in under 4 minutes and that my friend is amazing.
no man alive can out race rain Murphy i mean the man runs 80 mile a week no one does that but him.
i've watched the Jericho mile 100's of times and will watch it 100's more.
great movies get watched more than movies that are not.
i thank the makers of this film for giving years of there lives to make it.they are great people and i bless them all.thank you for letting me get my word out again thank you all..
Run Baby Run. The first time I saw this film I was a kid.
I was ten years old when it was released but since my family never went to movie theaters I saw it on Network TV.
It was only the second film to illicit that response (Rocky was the first) and there haven't been many since.
I can't say why exactly; Larry "Rain" Murphy didn't deserve to win any more that Rocky Balboa or anyone else.
I know I admired Murphy, not so much for what he did, but for the way he did his time.
I have a rule today, that when I see this film late at night on cable television (the only time most will come across it) I must watch, no matter what I have to do the next morning.
Fortunately it doesn't play often like Shawshank Redemption or other favorites, so I still get plenty of sleep and I never tire of the story of one man's unrepentant imprisonment and personal victory..
Best Film ever made!!!!.
I read on the web that this film is being remade into a theatrical feature.
It's about time Hollywood got their act together.
Go figure!!JERICHO MILE was made ahead of it's time.
It's a masterpiece.Michael Mann, a true visionary, found a way to engage an audience without overindulgence.
Peter Strauss' Emmy award performance is probably the best character role I've seen in my film-viewing lifetime.
Any actor who touches this role will never be the same (unless an Academy Award is already sitting on their mantle).The gritty multi ethnic ensemble, a backdrop for THE JERICHO MILE makes one understand the delicate social dynamics of our world.
Imagine a convict imprisoned since he was a teenager for life with no chance of parole, that doesn't know he is possibly the fastest runner in the world.
...what would you do??This movie makes you walk away feeling you haven't been cheated on any level.
Totally thrilling, engaging, emotional, and a "Rolling Stones" soundtrack that kick's ass!!!I always thought this would be made for the big screen...
In the meantime I'll have to continue re-watching my weathered VHS copy I've had for many years..
Strauss is convincing in an otherwise confusing TV movie..
THE JERICHO MILE scores a qualifying time for presenting a determined Peter Strauss who gives this one a good amount of stamina.
His role is an inmate who has the love and desire for running.
In a prison world filled with intolerance, he wants a chance to return to society again by changing his ways and become an Olympic hopeful.
This must be a cross between CHARIOTS OF FIRE and the cult classic PENITENTIARY, and while it has its own variety of moments, the film is better off confused by focusing heavy on racial violence and rapid-fire tensions.
Otherwise, a good and honest effort in displaying harsh prison life to the screen, but don't expect much in terms of hope and glory..
You know, all the copyright holder for this flick would need to do is put this on a DVD with some documentary/behind the scenes stuff, or a copy of the original story, and i'd shell out money.
Good movies get bought, period.
This is another reason why people pirate flicks, most of the films we see are filler and fluff and hype, and nothing more.
We need more movies like THIS availableMade for tv movies usually get a bad rap.
The only bad rap I can give this movie is it's VHS only release.Ben Affleck may have been "the bomb in Phantoms", but Straus was the bomb in THIS flick..
A Very Food Film.
I have seen the Jericho Mile many times during the past 13 years.
It is a very good film that strongly survives the passage of time.My life's experiences as a champion miler and studies of the prison system confirms the validity of the movie.
Racism is one of the major elements of prison life, along with basic food, and very limited medical attention and exercise.
Running is one of the only available exercises that would be allowed in the prison environment.
The only questionable statement made by the movie is "can a man on a prison diet achieve world record time in the mile run" When I ran and set the Georgia High School Mile record, diet was very important to a runner.Prisons would not allow special diet.
Be assured, the movie is real, and Peter Strauss gives a great performance of a man tormented by his own demons.
Believe the movie.
This is a great movie.
The best role Peter Strauss ever did.
The music is good, the message harsh, the actors great and the story is both emotional and raw.
I was begining to think that I was the only person that had ever seen this film.
For me it is a great one, the character Murphy has no thought of hope or glory, he just likes to run!
It is others on the prison staff who have hopes of glory, ie Olympics.
In prison there is neither hope or glory.
The Jericho Mile (1979).
You can see a few blossoming Mann-erisms in this early TV movie.
Blame it on the limitations of television productions at the time, but the whole thing feels really flat.
And because the grittiness is watered down by television restrictions, it feels like a community theater version of prison life.
In the lead, Peter Strauss does a pretty good job but even he has some lemon moments (like the outburst in the counselor's office).
I don't think Mann's necessarily at fault for the film's failures, there aren't a whole lot of good TV movies from the 70's.
Two years later, he'd make THIEF, my favorite by him..
While all the other students watched a made for tv movie called Sooner or Later with Rex Smith and Denise Miller I was fortunate enough to watch this on the same weekend with my dad.
Well made well acted, to pull on the heartstrings film.
I heard it was even released theatrically in Europe and is was better than most of the films out that year.
Peter Strauss does an amazing job as well as the rest of the cast.
You cannot help but love Strauss' character and route for him all the way.
Not only one of the best movies made for tv but for me also great memories with my dad..
Hard To Find, But a Solid Need-To-See Running Film.
I have always had some fascination with prison movies about wrongly convicted men.
As I am also an avid runner and an enthusiast of the sport of running, this little flick combined both in great way.
The overall quality of the film and acting was much better than I expected from a T.V. movie from the late seventies.
The actual portrayal of running seemed accurate to me, unlike some sports films who falter in that main emphasis area.
The music (mainly The Rolling Stones "Sympathy for the Devil"), seventies hair and mustaches just gave it a sleek and stylish look.
Still an enjoyable solid running film, I only wish I could have seen it in better quality as this is a very hard to find title..
If you like speed, you'll love this!.
I would have totally forgotten about this film had it not been for the fact that I was originally going to review James Caan in Thief.
And noticed purely by accident that Michael Mann had directed both.Peter Strauss plays perhaps his best, certainly his most energetic role to date.
Facing a term in a hard prison for murder his only real freedom is running...around a track!This gets noticed by the prison sports coach and after a few scrapes & dramas he finds he is able to compete in the Olympics, only to be refused by the prison board unless he admits to his crime.A very simple, but moving film, of a man's fight for justice and to live out his passion for the track.
The cinematography is quite good although perhaps lingers a little too long on the slow mo shots of Strauss's sinewy body as he runs around the track.But the upbeat music goes hand in hand with the story, although there is perhaps too much pathos in-between.
The story gets sidetracked with social issues such as prison racism & violence, which to be honest we've seen elsewhere in other prison movies and so isn't really needed here.We also get to see glimpses of Mann's directing - the style found in his latter films such as Thief & Heat can just be seen in development here, but everything is very much understated & conservative which being a TV movie on a limited budget meant he probably wasn't allowed to explore & experiment.A good upbeat movie with a main message of hope & freedom lying from within, but which becomes muddled with too much political correctness.***/*****.
That's "Rain" Murphy, hard-timer, runner extraordinaire.
No Olympics for "Rain"!
He ran his own in the prison yard & beat out the official winner anyway!
Politics - Who needs it??!Good stretch for Strauss though.
More of an upstanding ladies man but rough around the edges at times, if you ask me.Richard Lawson was a nice treat.
Peter Strauss, by nature of appearing in mini-series and made-for-TV films, often gets an unfairly high proportion of bad reviews - Usually from casual observers who saw ten minutes of the film, having channel-hopped into it half-way through.
Well, I've just read all the other 20 reviews for this film and am delighted to see not a single bad word said about The Jericho Mile - That should be enough to have you blasting out to buy this film!!Peter Strauss won an Emmy for his role in this film and watching it even once will show you why he deserved it so much....
Looking to be objective, I attempted to criticise this film.
This is what true, realistic film-making is about.
This is not your typical Hollywood sensationalism, where everything is overacted - It's so realistic and true to life that people have thought it's based on a real event!! |
tt1288571 | Shank | The film is set in Bristol (several shots feature the Clifton Suspension Bridge, and one appears to show the Bristol International Balloon Fiesta). Cal (Wayne Virgo) is a 19-year-old closeted gay gang member who has nothing in his life except drugs, sex, random acts of violence and a secret that he keeps hidden from his mates. An online hookup for sex with a stranger, Scott (Garry Summers), ends in him assaulting and abandoning Scott out in the countryside. This temporarily satisfies but fails to dampen his unspoken desires for his best mate, Jonno (Tom Bott). Nessa (Alice Payne), their twisted, foul-mouthed and controlling, de facto gang leader who harbours much hatred towards everyone for losing a child at the age of 14, suspects that there is something going on between them but she can't put her finger on it. Jonno, putty in Nessa's hands, can't express his own deep rooted and unrequited attachment to Cal. Manipulating situations that bring her closer to having her suspicions confirmed, Nessa sets out about dividing loyalties and encouraging conflict.
For no good reason an innocent student, Olivier (Marc Laurent), falls victim to one of her plans and is mugged on her orders by the gang. Cal steps in to restrain them and creates a distraction allowing Olivier to run free. Ignoring Nessa's screams of contempt, he chases after him and offers him a lift by way of an apology. Fearing that the fall-out from Nessa for his actions will be harsh, Cal persuades Olivier to help him out. Seizing the moral high ground and sensing that there was something more to Cal's Good Samaritan act, Olivier allows Cal to stay with him for a few days. Acting on his own attraction to Cal, Olivier seduces him and in doing so, exposes Cal to new emotions and a tenderness that he has never experienced before.
Soon, the boys are overtaken by the embrace of the first flush of love. Cal and Olivier's relationship progress, but Olivier is warned by Scott, who happens to be one of his professors, to be wary of Cal. Scott gives Olivier his phone number and tells Olivier to contact him if he is ever in need of help. Nessa can't contain her rage for Cal's disloyalty to the gang and sets about hunting him down, intent on destroying him once and for all. With her gang in tow and Jonno tightly wound up, she kidnaps Olivier, taunting Cal with video messages via her mobile phone, to come and save his boyfriend. Arriving at the abandoned factory where they are all waiting for him, he reveals that he is equally hurt by the child she lost, as he was the father. Meanwhile, Jonno and the other gang members begin to destroy Cal's car before they turn toward him. As the showdown unfolds, Nessa loses all control of events and Jonno explodes in act of sexual aggression by raping Cal and leaving everyone traumatized. Shocked by what she has witnessed, Nessa realizes she will now never be able to break the bond between Cal and Olivier while she and the other gang members flee. Olivier then contacts Scott for help and he rescues them and tends to Cal's wounds.
As the film ends Cal sends Scott a video of the man being beat up in the opening scenes of the movie, with the message "Sorry". That man turns out to be Scott's husband (they both wore wedding rings) who is still in a coma at the hospital. Cal throws away his phone, before joining hands and boarding a train with Olivier, severing his last remaining link to the gang and his old life. | violence | train | wikipedia | Shank tells the story of a closeted gang member Cal (Wayne Virgo) who is deeply in love with his best friend Jonno (Tom Bott).
Their anger grows and tragic consequences ensue when they discover Cal's secret.Shank is set in a world not usually explored in gay cinema and as a coming out story there is a lot to be admired here.
I didn't believe that the street tough would go for someone like Olivier.In contrast, the sexual tension between Cal and Jonno was electric.
Bott's performance was flawless, subtly portraying a range of complex conflicting emotions.Alice Payne turned in a promising performance as Nessa, and Wayne Virgo in the lead managed to hold the film together.Near the end of the film a series of events occur that simply didn't seem plausible in the grander scope of the movie.
It is disturbing.It depicts a very real story that looks at a young gay gang member hiding from his fellow hoodlums his sexuality whilst engaging in dangerous and at time's very unsafe sexual practices without their knowledge.Only a chance encounter (and subsequent love affair) with a victim of the gangs abusive streak arrests his spiral and descent into the hell of the ultimately bored undereducated unemployed subculture that does hang out on Britain's street corners intimidating all those who appear to have more to their lives than they do!
It's unique interwoven story deserves at least a 9 out of 10 on its own.It might not be comfortable viewing for many but it packs a punch that resonates for a long time afterwards - a mark of a good film.
It is by far the most original film with a gay central character that I have seen in a long while and I have seen plenty.
Buy it, don't rent it and don't steal it off an illegal site (like a certain person I know did) - these film makers deserve to get every penny for their effort in the vain hope they make something as good again.....
From researching the film and hearing the writer/editor and producer in a Q&A afterwards the film takes on a completely different resonance of believability when we learned that the majority of the narrative had been woven from real life events that had taken place in the UK.
All the supporting cast give this film a depth that you wouldn't expect from a low budget independent film with such high production values.This is a gritty, urban and energetic film that grabs you from frame one and drives you through so many twists and turns that you find your emotions rubbed raw one minute then soothed the next.
Incredible raw camera work carousels you through the lives of these delinquent British youth whilst an urban 'great' soundtrack of hip-hop and rap is beautifully underscored by British composer Barnaby Taylor - whose piano and guitar punctuation at key moments helps bring the arc of the main character's story to an emotional high.
The Miami New Times says of the film "21yr old Director Simon Pearce has taken the bildungsroman, held it up against the wall and punched its face in."I had to look the word up as well and it means - BILDUNGSROMAN - A novel whose principal subject is the moral, psychological, and intellectual development of a usually youthful main character.I agree it did punch it in the face.
From the facebook page ( shank cal shank - profile name) for the film it's clear that I'm not alone in my cry of 'bravo' to these innovative and daring film makers - the coming-out genre has been declared dead and buried with this film and SHANK is the new dawn for gay cinema.
I try to get almost everyone I know to watch this because it's definitely one of the better indie films i've seen in a really long time..
SHANK is an important debut film for director Simon Pearce (apparently only 21 years old) and writers Darren Flaxstone and Christian Martin.
The story has the courage to be honest enough to view gang behavior and the cross section of needs that gang membership provides to young lads in search of their true identity: first comes identification through 'belonging' to like lost souls, and second comes the breakthrough of self discovery.
Cal (Wayne Virgo) is the vulnerable lead lad, a member of a Bristol gang led by a rather despicable female Nessa (Alice Payne) who finds pleasure in 'filming' the gang's bashing of victims.
Cal takes on this trait by seeking out victims for release of his same sex energy, using drugs to render his victims cooperative, films his conquests using a cellphone camera, and then beats the victims bloody: an early scene illustrates this behavior with a teacher named Scott (Gary Summers) who while recovering shares the incident with an off screen therapist, gradually unfolding the fact that Scott's partner was abused by this same gang.
While Cal displays this pugilistic behavior in secret, in the presence of his gang his physical attraction to fellow gang member Jonno (Tom Bott, in an impressive film debut) surfaces - an attraction that appears to be reciprocal were it not for the forbidden arena of same sex love.
The gang attacks a young French exchange student Olivier (Marc Lambert), but Cal cannot tolerate the abuse of this obviously innocent gay lad and follows him, offering him a ride home, and eventually merging into accepting his sexual identity with the kindness of Olivier's open heart.
There is a final confrontation between Cal and Olivier and the gang, and Jonno exacts his revenge and devastation in a brutal attack.
Filmed in Bristol, England, UK on a non-existent budget of 20,000 euros (28,000 USD) with a cast made up almost entirely of first-timers to feature film, "Shank" is one of my all time favorites."Shank" is the story of teenaged "scallie" gang banger, Cal (Wayne Virgo), who is realizing his true desire for other men.
In particular, his best friend and fellow gang member Jonno (Tom Bott) with whom he shares several very intimately awkward moments.
However, when the gang jumps an attractive young gay man, Olivier (Marc Laurant), Cal reaches his breaking point stopping the beating.Having left his gang stranded to go and help the bloodied young man, Cal is now the target of their rage.
Directed by 21 year old Simon Pearce, "Shank" is a gritty and unapologetic look at a coming-out story that has never been seen before.
Wayne Virgo is an extremely talented newcomer, who also happens to be a gorgeous young man with great attributes which are seen throughout out the movie."Shank" is violent and unsettling at times, sensual and compassionate at others, and has a well-balanced use of intimacy and nudity.
Making you care for and feel for the characters, "Shank" is a perfect blend of every element that a good movie is made of.With it's gripping script (written by Darren Flaxstone and Christian Martin), beyond-their-years-in-talent acting, and superb direction and cinematography, "Shank" is a low-budget film that can stand against any Hollywood powerhouse...Just letting you know....
Encompassing the fairly major subjects of homosexuality, Chav gangs in 21st century Britain, self love and finding one's place in the world, 'Shank' really packs a hard punch, just about pulling these hefty themes together, all in all a real credit to the sharp script, snappy editing / direction and raw but engaging performances from the exceptionally young Bristol based cast.I found it great to see low budget British film-making still in existence with such energy, passion and verve, which is sadly so lacking in the majority of big budget releases, certainly when it comes to the tricky issue of sexuality, (usually it's the tired old coming of age/ coming out to the parents type of thing, or in the bigger budget releases, Julia Robert's best friend is a good as it gets.) This film takes the sexuality/ coming out / rites of passage story and actually tries to say something about the less than perfect society in which we all live, both good and bad, evident in the the highly charged scenes of sexual violence contrasted with the incredibly tender love scenes.
In fact, it's almost impossible to distinguish the actor's own personalities from the characters they're playing.Unfortnately, the film looses ground in the final "rumble" scene, which is carried on much too long.
There is much to commend this film's fresh take and realisation of a difficult and under discussed issue of youth culture versus gay coming out.
He falls in love with some guy leading to tragedy.Sometimes effective, but the movie don't move more from some erotic scenes and some disgusting , really shocking scenes, that you can't denied are well staged by director Simon Pearce.
And the actors are good, mostly for being so young and handled this kind of material.The problem is that the movie gets in one point totally ridiculous, and boring.
However, when one actor carries such a heavy load as Wayne Virgo did for the part of Cal, then I believe you need to cast for more than just type.
Marc Laurent did a good job as the French student and had a great sense of mise en scene.
While his final scene was a bit much (director is responsible here), I thought he has great potential past this film.Today, thanks to advances in technology, young gay people have a choice of film subjects and styles geared toward their orientation and subculture.
This film is the most gaspingly and brutally real gay-themed film you will ever see.Cal, the central character is completely believable and represents every gay man's dream: a straight-acting hunky punk.
It's clearly stated in the summery and plot synopsis that it's about a lad that after a chance meeting hits off a relationship but not just that this film has such a strong message on the kinds of things young gay couples or teenagers who think they are gay go through when it comes to telling family members and friends.Yes this film is also very graphic in terms of violence, in fact the finale of this film was very graphic, in some ways I wish I could have turned it off but I continued watching for the fact that the story of fear, changes and the intense storyline makes you want to watch it through till the end but trust me when you do finally make it to the end there is one last twist which will leave an impact in different ways on different people.
I think this is a great film and believe it will remain one of my favorites.The plot I will not go into for to do so would totally ruin watching the movie.
Hang in there and you will see a film which will make you think a lot.Since I am an American, it took a little getting use to the UK setting with cars driving on the left, yet it would be easy to have made this movie in the US.
10 scored because some of the reviewers here are being just idiotically mean and vindictive - in my opinion had the writers been given the budget of say Attack the Block or the other SHANK then this would have been even better than it is....possibly some of the comments are coming from the minds of those who mistook it for the other SHANK and weren't expecting a gay hero!It's the 21st Century people - this should have been widely distributed and supported and I say that as a Brit who appreciates British talent..
This really does have a socio/economic/realist vein to it that pulses with an energy that will grab your attention and shock your senses whilst at the same time refreshing you with the delights and the beauty of the first flush of love.Excellent award winning film.
Gang member Cal (Wayne Virgo), a closeted gay, comes to the defense of innocent gay teen Olivier after Cal's gang begins beating him.
Cal is ostracized from his gang, which includes his best friend Jonno.
Some reviewers criticize the acting of the actor playing Olivier, but I found it realistic and believable.
I did have reservations of lowering my rating down to 4/10 stars for Shank, because overall, it wasn't that bad of a movie, for a small, somewhat original independent gay themed movie.How it mostly shot itself in the foot, was, though (again) somewhat original, it was thoroughly predictable, a bit unrealistic and contained the one of the most outrageous, out of left-field finale involving a rape (you'll know what I mean when your mouth is agape as was mine) and plot twists wrapped up that didn't either matter or there was simply no reason to tie up some stories.The movie begins with a small gang of male thugs lead by a female in England beating up just an innocent man out walking for no more reason than their twisted sense of enjoyment all the while filming it on their phones, I'm guessing for either internet or trophies.
The movie shifts focus to one of the gang members, Cal (Virgo) who branches out his gang-free time by picking up a stranger to have some coke and sex with in the woods.
Only, this time, Cal rescues him.Even though I have never has an associations with gangs or thugs, it's fairly obvious to know the aftermaths of him helping this beaten gay student on the road.
I don't think that KKK member would be looked on too kindly by the other racists.So you know where this is going, hence the predictability, as do you know Cal falls, finally, for another male.
Though it doesn't begin that way: as Cal definitely likes Oliver, (Laurent) the gay-bashed citizen, he uses him to hide out from the revenge smitten ex-gang friends of his.
I liked the eye candy, the actors or director had no qualms about showing them naked or in hard-core sexual acts – I hate edits, and the fact this story stemmed from a closeted gang member, something we rarely see, if at all.
I'm going to start by saying that this film is one of the best examples of "deceptive advertising" as it was sold as a "Skins meets Latter Days" and it ended up being a dull story about disrupted teenagers.
You wanna watch a gang-related gay film try "Our Lady of the Assassins" that one does deal with the reality thousands of teenagers in gangs have to deal.Anyways, moving onto the characters none of them make anything good to the film.
So obvious that it makes you thing he was the "closeted gay trying to come out".
Cal (Wayne Virgo) is part of a gang who go out and casually beat up people for no reason.
Then one day his gang attack an innocent French student named Olivier (Marc Laurent).
The text message sent at the end is great; "Sorry -Cal." Which is to say this:"sorry that this all sucks and my boyfriend, who happens to be your student, who happens to have been beaten up by my gang who also beat up your boyfriend in a non-related incident while you and I also just happened to have hooked up randomly online once, after which I bashed you in the face.
But it was the pre-wrap up confrontation scene which took this from the edge of ridiculous to a you've-got-to-be-kidding-me joke of a movie.Jonno, the best friend from his "gang" (pfft, some gang, by the way), RAPES Cal. In front of the rest of the gang, even.
And it is, but only because it's SO OUT OF LEFT FIELD and ridiculously not believable.A lot of this movie, as is the case with much of gay cinema, is used as an excuse to show cute young guys naked.
Considering that most of the actors are young newcomers, the director is 21 years old and created on a very low-budget, this is a really well-done film worth watching.The story is fairly straightforward and not complicated to follow.
While I agree, I still give him credit for doing the sex scenes (he was apparently very nervous) and later in the film his fear and panic seems pretty realistic to me.There are a few minor things I didn't like.
Only after watching the film a few times did I understand why she did it (without spoiling it for you :) 'Shank' was a gritty, different type of gay movie from the norm out there.
The subplot is that in that kind of malfunctioning family/triangle, one member, Cal, is secretly gay and the other male one is repressing his tendency towards his mate; peppered with an obnoxious - yet fragile in the end - female lead who cannot face her dark secret, it all soon comes down to a violent confrontation; add an exchange french student to the mix, a student who is OK with his sexuality and there you have it.
(It is an obviously small budget film, but that is OK, if not to its advantage.) Worth for a look just for the effort of his 21-year old director and the instinctively observed scene at the cemetery..
Some movies, although a great premise, end up terrible due to their budget, so I expected the worst for this film!
Olivier's character did grow on me throughout the film, and in the end I loved the man and thought that him and Cal were very cute together.
Very good acting on his behalf.I was impressed with the film, it did come together rather perfectly, and my emotions fell right in line with where they were supposed to be.
This may have some disturbing but real content, but is definitely the freshest gay themed movie to come around in a few years.
Numerous people responding to the film do not address the issue of gangs in postmodern times. |
tt0120483 | The Man Who Knew Too Little | Wallace Ritchie (Murray) flies from Des Moines, Iowa, to London, United Kingdom, to spend his birthday with his brother, James (Peter Gallagher). As James hosts a business dinner, he sets Wallace up with an interactive improv theatre business, the "Theatre of Life", which promises to treat the participant as a character in a crime drama. Before the night begins, James hands Wallace a pair of Ambassador cigars, promising to "fire them up" before midnight in celebration of Wally's birthday. Wallace answers a phone call intended for a hitman at the same payphone that the Theatre of Life uses for its act.
The contact, Sir Roger Daggenhurst (Richard Wilson), mistakes Wallace for Spencer, the hitman he has hired and Wallace assumes the identity. The real Spencer (Terry O'Neill) picks up the phone call meant for Wallace and murders one of the actors, prompting a police investigation. Daggenhurst, his assistant Hawkins (Simon Chandler), British Defense Minister Gilbert Embleton (John Standing), and Russian intelligence agent Sergei (Nicholas Woodeson) plan to detonate an explosive device (hidden in a Matryoshka doll) during a dinner between British and Russian dignitaries, to rekindle the Cold War and replace their aging technology.
Still believing he's acting with the Theatre of Life, Wally meets Lori (Joanne Whalley), Embleton's call-girl. Lori plans to blackmail Embleton for a substantial amount of money using letters that detail the plot. Spencer was hired to eliminate her and destroy the letters. Wallace scares off Embleton when he arrives to look for them and drives off Spencer. Fearing their plot will be revealed, Daggenhurst hires two more hitmen, while Sergei hires now-inactive spy Boris "The Butcher" Blavasky (Alfred Molina), to eliminate "Spencer". Boris succeeds in killing the real Spencer, but Wallace and Lori return, retrieving the letters.
Using Spencer's communicator, Wallace mentions lighting up some "big Ambassadors, at 11:59," referring to James' cigars. Thinking the words refer to the assassination plot, both sides believe he is an American spy who has caught on to their scheme. Daggenhurst offers Wallace and Lori 3 million British pounds in return for the letters, at the same hotel where the dinner is taking place. This is a ruse to capture and kill them both. All the while Wallace gets close to his "co-star" Lori, who confesses she'd love to study acting once they're paid.
Wallace contacts James and tells him to meet him at the hotel – soon after, James sees an evening news report that Wallace has murdered an actor and police are searching for him, prompting James to abandon the business dinner. Wallace and Lori are caught and held captive. Boris opts for torture by Dr Rudmilla Kropotkin (Geraldine James), but Wallace and Lori separate and escape before she arrives. James is captured and sent to be tortured by Dr Kropotkin. Wallace evades the hitmen and finds himself part of a group of Russian folk dancers performing for the ambassadors. During the routine, he sees the Matryoshka doll bomb, unwittingly disarms it seconds before it goes off, blocks a poison dart from Boris with it, and steals the show with his improvised dancing.
Realizing their plot has failed when the bomb fails to go off, Sergei and Daggenhurst bring out two bags containing the promised £3 million for Wallace and Lori and release James, who is exhausted but otherwise fine after his torture session. Boris congratulates Wallace for his impressive covert skills and gives him a souvenir pistol, telling Wallace he will continue his butcher shop business. Sergei and Daggenhurst attempt to escape with half the money and discover Wallace's doll, which they believe is only a normal one he picked out for himself. They are proven wrong when they realign the doll, reactivating the bomb and blowing them up, just as Wallace and Lori share a kiss.
Some time later, on an exotic beach, Wally unwittingly incapacitates a spy, passing a test by an unknown American espionage group. Believing he is capable of being a top agent, they offer him a position on "the team". Thinking that they wish to make him a movie star, Wallace accepts their offer. | comedy, murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0094680 | As Time Goes by | Second Lieutenant Lionel Hardcastle (Geoffrey Palmer) and Middlesex Hospital nurse Jean Pargetter (Judi Dench) met in the summer of 1953 and fell head over heels in love, calling her "Pooh", but then Lionel was posted to Korea. He wrote, but Jean didn't receive his letter (it becomes a topic in a later episode). Because of this mix-up, each assumed the other had lost interest. After his war service Lionel emigrated to Kenya, became a coffee planter, and married Margaret, whom he later divorced on grounds of "mutual boredom". Some time after his divorce he returned to England. Meanwhile, Jean had also married and bore one child, Judith (Moira Brooker). After her husband's death, Jean opened Type for You, a secretarial agency. Her daughter Judith, 32 years old during the series, is twice divorced (from Ken, who had "sad eyes", and Edward, who was "very clever") and, during most of the series, lives with her mother and also works at the secretarial agency.
Lionel, now writing his memoir, hires a typist through Type for You, unaware that Jean owns the agency. His and Jean's awareness of each other occurs as Lionel picks up Judith for a dinner date. Although Lionel's and Jean's reunion is full of missteps and miscues, their romance gradually rekindles. In the third season, Lionel moves into Jean's house in Holland Park, London; they marry during the following season.
In the first season Judith develops a crush on Lionel while Lionel's publisher, Alistair Deacon (Philip Bretherton), who likes to call her "Lovely Lady", takes a similar interest in Jean. Both crushes are brief; eventually Judith and Alistair fall for each other and, in the final season, marry. Other story arcs feature Lionel being asked to write an American TV mini-series, Just Two People, based on his early romance with Jean. The mini-series fails after much rewriting and network interference. Jean eventually retires from Type for You and later volunteers at a charity shop.
Jean's very efficient secretary, and Judith's best friend, is Sandy (Jenny Funnell), who eventually moves in with the Hardcastles after splitting with her boyfriend Nick. After Jean's retirement, Judy and Sandy become co-managers of Type for You. Sandy dates Harry (David Michaels, later replaced by Daniel Ryan), a policeman and rugby player, whom she marries at the end of the series.
Other notable characters include Lionel's irrepressible father Rocky, whose favourite saying is "Rock On"(Frank Middlemass) and who owns a large country house in Hampshire which he later gives to Lionel; the housekeeper, Mrs. Bale (Janet Henfrey), who has an unusual interest in the Shipping Forecast and gives exact times that meals are ready, and the gardener, Lol Ferris (Tim Wylton), who says Jean is a "tender woman". In the early seasons of the show, Lionel received news from Rocky's physician that his father was dying and had less than a year to live, but this plotline was dropped and Rocky continued to appear throughout the show's later seasons, including the final "Reunion Special" in 2005.
Rocky marries Madge (Joan Sims), as much a character as Rocky is, when he is 85 and she is 78. They travel the world, listen to country music, tool about in Madge's classic convertible (with steer horns on the grille), and hang out at the local pub, where Madge sings. In Series Nine, Madge is mentioned as being on an archaeological dig in Egypt; in reality Joan Sims died before filming began. Jean's first husband's neurotic sister Penny (Moyra Fraser), who always calls Jean "poor Jean", and Penny's flaky dentist husband, Stephen (Paul Chapman), who once accidentally declined the OBE, also make many appearances. | cult, romantic | train | wikipedia | A forgotten classic in the low-budget S.F. genre. "As Time Goes By" is an interesting, memorable film that I think any fan of Science Fiction would enjoy. I saw it in the late '80s at the Mill Valley Film Festival and I made a point to remember the name, because I suspected that this film might not get the publicity it deserved, and would become hard to find.Aside from the S.F. elements, I would classify this as a mystery/drama with comedic touches. It's a low budget film and the director knows it, using this to keep the tone light and also to focus the audience on the characters and their story.I especially like the way the filmmaker plays with the time travel element, showing me a trick or two I have never seen before. The alien is weird, wise and funny and even though I have read my fair share of S.F. I haven't encountered another one like him. Sure, the film isn't perfect, but it was easy to ignore the flaws because I like the spirit and intelligence of the people who made it.I hope this gets released on DVD so I can buy it. "As Time Goes By" stands on my list as one of the top ten films of 1988. That's right, I'm not kidding! Top ten.. A missing classic. 'As Time Goes By' is a missing classic, about a policeman, a surfer and an alien in the Bush. Marked by a characteristically awesome poster, the surfer is seen sunbathing in the desert beside his surfboard. The policeman is haunted by the cricket match that killed his baby sun. The alien by the other past we used to live in - we lost the war, we were all eating sushi, and we didn't like it!It's all about jumping back in time to make important changes, to stop tragedy. Time loops? Paradoxes? The complications are attacked obliquely in the neon lit setting of Max Gillies' greasy spoon diner.It stuns me that we have no archived source of this movie. In spite of issues of copyright, the general public's interest has often acted as a kind of 'casual backup' that prevents the loss of good shows from memory.I'm trying to teach a friend about what was good in '80s SF, and plan on showing her Repo Man, The Quiet Earth and As Time Goes By. ATGB stands up well in that company - they all have a certain feel - and will be missed if I can't find it.. entertaining but too self-conscious cult film wannabe. The idea of a sci-fi western parody probably wouldn't make sense anywhere else but in the remote Australian outback, maybe the perfect setting for this contrived madcap spoof. Among the cast of eccentrics are, in no particular order: a slightly goony surfer who's been waiting a quarter century to keep an appointment in the back of beyond; a bitter outback cop who once accidentally killed his own son during a cricket game; a scientist who dresses like Pee Wee Herman and hopes to capture a Nobel Prize and a genuine extraterrestrial; a cattle tycoon with plans to make the desert bloom using the Earth's ozone layer; his two sheep-hating henchmen; a shopkeeper with a passionate fear of dust; a spaceship that sells Budweiser beer; a cocktail shaker time machine; and a radioactive alien named Joe Bogart, played by Max Gillies, who behaves as if he wants to be known (fat chance) as Australia's answer to Robin Williams. With characters like this, who needs a plot? |
tt0077792 | Kasme Vaade | Suman (Raakhee) and Amit (Amitabh Bachchan) love each other and plan to marry soon. Amit lives with his younger brother, Raju (Randhir Kapoor), and Raju already calls Suman "Bhabhi". Amit is a teacher in a college, but Raju is unemployed and a little bit spoiled by Amit and Suman's pamperings.
Raju gets into bad company, and as a result in trouble. When Amit comes to help Raju, he is killed. Suman dons the garb of a widow and plan not to marry again.
Then one day a look-alike of Amit, named Shankar enters Suman and Raju's life. Guilt-ridden, Raju thinks that he has gotten his brother back, and tries to make amends by hiring Shankar, not knowing that Shankar is a wanted criminal, and is looking for an escape route from the authorities.
Raju's guilty unconditional support and love along with the, for obvious reasons, confusing for both, but electric attraction between Shankar and Suman eventually wins Shankar over from his past evil ways. Nevertheless Shankar can not so easily escape his past.
Suman is kidnapped in order to force Shankar to aid a kingpin by using an international car rally championship as cover to smuggle diamonds. With Raju's help, of course, good prevails over evil and symbolically, Shanker is wounded protecting Suman and as they role free of the shooting and explosions and come to rest, it is seen that Suman's forehead has been marked crimson by the blood of her soul mate. Raju has learnt a heart-crushing lesson in the dangers or excess and frivolity but in the end, there is hope and greater wisdom.
Neetu Singh also had a small role as the fiancee of Raju (Randhir Kapoor). Amjad Khan was the main villain while Vijayendra Ghatge played the role of the killer of Amit. The film's songs 'Aati rahengi baharen'. 'Mile jo kadi kadi, ek zanjeer bane' and the title song 'Kasme vaade nibhayenge hum' had become very popular. | revenge | train | wikipedia | ONE OF AMITABH'S BEST FILMS. THIS MOVIE HAS SOME REALLY NICE SONGS, SUNG BY KISHORE KUMAR.AMITABH HAS PLAYED THE DOUBLE ROLE EXCELLENTLY |
tt0847150 | Sense & Sensibility | Because of primogeniture, when Mr Henry Dashwood dies, his house, Norland Park, passes directly to his son John, the child of his first wife. His second wife, Mrs Dashwood, and their daughters, Elinor, Marianne and Margaret, inherit only a small income. On his deathbed, Mr Dashwood extracts a promise from his son, to take care of his half-sisters. John's greedy wife, Fanny, soon persuades him to renege on the promise. John and Fanny immediately move in as the new owners of Norland, while the Dashwood women are treated as unwelcome guests. Mrs Dashwood seeks somewhere else to live. In the meantime, Fanny's brother, Edward Ferrars visits Norland and soon forms an attachment with Elinor. Fanny disapproves of the match and offends Mrs Dashwood with the implication that Elinor is motivated by money.
Mrs Dashwood moves her family to Barton Cottage in Devonshire, near the home of her cousin, Sir John Middleton. Their new home is modest but they are warmly received by Sir John and welcomed into local society—meeting his wife, Lady Middleton, his mother-in-law, Mrs Jennings and his friend, Colonel Brandon. Colonel Brandon is attracted to Marianne, and Mrs Jennings teases them about it. Marianne is not pleased as she considers the thirty-five-year-old Colonel Brandon an old bachelor, incapable of falling in love or inspiring love in anyone else.
Marianne, out for a walk, gets caught in the rain, slips and sprains her ankle. The dashing John Willoughby sees the accident and assists her. Marianne quickly comes to admire his good looks and outspoken views on poetry, music, art and love. His attentions lead Elinor and Mrs Dashwood to suspect that the couple are secretly engaged. Elinor cautions Marianne against her unguarded conduct, but Marianne refuses to check her emotions. Abruptly, Mr Willoughby informs the Dashwoods that his aunt, upon whom he is financially dependent, is sending him to London on business, indefinitely. Marianne is distraught and abandons herself to her sorrow.
Edward Ferrars pays a short visit to Barton Cottage but seems unhappy. Elinor fears that he no longer has feelings for her, but will not show her heartache. After Edward departs, Anne and Lucy Steele, the vulgar cousins of Lady Middleton, come to stay at Barton Park. Lucy informs Elinor in confidence of her secret four-year engagement to Edward Ferrars that started when he was studying with her uncle, and she displays proof. Elinor realises that Lucy's visit and revelations are the result of Lucy's jealousy and cunning calculation, and understands Edward's recent behavior towards her. She acquits Edward of blame and pities him for being held to a loveless engagement by his sense of honour.
Elinor and Marianne accompany Mrs Jennings to London. On arriving, Marianne rashly writes several personal letters to Willoughby, which go unanswered. When they meet at a dance, Mr Willoughby greets Marianne reluctantly and coldly, to her extreme distress. Soon Marianne receives a curt letter enclosing their former correspondence and love tokens, including a lock of her hair and informing her of his engagement to a young lady with a large fortune. Marianne is devastated. After Elinor has read the letter, Marianne tells her that she and Willoughby were never engaged, but she loved him and thought that he loved her.
Colonel Brandon visits the sisters and reveals to Elinor that Willoughby's aunt disinherited him after she learned that he had seduced Brandon's fifteen-year-old ward, Miss Williams, then abandoned her when she became pregnant. This is why he chose to marry for money rather than love. Brandon was in love with Miss Williams' mother as a young man, when she was his father's ward, but she was forced into an unhappy marriage to Brandon's brother that ended in scandal and divorce; Marianne strongly reminds him of her.
The Steele sisters come to London as guests of Mrs Jennings and after a brief acquaintance they are asked to stay at John and Fanny Dashwood's London house. Lucy sees the invitation as a personal compliment, rather than what it is, a slight to Elinor and Marianne who should have received such invitation first. Too talkative, Anne Steele betrays Lucy's secret. As a result, the Misses Steele are turned out of the house, and Edward is ordered to break off the engagement on pain of disinheritance. Edward refuses to comply and is immediately disinherited in favour of his brother, gaining respect for his conduct, and sympathy from Elinor and Marianne. Colonel Brandon shows his admiration by offering Edward the living of Delaford parsonage.
Mrs Jennings takes Elinor and Marianne to the country to visit her second daughter. In her misery over Willoughby's marriage, Marianne becomes dangerously ill. Willoughby arrives to repent and reveals to Elinor that his love for Marianne was genuine. He elicits Elinor's pity because his choice has made him unhappy, but she is disgusted by the callous way in which he talks of Miss Williams and of his own wife. He also reveals that his aunt forgave him after his marriage, meaning that if he had married Marianne he would have had both money and love.
When Marianne recovers, Elinor tells her of Willoughby's visit. Marianne realises that she could never have been happy with Willoughby's immoral and expansive nature. She values Elinor's conduct in her similar situation and resolves to model herself after Elinor's courage and good sense. Edward arrives and reveals that, after his disinheritance, Lucy jilted him in favour of his now wealthy brother, Robert. Edward and Elinor soon marry, and later Marianne marries Colonel Brandon, having gradually come to love him. | romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0034878 | Hurricane Smith | Billy "Hurricane" Smith (Carl Weathers) is a construction worker in Marshall, Texas. Mourning his mother's death, Billy goes to Australia to find his missing sister. His search takes him to the swank pad of a pimp, Shanks (David Argue), and one of his hookers, Julie (Cassandra Delaney), who both knew Billy's sister.
Billy is tortured by his sister's former employer, crime boss Charlie Dowd (Jürgen Prochnow), who is secretly waging a turf war against his partner Howard Fenton (Tony Bonner), and Billy is not about to blow town without finding his sister—and then Billy discovers that his sister was murdered by Charlie.
Not only does Shanks endure a savage beating to help Billy, but Shanks is also killed when they storm Charlie's mansion in search of the now-kidnapped Julie. Ever busy Charlie has already blown up Howard in an explosion which almost killed Billy, and has murdered his own girlfriend just to eliminate loose ends.
With the SWAT team called in, Charlie uses Julie as a shield after his men are wiped out. Charlie commandeers a chopper. Climbing onto the bottom of the chopper, which flies over a part of the ocean, Billy throws Charlie into the water below, where Charlie is killed by a swarm of sharks.
Billy is now free to make plans to bring Julie stateside, where they will not run into any of her former customers. | violence, murder | train | wikipedia | I liked it. I must admit I saw it when it first hit the theaters in 1942 or so. I had a crush on Ray Middleton (being just out of high school) and saw it four or five times. It was very much a romantic comedy as well as a 'western'. You could take the plot and turn it into a romance novel. It was typical of "b" movies, not a lot of characters or locations but it was consistent. I wish it was available on DVD so I could enjoy it again. One of the things I liked was Ray Middleton being the hero. In a couple of others he played, if not the villain, the unlikeable other man. Hurrican Smith was fun. He had a great speaking voice and you can hear him sing as Frank Butler in Annie Get Your Gun, the original stage soundtrack with Ethel Merman.Oh, BTW I'm 81 years old. |
tt0098051 | The Package | The film follows Tommy Wick (Steve Austin), a man tasked with delivering a mysterious package to "The German" (Dolph Lundgren), a dangerous crime lord. Along the way Wick is attacked repeatedly by a rival gang that wants what he is carrying, eventually he discovers that his cargo is not what he was initially thought it was.
However, Tommy arrives at a bowling alley and beats up a rival for not paying back Big Doug. Afterwards he visits Big Doug who tells him he wants a package delivered to the German. En route he is pursued by a rival gang who wants what he is carrying, forcing him to fight them off and run.
Eventually Tommy is captured by the rival gang. He manages to escape, and is captured by the German and brought to see if he has compatible DNA with the German. He then breaks free and has a final showdown with the German, killing him. He then wishes Big Doug that the incident be filed away and they wish each other a hearty godspeed. Tommy then rings his wife about the cash and tells her 'I love you'. | suspenseful, intrigue, murder, violence | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0332712 | My Baby's Daddy | Childhood friends Lonnie (Eddie Griffin), Dominic (Michael Imperioli), and G (Anthony Anderson) have a rude awakening when they find out their girlfriends are pregnant. Lonnie and G have sons, Carver and Bruce-Leroy, and Dominic has a daughter, Jasmine.
Each have their own unique set of problems; Lonnie's girlfriend Rolonda (Paula Jai Parker) is more interested in partying than being a mother; Dominic discovers that his girlfriend Nia (Joanna Bacalso) is a lesbian and has fallen in love with her midwife; while G, an aspiring boxer, is unable to fully commit to his girlfriend XiXi (Bai Ling).
Throughout the movie, all three men, particularly G and Dominic, are determined to continue their normal way of living and be a father at the same time. Lonnie is a garbageman among other small jobs, G works in the store his girlfriend's family runs, and Dominic is managing a pair of white rappers.
After they momentarily lose their kids during a party they threw, they realize how much their kids depend on them, and gradually become responsible fathers. Lonnie falls in love with a woman from a Mommy and Me class named Brandy who he treats badly on date, due to believing she wouldn't the real him. Dominic's ex-girlfriend reveals she's a lesbian and feels he is too involved in his career to ever be a father. G's cousin No Good (Method Man) robs a store and his girlfriend feels he was in on it and takes Bruce-Leroy away from him.
After all three are given a talking to by Lonnie's Uncle Virgil, they realize how much they love their kids and what they have to do. Lonnie apologizes to Brandy, but he stays true to himself, and she forgives him, then he storms to his ex-girlfriend's house and takes Carver with him, while criticizing her for having a baby to get child support payments, and knocks out her cousin "Big Swoll". Dominic goes to his ex-girlfriend and tells her how much he loves Jasmine and how he needs to be a part of her life. G's girlfriend's father tells him a story of being in the Triads before he had his daughter and realized how much his family meant to him, leading to G proposing to his girlfriend.
At the end of the movie it is revealed that Lonnie and Brandy are married with 2 children. Lonnie has also achieved his dream of becoming a successful inventor; Dominic started a children's music album; and G and his father-in-law open a martial arts/boxing studio called The Mo Fo Dojo. No Good, after learning of organic foods, goes on to become a successful food show personality called The Organic Gangster. They lastly toast to great babies' daddies. In the end, they realize that three little babies turned them into three grown men.
Tagline: They're going from players to playtime. | mystery | train | wikipedia | Eddie Griffin saves this movie.
This movie isn't laugh out loud funny, but it is short and entertaining.
I've liked Griffin in about all his films, and I think he's the one that makes this movie OK.
It's about 3 single guys whose girlfriends become pregnant at the same time, and even have the babies on the same day.
So, of course, it's like a fish out of water when they must care the infants by themselves for the first time.
But all come to love the kid and want to baby sit all the time.
G's girlfriend is Asian and her family provides some laughs, especially when she gives birth at the store.
And Dominic is just a player.One of the best scenes is when Lonnie meets Brandie at the bar and acts all pimped out.
And the hair style really tops it off.FINAL VERDICT: IF you like Griffin or Anthony Anderson, then you may want to check this one out.
I wouldn't say go out and rent it, but if you happen to come across it on cable, then it isn't a bad way to waste 90 minutes..
My Baby's Daddy is not worth the time or money to watch.
Eddie Griffin, Anthony Anderson and Michael Imperioli play three guys, who find themselves facing the responsibilities of fatherhood when their girlfriends all get pregnant at the same time.
My Baby's Daddy is a laugh free comedy that's actually worse than its trailer would indicate.
The plot is just like 3 Men and a Baby but a lot worse and that movie wasn't even that good to begin with.
My Baby's Daddy was the first movie I saw in 2004 and I was hoping it wasn't an omen for things to come.
The film couldn't decide what it wanted to be.
It could have worked out as a kid's comedy if they had taken out the sex scenes and if it was a kid's movie then the fart jokes would have been understandable.
But, there were some jokes that wouldn't be appropriate for them and I think they should had taken the family route.The movie is filled with fart jokes, poop humor and other lame jokes, these gags are getting old and most adults aren't going to find those jokes funny.
The acting was decent with the funniest person probably being Eddie Griffin but he is way above this material.
Michael Imperioli was pretty bad himself and he should just stick to The Sopranos.
The worst actor in the film is Anthony Anderson who always overacts and its hard to take him seriously.
He just tries too hard to be funny and he should really stop acting.
Method Man's scenes were funny but he alone can't save this movie.
If they had just tried a little harder while writing then they could have actually inserted some funny jokes.
A funny movie with a very good message.
After watching the trailer for My Baby's Daddy, I thought it would be an interesting movie to watch.
After seeing the reviews I looked the other way and my expectations for this movie dropped.
All I have to say is do not let the reviews turn you away from this movie.
This movie has an amazing way of delivering comedy and morals at the same time.
Sure it is unlikely that three best friends will all get their girlfriends pregnant at the same time, but it was still well put together.One of the drawbacks to this movie was its predictability.
But what movie these days isnt?
It delivered laughs like the previews promised, and it delivered hope.
It shows us that change is good.
And most importantly it shows us to do the right thing...for yourself, and the people you love.
Overall this movie is well worth watching.
Pretty funny.
This movie was pretty funny.
It was good for a cheap laugh.
Anthony Anderson was definitely the funniest part of this movie.There was a good blend of family values and comedic fart jokes.Overall, this was a pretty good movie.*** out of *****.
There's a long-standing rule of thumb in the motion picture business that the more writers who have a hand in making a movie the worse that movie will turn out to be.
In the case of `My Baby's Daddy,' it took four scenarists (who shall remain nameless) to come up with this excruciatingly bad multi-ethnic rip off of `Three Men and a Baby.' The plotting comes direct from the TV sitcom factory: three bachelors, who have never grown up into responsible adulthood, simultaneously find themselves the fathers of three adorable infants.
Naturally, after much initial bumbling and stumbling in the ways of parenthood, the three men learn what the true definition of manhood is.Though the movie has some fun lampooning racial and ethnic stereotypes, the humor is generally so bland, broad and formulaic that any promise the movie offers that it might somehow qualify as satire quickly evaporates.
Instead, the movie goes all soft and gooey, trying to get the audience to coo over the cute toddlers and sigh at the sight of three grown men who are themselves cooing over their toddlers.
This movie was actually more than mildly amusing for me.
Most of the comedy was good, and sometimes I even laughed out loud.
The only part that repulsed me was making the babies talk (as seen in the preview), but at least there was some kind of reason for it and it didn't last too long.Yes, most of the plot was predictable, but it was still a good story.
My favorite parts were those with G and his lover's Chinese family, and the role Eddie Griffin played as Lonnie.
Even if you don't think "My Baby's Daddy" is your type of movie, you might actually like it..
An unpleasant, and unfunny mess, that is littered with clichés, and jokes aimed at African-American and Asian culture.
One of the year's worst films.
My Baby's Daddy (2004) plays like a series of all the clichés we usually in Hollywood parenting movies.
What's sad is that it took the minds of four writers (this includes star Eddie Griffin) to make one bad movie.
This is an unpleasant, and horrible comedy that doesn't deserve to be considered funny.The film opens with a disappointing cartoon recap of three friends, Lonnie (Eddie Griffin), G (Anthony Anderson), and Dom (Michael Imperioli), who have grown up together, and all have girlfriends.
G plans on becoming a famous boxer like Stallone's Rocky Balboa; Lonnie plans on a becoming a famous inventor, and Dom aspires to be a player.It becomes unfortunate when their three girlfriends become pregnant at the same time.
That's because the script requires them do so, which is one of the film's biggest flaws.
The three characters all have the same problems at the same time.Months later, the babies are born in different places, one of them in in a grocery store.
Get some Crisco," one old man yells.But the fathers face problems with their girlfriends.
Griffin's girlfriend (Paula Jai Parker) dumps him, and Griffin falls for another mother (Marsha Thompson).
Anderson's long-time pal (Method Man) is released from prison and gets him involved in a robbery, which ruins his relationship with his girlfriend, and Imperioli's girlfriend (Joana Bacalso) turns out to be a lesbian.
Then we get another cliché where the men's jobs begin to affect their family life.My Babby's Daddy has an interesting plot about soon-to-be fathers, but director Cheryl Dunye throws in a lot of flatulence jokes, clichés and racial stereotypes, and tries to make us wonder what will happen next in order to move the story at a full movie length.
And the jokes aren't funny...they're unpleasant.
Think: would a baby actually talk to you if they drank too much alcohol?
Surely, you must be rolling down the aisles by now.I will say that only two characters are able to steal their scenes: John Amos is an old man who is tired of seeing the three friends hanging around in his house and he gives them a funny life lesson in the near-end, and Tom "Tiny" Lister, Jr. is a record manager, who knows how to throw a party: forcing his guests to eat his milk and cookies.Anderson, Griffin, and Imperioli are very promising actors, but not here.
Even the women who play their girlfriends are miscast and boring.
But the queen of ham here is Paula Jai Parker as Griffin's girlfriend, a character who can be described as a bitch and a wannabe street slut.It seems that My Baby's Daddy was intended for an African-American audience, since some of the jokes are aimed at African-American, and Asian culture.
The whole movie doesn't work.
I still think they wouldn't make good dads..
Not worth your time.
This movie is not worth your time, when it comes out on dvd you may want to consider watching it if you think you might like it but definitely don't pay 10 bucks to go see it.
Sure ill agree that it had some funny parts but the movie on a whole was cheesy.
I think it is deserving of its 3.6 vote.I definitely wouldn't give it any more then 4.
I watched it because i thought i would like it even though the rating was so low and because of the people in the forum who said it was so funny, but i wish i hadn't watched it now.
A complete waste of time..
A total flop.
Part of the reason this movie got such awful reviews could be because going in, it would be reasonable to expect a movie with this subject matter to be slightly more grown up in terms of the comedy, when in reality, it's basically early Sandler quality material, and no one really comes along to save it as it just keeps on the same steady pace of dullness the entire way.Co-writer and star Eddie Griffin is awful as usual, but Anthony Anderson and Michael Imperioli both given decent, if rather uninspired, performances in their leading roles.
Imperioli is a fine actor and Anderson is generally good for at least a laugh or two, but the material fails their talents.
John Amos ("Good Times") is good, but most of the supporting cast is useless or, at best, unmemorable.
Paula Jai Parker and the Sklar brothers turn in notably unfunny performances.The character development is atrocious.
Most notably, Dominic (Imperioli) is supposedly a player, but apparently we're just supposed to take their word for it.
G (Anderson) is lazy, which we're supposed to get out of him being late for work once.
Lonnie (Griffin) is the only one whose character appears on screen to be what we're being told it is, but his storyline is so predictable and lazy that it doesn't really matter.Bottom line: If you're looking for a way to waste an hour and a half without thinking or even needing to really pay attention at all, you can do worse than this movie, but it's the epitome of a movie that TBS is going to inevitably show 30 times a year.
It tells very little story, all of it you can see coming a mile away, and you might chuckle a couple of times.
My Baby's Daddy Needs to Grow Up. My Baby's Daddy is a semi-comic tale of three friends who all get their girlfriends pregnant at the same time and are suddenly thrown into the job of father.
This film stars comedian Eddie Griffin (Coneheads, John Q, Undercover Brother), Anthony Anderson (Big Mommas House, Me, Myself & Irene, Barbershop) and Michael Imperioli (Goodfellas, Bad Boys, Summer of Sam).
This obvious rendition of Three Men and a Baby has the potential to be a funny and touching film, but falls short in several categories.
The film opens with a really fun and fresh animation sequence, telling the story of the boys growing up together, getting in trouble and establishing their characters.
Griffin plays Lonnie, the nerd of the group, who is hopelessly in love with a slut who uses him for his money.
Anderson plays G, a lighthearted guy who has dreams to be the next Rocky.
Imperioli is Dominic, a self proclaimed player who is trying to produce Hip Hop records.
Anderson is by far the most interesting of the three friends, but still comes short.
The biggest problem with the film is that the comedy and the spirit of the story are not consistent.
There are some genuinely funny and touching moments that lead the audience to think there might be some substance to the film- as soon as you think that, the moment is ruined by a fart joke or some over the top, quasi-comedic attempt.
Some times it feels like a touching light comedy only to have the humor whip into a crude, farcical hodge-podge.
Griffin does his typical thing, swapping his look around as he transforms from a goggle-glasses wearing nerd, to an afro sporting, FUBU clad player.
Anderson has some interesting banter between himself and his Chinese girlfriend's father.
Whereas this might be an interesting dynamic to have, the writers messed it up with cheap shots to Asian names by coming up with sarcastic, 80's-esque names for her family; Fung Yu, Bling Bling, and others just as dismal.
Imperioli is a throw-away character who really accomplishes nothing in the film.
Overall there are a few chuckles mixed in there, but what could have been a fun and touching film about three guys growing into fatherhood, turned into a mix of crude jokes and gags loosely linked by a story about babies.
Time to grow up, boys.
Roundly poor comedy that has very little to recommend it for.
Friends Lonnie, G and Dominic grew up together and, as young men, moved in together temporarily.
One night they hook up with their partners or lovers and all three find themselves fathers to be when they all turn out to be equally clueless in the world of birth control.
More than a year later they are all facing the same challenges together as they enter fatherhood.With the titles and cartoon sequence opening the film, I had low hopes for this film and I can confirm that the film just about met all of them.
The plot is of course contrived and is little more than a series of unlikely relationship developments designed to generate laughs and easy comedy.
Which is where it all falls flat because there is hardly a laugh to be had in the whole 90 minutes.
The character stories behind it are mostly poorly conceived, poorly developed and poorly delivered.The cast match this standard and deliver nothing more than the basics.
Anderson mugs along like he often does and the effect is laziness incarnate.
Griffin is equally poor and doesn't add much to anything although he isn't helped by his plot being so poor.
Imperioli at least has the good taste to look a bit out of place and uncomfortable.
The women in the cast are mainly eye candy but in fairness they are mostly very good eye candy.
Parker is a growling cliché of a character that could only be more racially insensitive if played by Barbara Streisand in blackface.
However Bacalso, Thomason and Ling are all stunning and sexy, regardless of what the material asks of them.A roundly poor comedy that has very little to recommend it for.
Hilarious update of 3 men and a baby.
The trailer doesn't do the film justice.
There are a lot of touching moments in addition to some hilarious scenes with the grown men and their new babies.
Some scenes are a bit like a sitcom, but the film is worth seeing.
Anthony Anderson steals the show..
One of the biggest flaws of the movie was that they tried to pack three intertwined stories into one movie.
Definitely should have just made it one person's story.
The movie's plot wasn't too bad, I mean it was decent.
The production along side with the writing in this movie was terrible.
I felt bad for the cast, Eddie Griffin is a very funny comedian, too bad he wasn't able to shine in this movie.
As for the cast, the person who made this movie, believe it or not was Method Man aka "No Good" he managed to produce the only comic relief in this not so funny comedy.
Not really worth a watch, but if you are going to watch it, fast forward to Method Man's parts, it's the only worthwhile part of the movie.Oh yeah, plot development, climax, resolution, all terrible.
Anderson's movie.
This film was made to finally show off Anthony Anderson.
I think that he is a great actor and a good comedian.
The film itself was missing something.
About the middle of the film it seems to jump way ahead of itself.
Usually not a bad thing but I seem to have lost something in the jump.
I did like this movie and thought it was very funny.
I hope they have a directors cut with the actual minutes put back in..
Occasionally, yet very disappointing comedy!.
MY BABY'S DADDY had a lot going for it.
It had a similar premise to the excellent THREE MEN AND A BABY, it had a great cast, and a script co-written by the guys that wrote NATIONAL LAMPOON'S VAN WILDER.
However, despite all of that, the movie turned out to be a disappointment.
Maybe my expectations were too high, but the movie just seemed like it could have been so much better than it is.
It's really not that bad of a movie, it's just a disappointing one.
It's no classic, but it's not the worst movie of all time.
There's some funny stuff here and there.Anthony Anderson does a great job as always and there is a funny one scene cameo by Scott Thompson.
I think this movie is sublime.
A total knock-out.
I've seen it five times and I can't wait to see it again.
Don't forget this film at awards time! |
tt0120764 | My Favorite Martian | News producer Tim O'Hara (Jeff Daniels) is fired for unwillingly "compromising" his boss's daughter, reporter Brace Channing (Elizabeth Hurley), during a live broadcast of the first Space Shuttle launch from Vandenberg Air Force Base. His assistant, Lizzie (Daryl Hannah), tries to comfort him, and it is apparent she has a crush on him. Later, Tim witnesses a small Martian spacecraft crash landing. Realizing his chance to deliver a story that will "rock the Earth", he brings Brace to show her the ship, but by the time he reaches the crash site the ship has been shrunk to toy size. Nearby, its only occupant (Christopher Lloyd) hides in the bushes. Tim takes the now-shrunken spaceship home with him, and the Martian follows him to retrieve it. After a confrontation, Tim is knocked out and the Martian disguises himself to look like Tim and ends up kissing Lizzie when she visits.
When Tim confronts the Martian the next morning, he finds out that a small device called an "electron accelerator", which powers the control systems of the ship, is damaged beyond repair and the Martian needs Tim's help to find a replacement. The Martian takes the name "Uncle Martin" and explores the city with Tim, unaware that they are being watched by SETI, which discovered DNA left by Martin while hiding out at Tim's. While exploring Tim's neighborhood, Martin tells him about a friend of his named "Neenert", one of his planet's most gifted Martian scientists, who came to Earth in 1964 but never came back. Brace is captured by the SETI gang and is interrogated.
Tim secretly tapes Martin and Zoot with hidden cameras to back up his story and impress the TV station staff, but he eventually decides not to reveal the tapes as he has become fond of Martin. Meanwhile, Martin and Zoot discover a subsystem of the ship called the Interstellar Safety System, which is prepared to self-destruct. Brace discovers the footage of Martin in his Martian form and she steals the tape. Lizzie shows up at Tim's house to discover Brace stealing the tape. Thinking that Tim cheated on her, Lizzie rejects him and storms out, only to be distracted by the now-full-size spaceship, and is pulled into the cockpit by Zoot.
Martin and Tim go after the Martian evidence, shrinking the ship (along with Zoot and Lizzie) and racing down to the station, where Tim admits to Martin that he has been videotaping him, but says he likes Martin and apologizes. Accepting Tim's apology, Martin subdues Brace, then disguises himself as her so he can take her place on the news, and Martin's alien form is almost exposed during the broadcast, which is carefully watched by Elliot Coleye (Wallace Shawn), head of SETI. As footage from another news report is aired, Tim and Martin escape the station, pursued by SETI through the sewers in Tim's car, shrunken via Martin's device. They eventually end up in the hands of Coleye, who take them back to SETI for investigation.
At the lab, Tim tricks one of the scientists into growing Martin's ship to normal size, breaching security and allowing Lizzie and Zoot to escape. However, the trio's escape is blocked by two security guards, one of whom shoots Zoot. With the help of a "nerplex", a piece of alien gum that can transform anyone into another life form, Lizzie transforms into a hideous monster from "Veenox 7". She defeats them, then spits out the nerplex and turns back into a human.
The three eventually succeed in locating Martin, who has undergone surgery involving the removal of his antennae and presumably killing him. When Martin and Zoot reunite, he comes back to life and wakes up. They then escape SETI headquarters and Tim and Lizzie prepare to bid farewell to Martin, installing a car alternator in place of the ship's damaged electron accelerator. However, they are interrupted by Coleye, who attempts to stop him from escaping, saying that he will stop at nothing to prove the existence of aliens, even if it means killing Martin. A SETI official named Armitan, revealed to be Martin's old friend Neenert (Ray Walston), saves Martin by destroying Coleye's gun and tossing Coleye wildly in the air. After a reunion, Martin and Neenert fly back to Mars on their ship, much to Coleye's dismay.
Eventually, Coleye catches hold of the piece of nerplex left by Neenert. Believing that he can still prove his cause, Coleye chews on it, and he is turned into an alien. Laughing, Coleye accidentally swallows the gum, which presumably leaves his transformation permanent. He ends up caught and tranquilized by his own organization as Tim and Lizzie escape the scene.
In the end, Martin and Zoot decide to return to Earth and stay with Tim and Lizzie, while Neenert flies Martin's spacecraft back to Mars. Tim initially objects to Martin's staying, but Lizzie convinces Tim to change his mind. | absurd, psychedelic, romantic | train | wikipedia | Boy, I can hear those producers right now: "That's great, a movie-version of My Favorite Martian...
KIDS WILL LOVE IT!!!"And thus yet another charming 60's TV-show was mutilated by Hollywood.This movie version is so loaded with pointless F/X they left no room for a story, not to mention comedy!
All though Jeff Daniels and Christopher Lloyd try their best the story just ISN'T FUNNY.
Not to mention that dreadful ZOOT-character voiced by Wayne Knight: it ranks as one of the most annoying film characters off all time, alongside the infamous Jar Jar Binks.One plus worth mentioning: the star of the original show, Ray Walston, turns up and he is in surprisingly good form..
The sad thing is that I suspect Disney in their arrogance does not even know when a movie is good or bad.It is only due to the talent of the actors that I can even give it a 3 of 10..
At that point, it was no longer a movie of the beloved My Favorite Martian we have enjoyed from the TV series but a cartoon.
I highly recommend people watch the old TV series when it is on in syndication or if its available on DVD, because those shows focused on story and what little special effects that were done in the TV series were strongly carried by the acting, writing and direction..
We went into this movie because my husband had enjoyed the original version of `My favourite Martian'.
5.) Ray Walston, the original martian from the TV series, played a bit part (read "cameo") in this flick and died two years later of lupus.
Okay, let's wrap up this review with a moment of silence for this franchise's agonizing death, and if you would like, you can say a quick prayer that Disney doesn't forget this travesty and do something silly like a movie adaptation of "Mork and Mindy" starring Tim Allen..........................................................
As manic as that 1963 classic is, it is far superior to this claptrap - in fact - suddenly it looks pretty good in comparison.What is most sad about this movie is that it must have apparently been written to appeal to young children.
Certainly no self-respecting, card-carrying child I know!If they HAD to remake "My Favorite Martian", why didn't they add some of the timeless charm of the original classic?
Christopher Lloyd is really funny as 'Uncle Martin' and Jeff Daniels is on good form throughout too!
I had not seen the TV series for 30 years or so, but I had fond memories of it--I think Ray Walston could have played martin in this one(he does a cameo), still.
This was a little raunchy for a Disney flick, but overall it was OK.After seeing the movie, I caught a re-run of the old show and appreciated how funny it really was..
It was a bit less than I expected, but it was still entertaining.It stars Jeff Daniels (''Dumb and Dumber''), as a TV producer named Tim O'Hara.
Wallace Shawn is one of the most underrated yet distinguished co-stars out there, and he demands just as much credit as the other actors on board, since he does very well with his character, who chases Tim and ''Uncle Martin'' because he wants to prove there is intelligent life on other planets.
Must be the sugar-rush in the vanilla and chocolate.) In fact, the scene where Martin wrecks the ice cream shop was shown many times on the TV spots and trailers, and it made the film look more promising than the outcome.There are some good moments in ''My Favorite Martian,'' including the ice cream shop segment.
Christopher Lloyd and Jeff Daniels are cheery and happy the whole way through, which may be a good enough reason to see this film.
But as I watch it, I can't help but compare it to other family films I've seen that are so many times more compelling, interesting and smart than "My Favorite Martian." But if you are looking for pure entertainment...you've found it..
I was surprised about how much I really liked about Disney's new live action re-make called "My Favorite Martian." It was action-packed, well acted, childish, energetic and has a suitable plot.
While the movie will certainly satisfy kids, if I thought this film was too wide, then I can't imagine the average adult surviving it.The film stars Jeff Daniels as a TV reporter named Tim O'Hara.
Thus, "My Favorite Martian" is not at all a bad movie.But I have a real hard time calling it "Good.".
well, maybe not, that 25 cents will go to feed some poor guy.My favorite martian is based upon the TV series from the early 60's, starring Christopher Lloyd as uncle martin, and Jeff Daniels as Tim O'Hara.
The UFO's driver sneaks into his car invisibly, and makes Tim's life a living hell for a little while.Now admittedly, there are some good jokes and one-liners lying around in this movie, but they're few and far between, and they only get a chuckle out of me personally.
and if you know the writers (Sherri Stoner and Deanna Oliver, who both worked on Tiny Toon Adventures and Animaniacs) They definitely could've done a lot better.My favorite person throughout the whole thing was Wallace Shawn, who plays coleye, a scientist who is as weird as his voice.
Disney has made two good "kid sci-fi movies" in the last year.
The special effects were good and something you would expect for major producers like Disney.So, I don't know what happened.
Leave it to Disney for great animation, so realistic it's hard to believe it's not real.This is a fun movie, with just a couple scenes I'd have rather not had young children seen.I never saw the original series, but this was enjoyable for my son and I..
I used to watch the old My Favorite Martian tv show all the time and I liked it.
I went into this movie with very low expectations, and while I wouldn't say this is a good film, it is definitely better than I expected.
There are some fun special effects, predictable jokes, and semi-annoying characters (especially annoying was Elizabeth Hurley, whom I usually really like).
I just remember seeing it on PPV for the first time with the family back in 1999 so It was a film I would just sit back relax and enjoy.Jeff Daniels, Christopher Lloyd,Daryl Hannah, Elizabeth Hurley Wallace Shawn star in this Family/comedy from Disney.
I do think they could have done the film without a few of the "JOKES" they made in the film but the rest do workIf you don't take this movie seriously you might actually find it funny because I did and yes it's not a perfect movie but I have seen worse I give My Favorite Martian an 7 out of 10.
Based on the 1960s television series of the same name, 'My Favorite Martian' is Dumb Fun!
This movie tries hard, but completely lacks the fun of the 1960s TV series, that I am sure people do remember with fondness.
Sadly, this movie does little justice to the series.The special effects are rather substandard, and this wasn't helped by the flat camera-work.
And I was annoyed by the talking suit, despite spirited voice work from Wayne Knight.But the thing that angered me most about this movie was that it wasted the talents of Christopher Lloyd, Jeff Daniels and Daryl Hannah, all very talented actors.
Christopher Lloyd acquits himself better, and as an actor I like Lloyd a lot(he was in two of my favourite films Clue and Who Framed Roger Rabbit, and I am fond of Back To The Future) but he was given little to work with, and had a tendency to overact quite wildly.Overall, as much I wanted to like this movie, I was left unimpressed.
I can't say this fared well in comparison.Without the comparison, however, this is still only a children's movie, with little whatsoever to entertain the adults, aside from possibly piquing the grandchildren's interests in watching the old series, perhaps.The star of this work wasn't even one of the main players!
(After seeing "My Dinner with Andre," I feel like Wallace is a personal friend and it is always fun to watch your friends in movies.) The special effects are good and the opening scenes of the Martian surface are excellent.
This movie is dumb too but the plot holds together more or less and there are a few good bits, like shape changing chewing gum.My Favorite Martian is not the worst movie of the year..
I must firstly state that being a 16 year old boy Disney films are not my favourite movie genre, in fact I would rather watch Liz Hurly preform the entire works of Shakespeare.
Ok, the jokes are not rib achingly funny, and some of the acting isn't memorable but it does contain the prime ingredient for a family film, fun.Christopher Lloyd was brilliantly cast as the martian crash victim, Uncle Martin.
Sadly the infamous, I'm only in this business because I have a pretty face' Liz Hurly manages to ruin every scene she's in with her fantastic' acting skills.No crude humour, no swearing, no sexual antics that you wouldn't want your Granny to see, because it's all Disney, and it's a great family film.Marks out of 10 a 7.
Once viewed as a major threat, television has lately, it seems, and with some sweet irony, become more and more a source of salvation for the movie industry, providing a seemingly limitless supply of once-popular series to serve as inspiration for big budget, usually special-effects laden feature films.
Based on a mediocre TV series in which Bill Bixby and Ray Walston played, respectively, a regular guy and his martian pal, this film strands a collection of otherwise able performers - Christopher Lloyd, Jeff Daniels, Elizabeth Hurley, Daryl Hannah and Wallace Shawn, all of whom have been showcased to far better advantage elsewhere in a half-witted screenplay that mistakes undisciplined loudness and tumult for cleverness and wit.
Even the clever use of Ray Walston, the original Uncle Martin in the series, can't rescue the film from its own glaring inadequacies.
When's the last time you saw a TV with rabbit ears, eh?Disney doesn't trust quaint or relationships and crams this flick with youth-wooing special effects that include a talking space suit named Zoot!
Well, far from being perfect, My Favorite Martian is a terrifically funny movie for all its worth.
Christopher Lloyd and Jeff Daniels bounce off each other hilariously, and Elizabeth Hurley makes a hilarious supporting role as a snobbish reporter whose dad runs the TV studio.You know the gist of the plot - a Martian lands on Earth and winds up in the home of a struggling reporter, who becomes conflicted on whether or not to expose him.That's all there is to it, really.
My Favorite Martian is an innocent, fun flick with a lot of humour that makes me, a 25-year old man, laugh a lot at.
"My Favorite Martian" was clearly before my time I never watched the series, yet I finally decided to check out the movie and it was a nice little picture that didn't take itself to serious!
Even if the story was lame it was a fun adventure set in modern day California with a goof and lonely TV reporter Tim(Jeff Daniels)who stumbles upon a martian(Chris Lloyd)and this journey turns into a twist of one becoming a human form of Uncle Martin.
Overall cute little funny non serious film with an eye candy treat of Elizabeth Hurley so zoom in and watch it!.
It is indeed a pure Dysney production: its core audience are children & the movie is more more in the visual than in the message.Thus, you will find some funny scenes (the first sighting of the town, a "cosmic" stray toaster) and the casting is experimented, with special mentions to "Doc", who rejuvenates in a "Mac Fly" character, and to Hurley, who seems open to auto-derision.Ice on the cake: the main title is scored by Danny Elfman, and like every other great composer, you recognize his "voice" before he is even credited..
As I was watching, I drew comparisons to another Christopher Lloyd film called "Back To The Future." In both films he played a character that is into fixing things as well as using vehicles as means of transportation between worlds.
As I was watching, I drew comparisons to another Christopher Lloyd film called "Back To The Future." In both films he played a character that is into fixing things as well as using vehicles as means of transportation between worlds.
I thought that everything in this film was predictable; from its landing and the doctor who is after Uncle Martin to the traditional "happy" ending.With this being said, it was entertaining and enjoyable for younger audiences, but not for people around my age.
I thought that everything in this film was predictable; from its landing and the doctor who is after Uncle Martin to the traditional "happy" ending.With this being said, it was entertaining and enjoyable for younger audiences, but not for people around my age.
This is quite clear from the way the actors sleepwalked through their performances, even Christopher Llyod, who is repeating his Back To The Future bit for an audience that the director hopes will be too young to remember the original.The question of why Disney made this film is not very puzzling at all.
4.) To make people laugh.5th And Wrong Reason To Make A Film5.) $$$,$$$,$$$"My Favorite Martian" (every time I retype that title, it depresses me a little more) was clearly made for reason number 5.
This is one Disney film that I will not let my four year old nephew watch..
Goofy SFX, Jeff Daniels' characteristic goofy dumbness, and the goofiest, dumbest Christopher Lloyd (not much different than taxi driver Jim Ignatowski, 1979-83) take a feature-length stab at the mid-60s CBS sitcom (with a few jokes from original martian Ray Walston in MIB shades).
For those old enough to remember, My Favorite Martian (surely spelt Favourite back in the good ol' days) was a pleasant '60's sitcom starring Bill Bixby (later to become The Hulk) as the reporter and Ray Walston as the Martian.
There's little of the charm of the TV series in this film version.Walston's part is taken by Christopher Lloyd (the madcap scientist in the Back To The Future films) and the Bill Bixby part is played by the nearly always good Jeff Daniels (Dumb And Dumber).Christopher Lloyd's hyperactive portrayal of Uncle Martin is the problem with My Favorite Martian, a performance more reminiscent of a Looney Tunes character rather than the well mannered, concerned spaceman we were treated with years ago.
If you're expecting a good Disney movie, you WILL be disappointed..
So so special effects get in the way of recapturing the interesting relationship between Uncle Martin and Tim O'Hara that we remember from the TV series.
As I was watching, I saw comparisons to another Christopher Lloyd film called Back To The Future.
I guess since this is meant for children it is not supposed to be such a thinking movie, but come on I would have appreciated it more if it gave the older audience something more to chew on as we sat through the film.
I guess since this is meant for children it is not supposed to be such a thinking movie, but come on I would have appreciated it more if it gave the older audience something more to chew on as we sat through the film.
I guess since this is meant for children it is not supposed to be such a thinking movie, but come on I would have appreciated it more if it gave the older audience something more to chew on as we sat through the film.
Christopher Lloyd and Jeff Daniels in one epic comedy movie.
I've got to say that My Favorite Martian has be one out of many of my favorite Disney movies.
Paring up Christopher Lloyd (Back to the Future) and Jeff Daniels (Dumb and Dumber) is got to be the greatest idea ever made in the history of comedy movies.
One night while driving home space ship crashes on the beach, and it turns out it has a lovable, comedic character with it.Putting two comedy actors in one movie was a great move, both of these comedy stars bring so much laughs and fun, there were moments I couldn't stop laughing, like the part when Martin the martian first shows up and impersonates Tim with Lizzy.
You will enjoy this film, my wife and I did and be prepared to laugh a lot and I mean a lot it's that kind of movie where two comedy stars work their magic together.10/10 for My Favorite Martian.
My Favorite Martian (1999): Dir: Donald Petrie / Cast: Christopher Lloyd, Jeff Daniels, Elizabeth Hurley, Daryl Hannah, Wallace Shawn: Pathetic geek show based on a T.V. Show that starred Ray Walston as the martian.
Christopher Lloyd plays the Martian who crash lands on earth and discovered by Daniels, a reporter who has just lost his job.
Ray Walton was superb as the Martian "Uncle Martin".Here Christopher Lloyd, who was so good as Doc Brown in the Back to the Future movies, plays Uncle Martin.
Ray Walston is a new character, Armitan, who actually is the Martian who made an appearance in 1964, an indirect play on the earlier TV series.Overall mildly entertaining for fans of the old TV series, but not a particularly good movie..
Then his life changes when he discovers a martian crash landed to Earth, this alien forms into a human and becomes "Uncle Martin" (Christopher Lloyd), and he stays with him while he fixes his ship.
It starts as a complicated situation where Tim has to keep an eye on Martin and his walking talking silver space suit Zoot (Wayne Knight), and he films the alien in his true form while in the jacuzzi. |
tt0268579 | Ripper | Molly Keller (A. J. Cook) narrowly avoids being murdered by a serial killer, after managing to escape an island. Five years later, she takes a forensic psychology class taught by Marshall Kane (Bruce Payne), a world-renowned expert on deviant violent offenders. Also taking the class are Jason Korda (Ryan Northcott), Chantal Etienne (Claire Keim), Marisa Tavares (Kelly Brook), Eddie Sackman (Derek Hamilton), Mary-Anne Nordstrom (Daniella Evangelista), Andrea Carter (Emmanuelle Vaugier) and Aaron Kroeker (Courtney J. Stevens). During one lesson, Marshall pranks his class by pretending to murder one of the students, his intention being to demonstrate the potential of anyone to be a killer. The unorthodox lesson prompts Aaron to reveal to Molly that he is aware of her past, which angers her as she does not want to discuss the trauma she endured. Her mood is further upset by Eddie when he attempts to hit on her, only to be firmly rejected.
Later that night, the group, excluding Aaron, meet up for a study session, which soon degenerates into an argument over Molly's overtly hostile attitude. To ease the mounting tension, they decide to go to a party taking place in a nearby abandoned building. Here, Jason makes a genuine attempt to get to know Molly better, but she remains distant. Marisa, meanwhile, has sex with a masked man, after which she overhears Chantal and Andrea talking about her. Feeling hurt, Marisa decides to leave, but the elevator instead takes her up to an isolated floor of the building. Upon stepping out of the elevator, Marisa is attacked and viciously stabbed by a masked assailant. In her panic, she stumbles and falls out of a window, but a chain wrapped around her ankle catches her, enabling the killer to hoist her back up, where he brutally and graphically stabs her to death, before sending her body crashing through a window into the party below.
The next day, the group mourn Marisa's death, while deciding they will try and identify who the killer is. Molly meets Detective Kelso (Jürgen Prochnow), who was part of the investigation of the previous murders. The pair go to the murder scene where Detective Kelso warns Molly that he believes the killer is back. Mary-Anne is driving home to see her family when a black truck begins to ram into the back of her car. She attempts to drive away, but the truck pushes her to the side of a cliff. As she attempts to get out, the truck hits her car again, causing her to crash through the windshield and plummet to her death. Detective Kelso finds her body in a nearby shed, where the killer has stabbed her repeatedly.
Molly challenges Marshall, and shows the killer is following the pattern of the famous serial killer Jack the Ripper. Jason manages to persuade the group to continue investigating despite their doubt. Molly and Jason discover a murderer previously held Marshall hostage. Chantal kisses Jason, but soon apologises to Molly for doing so, and the pair make friends. While Andrea is at the morgue identifying Mary-Anne's wounds, she is pursued by the killer, who drugs her before gutting her.
Jason, Chantal, and Eddie find out about Molly's past, which causes an argument resulting in Molly removing herself from the group. An upset Molly is comforted by Marshall. The following night, Molly, Jason, Eddie, Chantal, and Marshall are taken to a cabin where they realize the victims share the same initials of the victims of Jack the Ripper. Suspicion falls on Aaron, who was the one that assembled the study group. They attempt to phone Detective Kelso, but the phone is not working. After Molly and Chantal fall out, Eddie, Jason, and Chantal leave to try and fix the phone satellite on top of the mountain. Their car soon breaks down, forcing Jason to proceed on foot. Eddie attempts to fix the car, while Chantal remains inside. The killer soon appears and knocks out Chantal before Eddie's hand is trapped inside the bonnet of the car. Chantal wakes up and panics, driving the car forward into a tree which crushes Eddie's back, killing him. The killer chases Chantal to a factory, where she accidentally activates a log splitting machine. She bumps into Aaron, who warns her he knows who the killer is. She tries to escape, but they fall into the machine, where they are both mutilated by the circular saws.
Back at the cabin, Molly becomes suspicious of both Jason and Marshall. As Jason arrives back, Molly knocks him out before running into the forest. She encounters Jason again and flees while the killer hacks him to death with an axe. Molly discovers Marshall standing over a murdered Jason, before Detective Kelso arrives and knocks out Marshall. Molly then hallucinates and sees her younger self in the forest, gesturing to the two men and suggesting that Molly is the one who killed them all. Later, Marshall is executed for the murders, and due to visible mental problems, Molly is put in an insane asylum.
It has been said that the killer was never definitively named in the film, and there is suggestion that Detective Kelso is actually the killer. During the opening murder scene, as the young Molly escapes on a boat, she stabs the killer in the hand while he attempts to climb onto the boat after her. Detective Kelso is seen in every scene in the movie to be wearing only one glove on the same hand that the killer was stabbed in. However, in the film's sequel it was revealed that Molly was indeed the killer. | murder | train | wikipedia | Straight on the heels of above average (or well above average) direct-to-video horror movie such as, Cube, Ginger Snaps, Cut, and The Truth About Demons, comes the latest DTV installment, Ripper: Letter From Hell.
When the people around her begin to die, she believes a new serial killer is hunting them down, imitating the slayings of Jack the Ripper.
The killings in Ripper: Letter From Hell, are much more extensive than the average slasher film.
Horror fans are used to seeing the killer show up, swing his weapon of choice, and then the scene is cut, going back to the more boring part of the movie.
In Ripper, the killer spends more time with his victims, making them scream in agony, stabbing them to death, and then heaving them through a window, or ramming them off a cliff and leaving them to hang onto a rock before finishing them off.
The beginning comes off as a Brothers Grim-like fairy tale with the serial killer's pursuit of Molly through a dark, rainy, forest.
Ripper: Letter From Hell is a stylish, well orchestrated effort and deserves a spot with the recent array of worthy direct-to-video horror movies..
When her fellow classmates start dying at the hands of a mystery killer, who is following the modus operandi of the infamous Jack the Ripper, she suspects that the murderer from her past is back to finish the job.Molly and the remaining students from her study group pool their profiling talents in an attempt to discover the identity of the maniac.Director John Eyres directs this slab of stalk 'n slash with both eyes firmly fixed on the teen market, and what may have been a nice addition to the genre becomes an annoying and unwatchable piece of garbage due to its MTV trappings.
The nastiest deaths actually occur by accident, when two characters fall in front of the whirring buzz blades of a sawmill.Toward the end of this drivel, which at 115 minutes is way too long, I gave up following the ludicrous plot.
There was some rubbish about the victims sharing the same initials as those killed by Jack the Ripper, a pointless (non-explicit) sex scene, and various characters were revealed as red herrings.
Terrible dialog, annoying characters, and a pretty lame comparison to Jack the Ripper destroy this film.
Unfortunately, the movie hits rock bottom whenever the characters try to explain something (which I again attribute to bland characters and dialog).Also, there are no real ties to Jack the Ripper.
A connection to the Ripper seems to be thrown in for good measure.To sum it up: If you have seen any slasher films over the past five years, you have already seen this movie..
One would expect more from a movie which promises serial psycho killers copying Jack the Ripper.
A.J Cook as Molly is both a great anti-heroine and a wonderful surprise as an actress, and STV veteran Bruce Payne hands in a brilliant turn as the teens' ex-FBI teacher, with a British accent that puts Angelina Jolie et al to shame.
Add to this a twisty turny plot that had me in shock by the time it was finished (seriously, I've seen all the big horror-thrillers and I still didn't see the end coming) and Ripper is exactly what STV is for, showing up the big boys.So, if you think you can hack a movie with some rough edges, and you like a good slasher whodunnit, check this out..
As most people who comment negatively on DTV slasher films have only ever seen the Scream trilogy and I Know What You Did Last Summer, they can't be expected to construct a comparative view of what is really a film that excels the others of its ilk on production values alone.Although surface gloss is by no means compensation for a good strong story, Ripper has a whole lot more plot than some its commercially released contemporaries without abandoning the simplicity of the slasher conventions: a group of student taking a course in serial killer profiling are offed by a mystery murderer who bases the slayings on the most famous serial killer of them all - Jack the Ripper.Storywise, this is really a combo of Copycat and Urban Legend but, for the most part, succeeds in creating an ongoing ambiguity over the killers identity (something that is never honestly made clear at the end), but the ingenuity lies in the styling leading up to the finale.
The unsympathetic teenagers are first excited at the chance to do some detective work of their own, then they're curious as it becomes obvious they're somewhere on his list before fighting amongst themselves and ending up hacked to pieces.I wouldn't give any of the twists away, but Ripper is a largely satisfactory venture with a level of stylish (though sometimes misogynistic) violence that has been absent in recent horror outings and echoes the early days of Friday the 13th with a bit more visual flair.
Typical (and therefore dull) slasher type story about a group of students taking a course about serial killers who suddenly find that they're being bumped off one by one in a style reminiscent of Jack the Ripper.
One of the students - Molly (A.J. Cook) has been subject to this before, being the only survivor of a serial killer on an island five years before.
There's lots of wonderful screaming, and all sorts of suspects, from the appropriately creepy professor to the nerdy social outcast student, and by the end you don't really care who did it; you just want them to finish the job and put this cast out of its misery.Best line though?
I rented this movie thinking that with a title like "Ripper: Letters from Hell" that it might have something - anything, to do with Jack the Ripper.
This movie starts off with a young girl surviving a serial killer's attacks, than jumps forward several years to her as a college student studying other serial killers and obsessed with all things Gothic (the girl is obnoxious, so you have no interest in her or anything she's doing here) Then, about 45 minutes into the movie, someone mercifully starts killing off the various assortment of college low life, and the characters seem to think that the killings are reminiscent of Jack the Ripper's killings over a century earlier.
They figured that if they just automatically set it up for a sequel they could get away with the movie not making any sense, and the gaping holes in the plot, and whoever does a sequel will either have to explain that themselves, or it won't be mentioned at all, and either way the makers of this movie would be off the hook for any resolution to this story.Indeed, there are more violent and gory movies than this, there are movies with pointless endings like this, but this one somehow manages to beat all of them and take the cake for some reason.
Considering their subsequent large body of work, the 4th grade level acting can likely be blamed on the truly horrid dialogue they are forced to attempt to make sound decent.I would tell you to just fast-forward to the kill-scenes, but most of them are not worth the effort (was that apple-red paint used for blood?) Once the music video of the girl running through the city hit the screen, I couldn't take it any more, but forced myself to endure this drivel just to verify the "twist" ending that I had predicted within the first 5 minutes.
Rubbish.Oh, and although I'm no expert on the history of serial killers, I think I can safely say that Jack the Ripper never ran any of his victims over in a jeep..
I can't think of a single good thing to say about it, except that watching Jurgen Prochnow prowling and slithering around, dressed all in black, whispering half his lines and over-emphasising the other half gave me the best laugh I've had for a long time.
At first I thought this was because my brain had atrophied during the course of watching the movie, but when I listened to the Director's commentary on the DVD I discovered that he'd 'deliberately left the film open-ended so that we could all make up our own minds'.
Shamelessly borrowing elements of recent horror movie hits such as "Scream" "Copycat" and "I Know what you did last Summer", the film drags on interminably for nearly 2 hours with an assortment of laughable plot details, uphorent acting, a contrived soundtrack matched by the god-awful dialogue ( for example : "Shut up!" - "No, You Shut up!" ), the silliest love scene and a swag of horror movie cliches that even a spoof film wouldn't dare use due to familiarity.
This film was better than expected and enough of the characters were developed to the point that it was very difficult to guess just who might be the killer.
Here's a list of things Ripper gets wrong:1) It's a post-Scream slasher 2) It's full of terrible music and horrible quick-cut editing 3) It's one hour and forty-five minutes long (A slasher film!) 4) With the exception of Bruce Payne and Jurgen Protchnow, the acting is terribleAnd if you think I'm going to say 'in spite of this, I liked it' then you're wrong.
It was crap!After a promising pre-credits sequence where a girl named Molly survives a serial killer's rampage, we're thrown right into smart arse territory as we see our victims are all part of a college class who are studying murderers, or something.
We get a lot of babble about serial killers (looks at watch), characters establishing themselves (nods off), and a fake killing instigated by the teacher (pffft).
To cut a very long story short (there are only two killings in the first hour!), one of the students (or maybe the teacher) is killing everyone else in the way Jack the Ripper killed his victims.
Also, the 'killing Jack the Ripper style' plot is plainly dropped after the first two kills (unless Jack the Ripper used a bandsaw and a hatchet), plus the ending is completely daft and annoying.It is well made enough, but the post-Scream era wasn't a great time for slasher films.
Ripper was released at the height of popular slasher movies such as Scream, Halloween, and Friday the 13th.
It's no surprise that Ripper made a quiet entry via direct to video because I had not heard of this movie until I saw this on the New Release shelf.
A sole survivor of a massacre (A.J. Cook, Final Destination 2) studies serial killers under a famous Forensic Science expert (Bruce Payne, Passenger 57), but her classmates soon start dying at the hands of a serial killer who is replicating the infamous killer Jack the Ripper.
Assuming that you are not familiar with the murders committed by Jack the Ripper you could easily put some other famous serial killer in his place.
I was really questioning myself whether or not to rent this movie when i went to Blockbuster, bu then i remembered some good reviews on it, and i used to be OBSESSED with Jack The Ripper, so i said "What the Hell" and took it out.
By the end of the movie i was only HALF confused...The beginning has to do with a young girl Molly Kellar, who is on an island with some of her friends, when they all begin to be slaughtered.
Her death was pretty cool (Her acting sucked, but, thats alright) The movie continues on, and if you have seen it, u know it gets better.
They all meet up at the cabin where the big climax takes place, some people die, and Molly finds out, everything.Fast Track ANOTHER Five Years and well if you havent seen the movie, i wont give it away.Some things that i questioned and never found the answer to are this: Dont Read if You Havent Seen1.
Typical slasher movie about a copycat killer, with young people doing things that they shouldn't and getting butchered.
If you want to see a good movie dealing with Jack the Ripper, the choices are: "The Ruling Class" (Peter O'Toole's character ends up believing himself to be Jack the Ripper); "Time After Time" (H.G. Wells chases Jack the Ripper into 1970s San Francisco); and "From Hell" (Johnny Depp plays a detective investigating the murders in 1880s London).
Students at a college campus fall prey to a killer who uses Jack the Ripper as the inspiration for his killings.
It is an honest to goodness horror movie, not some cheap slasher flick.
One of the good aspects of this movie is that it not just a slasher, as it has many elements of a serial killer thriller.
It is a shame that this movie didn't get a wide cinema release, as it is much better than most of the slasher dribble that has been released of late (Valentine, Urban Legends: Final Cut) The best thing would have to be the ending, which will have you guessing up until the final scene.
I recommend you watch this movie, and keep an eye out for other straight to video horror flicks, as they seem to be the best at the moment (Ginger Snap's for example)..
The movie tries to be a serial killer thriller even though it's obviously just another teen slasher flick.
The killer doesn't wear a mask (well except for in the first murder) and we only get to see a hand killing people (like the Italian giallo flick which we have come to love so much).
It starts out as a pretty good teen slasher flick but it feels a bit too ambitious and the ending is a complete mess.
Either way, Ripper is an all right movie over-all but it tries too hard to be something more than it really is; a shameless Scream rip-off which was released a bit too late to become really famous.
This IS a movie with connections to Jack the Ripper.
Overall, Ripper: Letter from hell is a fun movie to watch on a friday night when your all alone in the dark.
i say if a horror movie is bloody, gory, and fun, its a good movie(especally the fun part), if the movie is scary its an added bonus, this movie isn't scary but its bloody, gory, and fun, plus i thought the acting was good with likable characters(except that french girl, i was waiting for her to die), and i like the plot they put in there, and this movie made me a fan of a.j. cook.(who is canadian, thank you) something that could have been fixed is the ending, i've seen it 3 times and i still don't get it.
Last night, I rented a movie entitled RIPPER: LETTER FROM HELL from Blockbuster (thank god I didn't buy it) and when I began watching it, I was already worried by the opening of the first scene.
A killer begins going around cutting people up in the same kind of style that Jack the Ripper (that's me!) killed his victims.
As the past re-awakens, Molly is forced to face the terrifying secret behind the stalker's return, and the entire class soon realises that it's a history that they don't want to repeat.This film starred: A.J. Cook, Bruce Payne & Jurgen Prochnow.RIPPER was released in 2001 and is a slasher film based on Jack the Ripper.
So not very surprisingly this is a slow and boring horror film based on a Jack the Ripper copycat killer.
One of the classmates, the main character, was stalked by a killer herself in the beginning of the movie.
i purchased th film ripper at a cheap pound shop and could not believe it when i watched it to as in how amazing it is, it is a real shocker for a film that isn't well known, the plot is amazing and the actors do a fantastic job, so highly recommended, however as you get so into the film and can't wait to find out who the killer is it is a real shock as to the end when you don't actually find out who it is, fair enough it is betrayed to be kane but i am thinking it is more likely to be molly, i understand that by adding this twist it really does hold you wanting more, but is kind of frustrating i have now watched this film over 5 or 6 times and still have no idea who it it each time i look for more clues but still not really sure.
The plot of the film is basically this: Molly gets dissed by all these people when she's younger and escapes death when all these people she is hanging out with on an island are killed by a serial killer.
*Then* the people who she is in a study group with begin to get killed one by one and each in the style of Jack the Ripper.
"Ripper: Letter From Hell" is a very good movie but I was a litlle dissapointed with the ending: I didn't like it.The cast and acting is the best that I've seen recently.
It was very original the first death and having the killer spending more time with his victims than the regular slash film.
It would have been so much better if a friend turned out to be the killer and had some screwball motive (a la "Urban Legend") rather than a contrived mixed-up and ultimately pretentious conclusion.SUMMARY - Good suspensful death scenes mixed up in a film with too many ideas that even the director could not control.**/*****.
I haven't seen a good horror movie since Scream 3, and this one reminded me of it.
Several of the scenes kept me guessing as to who the killer was, and I enjoyed the movie the entire way through. |
tt0039011 | Tarzan and the Leopard Woman | Travelers near Zambezi are being killed, apparently by leopards. The commissioner (Dennis Hoey) asks Tarzan to look into the matter. Tarzan immediately doubts that leopards are the problem. At the same time, Tarzan, Jane, and Boy take in Kimba, a boy who claims to have become lost in the jungle. Kimba (Tommy Cook) is the brother of Queen Lea, leader of a leopard cult. She has dispatched him to spy on Tarzan. Queen Lea also conspires with Ameer Lazar (Edgar Barrier), a Western-educated doctor who resents the West's domination of the area.
Kimba has a goal of his own: to take the heart of Jane (Brenda Joyce) a deed that would make him a warrior in the eyes of the cult. The Leopard Men wear leopard skins that form a cowl and cape, with iron claws attached to the back of each hand. Queen Lea (Acquanetta) wears a headband, wrist bands, ankle bands, halter top and miniskirt made of leopard skin. As "Variety" put it: "She displays plenty of what it takes to stir male interest and handles her acting chores adequately." She works her followers into a frenzy in an underground chamber, "These skins are your disguise. These claws are your weapons. Go not as men, but as leopards. Go swiftly, silently."
They attack a caravan bringing four teachers (Iris Flores, Lillian Molieri (Miss Central America of 1945), Helen Gerald and Kay Solinas) and bring the maidens back for sacrifice. They also capture Tarzan, Jane, and Boy. Tarzan brings down the roof of the cavern, destroying the cult and rescuing his friends.
The plot is summed up by these lines spoken by Tarzan (about Cheeta):
"If an animal can act like a man, why not a man like an animal?" | cult, murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0443533 | The History of Love | Approximately 70 years before the present, the 10-year-old Polish-Jewish Leopold (Leo) Gursky falls in love with his neighbor Alma Mereminski. The two begin a relationship that develops over the course of 10 years. In this time, Leo writes three books that he gives to Alma, since she is the only person he deeply cares about. Leo promises he will never love anyone but her.
Alma, now 20, is sent to the United States by her father, who feared the alarming news concerning fascist Germany. Leo does not know that Alma is pregnant and dreams of going to America to meet her. A short time after, the Germans invade Poland and Leo takes cover in the woods, living on roots, small animals, bugs and what he can steal from farmers' cellars. After three and a half years of hiding, he goes to America and finds Alma but is shocked to hear she thought he had died in the war and had married the son of the manager of the factory she works at. He is devastated when he finds she has had another child with her husband. He asks her to come with him, but she refuses. She tells him, however, about his son Isaac who is now five years old. Heartbroken, Leo leaves, and later becomes a locksmith under the guidance of his cousin. Leo regularly watches Isaac from a distance, wishing to be part of the boy's life but scared to come in contact with him.
In the present day, Leo is a lonely old man who waits for his death, along with his recently found childhood friend, Bruno, and Alma has been dead for five years. Leo still keeps track of his son, who has become a famous writer, much to Leo's enjoyment since he believes Isaac inherited the talent from his father. Leo's depression deepens when he reads in a newspaper that his son has died at the age of 60, and Leo develops an obsession with finding his place in his son's world, to the extent that he breaks into Isaac's house to see if he had read Words for Everything, a book about his life that he recently wrote and sent to Isaac.
Zvi Litvinoff's perspective is introduced. In the past, a younger Leo wrote a letter to his old friend Zvi, asking for his manuscript of The History of Love to be returned to him. Leo had given Zvi The History before they parted, years ago. However, his wife Rosa informs him that the book was destroyed in a flood, choosing to hide that her husband did not write The History of Love. Zvi also describes an event where Leo fell gravely ill in Poland and wrote his own obituary, after which Zvi stole it in the hope that it would keep his friend alive.
Unknown to Leo is that the book had been published in a small printing of two thousand copies (and re-published upon the supposed author's death) in Spanish, but under the name of Zvi Litvinoff, who copied the book thinking Leo was killed in Poland. Zvi felt so guilty for copying his book that he added his friend's stolen obituary as the last chapter, telling the publisher that including the obituary was conditional to printing the book, although doing so did not make sense with the plot. Zvi died later without telling the world about the real author of The History of Love.
In a parallel story, a 15-year-old girl, Alma Singer, named after the Alma in The History of Love, her parents' favorite book, is struggling to cope with the loss of her father due to cancer. Her mother becomes distant and lonely, escaping into her work of book translation. Her younger brother Bird, so called for jumping from the second story of a building hoping he could fly, seeks refuge in religion and believes himself to be one of God's chosen people, thus distancing himself from reality. Alma finds refuge in one of her father's hobbies: surviving in the wild. Alma also bears a crush on her Russian pen friend Misha, who has moved to New York. The two become a couple but they break up because of Alma's incertitude.
One day, her mother receives a letter from a mysterious man named Jacob Marcus who requests that she translate The History of Love from Spanish to English for $100,000, to be paid in increments of $25,000 as the work progresses. Alma's mother finds the sum suspicious, but the stranger confesses that his mother used to read the book to him when he was a child, so it has a great sentimental value. Alma sees this as an opportunity to help her mother recover from her depression and changes her mother's straightforward letters to Jacob Marcus into more romantic versions. When the letters stop before her mother completes the translation of the book, Alma decides to find the mysterious client.
She starts by noting down what she knows about Jacob Marcus in her diary, and concludes that the Alma in the book was real and proceeds to find her. She struggles in her search for Alma Mereminski, but succeeds when she realizes that Alma could have married and finds her under the name of Moritz. She is disappointed to hear that Alma has been dead for five years. However, she finds out that Isaac Moritz is the first of Alma's sons and a famous writer. When she starts reading his bestselling book, she finds that the main character's name is Jacob Marcus and realizes that Isaac Moritz had hired her mother to translate the book. Isaac is dead, however, which explains why his letters had stopped coming to their home. To be sure about her suspicions, Alma leaves a note on Isaac's door asking who the writer of the novel is.
In the meanwhile, Bird finds Alma's diary and misinterprets the names Alma Mereminski and Alma Moritz as being his sister's real names, and believes they had different fathers. Isaac's brother calls Alma, after reading the note and the original manuscript of the book, to tell her that Gursky is the real author, but Bird answers the telephone and it confuses him even further. He now suspects that Leopold Gursky is Alma's real father. To cleanse his sin of bragging and to regain the status as one of the chosen ones, he decides to set up a meeting with Alma and Gursky, thus doing a good deed without anybody knowing except God.
When the two receive the letter regarding their meeting, both are confused: Alma tries to discover which of the people she met during her searches could have sent her the note, while Leo comes to believe it was Alma who sent him the note, despite her being dead.
Leo settles himself on a park bench, waiting a long while for Alma to appear. He ponders his life, key moments from his past, the loss of his love, and what it means to be human. He imagines that he will die while he is waiting there, his own death and mortality being one of his preoccupations in the novel. When Alma finally appears, he and she are both confused, although at first Leo believes that she is his Alma from the past and that she is really just in his imagination. After he realizes that she doesn't look like his Alma, and he gets confirmation from a man walking by that the Alma who is there is actually real, Leo talks to her briefly about Bruno and Isaac, while Alma starts piecing together the puzzle of who Leo is. When Alma asks him if he ever loved a girl named Alma Mereminski, the old man finally feels a sense of transcendence in being recognized at long last, and instead of being able to respond to Alma's questions with words, he keeps tapping his fingers twice against her. She puts her head on his shoulder and hugs him, and he is finally able to speak again, saying her name three times and giving her her own feeling of transcendence at finally being recognized, too.
(Some readers believe that Leo has a heart attack and dies at this point, possibly because of Leo's earlier assumption that he is about to die, and also because he says during this meeting with Alma, "I felt my heart surge. I thought: I've lived this long. Please. A little longer won't kill me." A more compelling case can be made that the novel, for all its poignancy, simply ends with this mutually transcendent moment for these two characters.)
The last chapter is entitled "The Death of Leopold Gursky" and is identical with the last chapter of the book inside a book The History of Love, both being the self-written obituary of Leopold Gursky. By ending the novel this way, Krauss is richly alluding to earlier parts of the novel and to her theme of how words keep people alive for us, indeed, make people in danger of becoming invisible, visible. Zvi Litvinoff carried Leo's self-written obit in his pocket for years, as a talisman guarding against Leo's death. Litvinoff, when preparing History of Love for publication, insists that his editor include the Leo Gursky obit at the end, his way of ensuring that Leo will continue to "live" in the hearts of all readers of the book. And finally, Nicole Krauss includes the same obit at the end of her novel, as a way of urging all readers to keep this Leo, and all Leos, alive. | romantic, flashback | train | wikipedia | romantic epic.
In the old world, country girl Alma (Gemma Arterton) is loved by three boys; Leo, Bruno, and Zvi. She makes Leo promise to write about his love for her.
In 2006 NYC, Léo Gursky (Derek Jacobi) is a grumpy old retired locksmith.
He is trying to contact his estranged author son over his autobiography and desperate to find a book called, "The History of Love".
Bruno Leibovitch (Elliott Gould) is his neighbor friend.
Alma Singer (Sophie Nélisse) is named after the Alma in the book.
Her mother Charlotte (Torri Higginson) and her late father fell in love with the book.
Her little brother believes himself to be one of the 36 righteous Lamed Vovnik in Judaism and is building an ark.
She's in love with Russian boy Misha but she insists on staying friends.
Her mother is hired to translate "The History of Love" into english.I know nothing about the book.
I'm sure it's a romantic epic.
This film is ambitious in its ideas.
This could be a great movie concentrating on Leo. There is this story about Alma Singer which does not measure up to the epic romanticism of Leo's story.
Adapting from a novel is often ambitious especially when the adapter is reluctant to use an ax to chop out sections.
Alma Singer's story is probably necessary for the book but not for the movie.
With a great veteran like Jacobi, this needs to trust his ability to take over the screen.
It needs to be a character study of this grumpy old man.
This could have been amazing but it needs someone more daring in adapting the material..
The story of love --- A romantic fresco of the most successful.
My opinion---After "Go, Live and Become", "The Source of Women" and "The Concert" - Radu Mihaileanu returns with a most successful romantic fresco, where he will evolve these characters in different periods of their life, By the carelessness, love, promises and dramatic passages of their respective lives, with all the delicacy and emotions that Radu Mihaileanu knows how to put into his achievements by making us share them.
This beautiful movie is also served in the most beautiful way by a cast of the most successful brings all the strength that will make this movie really good, thanks to: "Derek Jacobi" (masterful), the young "Sophie Nélisse" (Beautiful), "Gemma Arterton" (superb) and "Elliott Gold" (perfect), plus an effective scenario, you have all the elements of a superb film that I advise of course, because its quality is no doubt, good movie time..
2 Amazing Hours.
I really liked this film, its story is really something,i loved the way it has been pictured, the leading actors' performances were really convenient, you actually live the scene with them, furthermore, the music was remarkable, each note served its moment very well..
a movie full of symbols.
This is a fantastic movie, full of symbols.
It conveys the most diverse emotions from sympathy to admiration, from sadness to enthusiasm.Radu Mihaileanu managed to build an amazing character, Léo Gursky with whom it is impossible not to empathize.
He is like an oxymoron.
You can feel both his sorrow and his positive and innocent attitude towards life.
He conveys sympathy as well as dignity at the same time!
The film is also very dynamic, with intertwined plans, which keeps you focused.
In a world where relationships are consumed so quickly, what a wonderful lesson we are given by these loyal and faithful characters who decide to love one person for their whole life!.
I thought the movie was just great.
It is a very moving story, based on facts that happened to the Jewish population in Eastern Europe during WW2.
From beginning to end, there is nothing that I disliked about this movie.
The characters, the story, the music, they all get a solid 10 from me..
Will Hurt Your Soul.
If you've read the book, this movie will be painful beyond all belief.
It will prove sometimes good authors cave for monetary reasons and give up the purpose of their novel for some cheap big screen existence.
All that was beautiful in the novel, the true symbols and emotions was stripped apart to bit and pieces of modern gimmicky references.
Stilen names of characters and brief concepts of ideas was all that was left.
A innocent girl in love with her family turned into a moody teenager, a sweet sad old man turned into an angry spout of distaste, and a sad beautiful mother turned into a crazy agoraphobic?
Did the author lose the rights to her book in a card game?
They left out the actual history of love....
The definitive bad adaption.
On can only hope that this film servers some purpose by being used in Film 101 for film students to see all the possible attributes of definitive bad adaption.
I have to say I enjoyed the novel.
The novel *tries* to be original, self consciously so.
One gets the sense the author had made a study of non-linear timeline work and threw in some Proust and painful immigration and old age stories.
Still the novel is worth a read, it is complex, and average to above average workBut the film is a complete mess.
Two thirds or more of the narrative complexity and intersections, which are precisely what makes the novel interesting, are lopped away.
Amazingly the film still is disjointed and jarring, and instead of being easier to follow -- now simply full of narrative holes..
moody and incohesive.
I don't know the novel, but from the hints of the film I could gather that the novel must have some deep appeal and intrigue.
The film adaptation lacks any of that.
The different layers of the story hardly make sense on their own, becoming only shorthands and clichees with little emotional impact.
The episodes are longish and loose sight of the bigger picture.
Production value and acting is good though, only the script lacks finesse..
Great movie.
Great movie.
Its awesome how this film manages to twist and bring together its multi-layered story.
Really heartwarming.
Especially because you actually don't like any character of this movie.
They are cute and you feel with them, but there isn't someone who is clearly the hero-main character.
I really enjoyed it, all of them have there small personalities and mistakes.
But you cant stop watching because of this.They cut out one scene with the young Alma, which i would regret as a cutter, because it clarifies the motivation of young Alma on the point, where i had some struggles to understand her only with the movie, though i have to say, you can understand her motivation only with the movie as well.Everybody who likes a heartwarming story with multidimensional characters and a multi-layered story, i can hardly recommend this movie. |
tt1260570 | Die-ner (Get It?) | Ken arrives in a small diner and makes small talk with the waitress, Rose. After listening to Rose's story, Ken reveals that he's a serial killer, and he quickly kills her and the cook, Fred. Ken cleans up and hides the bodies, but before he can leave the diner, he hears Kathy and Rob, an unhappily married couple, pulling in. Ken decides to bide his time and wait for an opening, and he pretends to be employed at the diner. As Ken prepares to strike, the local sheriff, Duke, appears. Frustrated by all the interruptions and questions, Ken attempts to bluff his way past Duke, but Fred and Rose stumble out of the storage room and leave Duke satisfied. Not sure what to make of the situation, Ken plays along. When the zombies attack Duke, Ken takes Kathy and Rob hostage, tapes down all the zombies, and decides to wait out the zombie attack. After he dies from his wounds, Duke comes back as a zombie, and they tape him down, too. Kathy and Rob attempt to deal with Ken, the zombies, and Jesse, Duke's talkative deputy, who shows up trying to find out Duke's fate. Eventually, Rob is killed by the zombies, and Jesse kills Kathy. Ken attempts to escape from the diner, but he is captured by the zombies and torn apart before he can make it to safety. | flashback | train | wikipedia | Die(ner) is a simple little horror film made for very, very little money.
When accepting that, one can find quite a lot of enjoyment out of it.It's about a serial killer who murders a waitress and short-order cook during the graveyard shift of a roadside diner, only to run into some problems.
The first is an arguing couple who come in and want to be served and the second is that his victims are about to come back to life as zombies.
Throw in an old sheriff, some wry dialogue, and some originality and you have the recipe for a fun little microbudget horror movie.The only drawback is, as with most low budget films, the action is low and some of the performances are stiff, but the lead playing the serial killer is quite charismatic.
Just give it a chance, especially if you're disillusioned by Hollywood horror movies..
Ken is a personable, talkative serial killer who has just dispatched the late-night skeleton crew at an out-of-the-way diner.
When a bickering young couple and a local cop turn up and start to smell a rat, Ken is ready to add to the body count.
But the bodies in the freezer aren't content to stay dead, and things quickly get out of control.When you approach a movie with a title like this one, you don't tend to expect subtlety.
But Die-ner's grim opening sequence (in a series of close-ups showing Ken cleaning up the traces of his work) tips you off that this is a horror movie before it's anything else.
The low-key comedy proceeds mostly from the well-drawn characters' reactions to the situation.
The young couple is faced with a double threat: they can't flee the zombies because of the psycho killer holding them hostage.
Josh Grote (in his first film performance) does a great job as Ken, who is less terrified than utterly fascinated by the zombie rising.
"I kill people all the time," he says, "but they've never come back before." Louisiana actor Larry Purtell is hilarious as the tired, ineffectual sheriff, who gets taken out of the game pretty quickly and spends most of the movie groaning on the floor.The film is fairly light on the gore, but there is one well-done zombie bite and a bit of hand trauma.
That aside, it's a clever take on the zombie and serial killer genres, informed by lots of older movies but never beholden to them.
I think if more people see this, it has the potential to generate some buzz.
If a DVD were available (hopefully with a different title), I might be interested in seeing it again.P.S. Lead actor Josh Grote appears to be in no way related to Edward Norton, despite looking and sounding exactly like him..
First of all, I don't understand how this movie can end up with "KFZ - Kentucky Fried Zombie" on the movie cover.
It just doesn't make sense, and is just a lawsuit waiting to happen.I enjoy zombie movies tremendously, and tend to sit down and watch just about anything even remotely zombie.
And it is extremely rare that I have to give up on a zombie movie.
The zombies in this movie were so bad that I was laughing most of the time.
You just got to love the "let's paint their faces gray, but forget about the neck and the rest of the body" mindset.
It is just so 70's and 80's, and it doesn't work in this day and age.The story in "Die-ner (Get It?)", well as far as I got into the movie, then it is about a loner coming into a late open diner and having a conversation with a waitress.
But he turns out to be a killer and does what he does best.
More late night visitor come to the diner.
But those killed just will not stay dead, but come back as zombies.Zombies?
I am certain that there is an audience out there for these kind of low budget zombie movies.
And I am more than certain that I will never make a second trip back to this movie to finish it.
A low-budget Zombie Farcical thriller.
A charming wise-cracking serial killer, sets up shop at an all-nite diner.
A bickering couple comes in and just as he's about to get started, here comes the dearly departed.
Now this isn't a barricade the restaurant from the oncoming zombie apocalypse, in fact they don't even lock the doors.
As well as realizing their host is a serial killer who they have to escape from while avoiding the zombies.
In one funny scene they ask the killer why he has a bag full of tape and rope?
Independent Serial Killer zombie flick!.
I was surprised to find myself pretty glued to the screen on this wonderfully done independent horror/Comedy.
You can tell they didn't have that big of a budget, but still they did a fairly decent job with the effects and the acting was fairly well too.
The serial killer carries a lot of the film and it doesn't wear out its welcome at 80 minutes long.
I do admit some of the humor was a bit corny,but it makes up for it with some very funny moments also and is a great clash of Slasher/Zombie Horror.I Highly recommended this for Independent Horror genre film lovers with 83 minutes to kill..
Works as a black comedy, but fails as zombie gorn.
I seem to be one of the few people who really liked this movie.
Honestly, I'm a little surprised at all of my fellow B movie fans who proclaim how tolerant they are of low budgets, yet give this movie such a low rating.I love the anti-hero Ken, a wise-ass serial killer whose victims mysteriously start to reanimate as zombies.
He's easily the best part of the movie, and, admittedly, most of the movie revolves around him, rather than the zombies, which I'm sure ended up annoying a lot of zombie fans.
If you go into this movie expecting a zombie bloodbath, you'll probably end up being a bit disappointed.Speaking of which, there isn't really all that much gore in this movie, and what gore does exist tends to be rather low budget and amateurish.
It's certainly not the worst that I've seen, but there are Troma movies with better gore effects.
If you find Troma movies unwatchable, then you might want to avoid Die-ner.Much of the humor in Die-ner is quite black, as befitting the subject matter and protagonist.
Early on, Ken tells a talkative waitress that people spill their guts to him all the time.
A lot of the scenes are played for dark humor, rather than gore.
Pointless flashbacks, rambling back story, and repetitive, dreamy music make up a good chunk of the movie.
I thought it was awesome, but most people seem to get bored out of their minds.
I thought that they all contributed to the surreal atmosphere, while making fun of traditional horror movies.It's not a masterpiece by any means, but I had a lot of fun.
Perhaps something like this has a very limited appeal, but you'd think that the title would scare off most people expecting a serious, gut-wrenching zombie film.
It works best as a black comedy and parody of zombie movies, and I'd recommend it mainly to Troma fans.
It's not zany or exploitative enough to be a Troma movie, but it may appeal to fans of their low budget slasher/horror comedies..
At a late-night diner on a remote highway, serial killer Ken (Joshua Grote) wastes waitress Rose (Maria Olsen) and kills cook Fred (Jorge Montalvo), then waits for more victims to enter the establishment.
Soon enough, a bickering married couple stop for a break (Liesel Kopp and Parker Quinn), but before Ken can murdlerise his customers, local cop Duke (Larry Purtell) also calls in for a coffee.
Then, as Ken tries to figure out what to do next, his previous victims suddenly come back to life as flesh eating zombies!The fact that 'Die-ner (Get It?)' feels the need to draw attention to its pathetic titular pun suggests that the makers of this film have zero confidence in their work.
Released on DVD in the UK under the equally terrible title of 'Kentucky Fried Zombies', this horror comedy is poorly written, clumsily directed, laugh-free and scare-less bottom-of-the-barrel zombie tosh that really drags.
I feel sorry for Joshua Grote, who actually puts in a reasonable performance as serial killer Ken: he gives it his best shot, but never stands a chance amidst the dull undead nonsense that unfolds.The one thing that can often save a low-to-zero budget zombie flick—the blood and guts—is in short supply, leaving this particular viewer thinking that the 25p I paid for the DVD was 25p too much..
First I want to point out the only actor I enjoyed 100%.
That was Joshua Grote.
Now the rest of the cast was pretty good at their parts.
Not all the zombies though, some of the zombies were pretty bad.
This film has a lot of dialog in it and Grote is speaking most of it.
His character is not all there in the head and he did a great job of acting that way.
I enjoyed watching him talk.
But too much talking in the film lead to being a little bored.
There was a couple gore scenes, but no real excitement.
The scare factor was low too.
Also there was some things that they touched base on in the film that were never resolved.
One important thing had to do with Grote's character and I wish they would of resolved it.
But overall it was a fun movie to watch.
But it had just as many good moments as bad ones..
A fun little movie for those who don't take things too seriously.
I'll start my short review by mentioning that the copy I got had the title 'KFZ: Kentucky Fried Zombie' - not massively important, but I thought I'd mention it.
I picked this up from a pound shop, so frankly I had low expectations.
However, much to my surprise I actually found the movie to be quite enjoyable; it just goes to prove that you shouldn't judge a DVD by it's box (or price!).
It's amazing how a small budget can go such a long way when the people involved in the project are so eager to put in a good performance, and this is certainly the case here.
In particular, I have to praise Joshua Grote in the role of Ken. He seems to me a cross between James Van Der Beek and Edward Norton and brings plenty of humour to the movie, appearing more than comfortable in front of the camera.
I predict he will have a strong career in future if he gets the break he needs and I'd certainly like to see him in more movies.
Everyone else in the film does pretty well too and for the most part, the direction is more than adequate, occasionally being quite stylish in it's presentation.
The script deserves praise and the music is also really good (the special effects aren't too bad either - I've seen much worse!).
It's no masterpiece by any means, but I've sat through enough big budget drivel and visited IMDb to find a rating well above that.
This movie was entertaining enough to hold my attention from start to finish, it made me laugh for all the right reasons and the makers deserve credit for putting together a decent little movie on such a small budget..
Die-ner (Get it?)...
Our story starts with Ken sitting casually in a rural diner chatting with his waitress, Rose.
This conversation is tongue in cheek and results in the death of both Rose and the only other person in the diner, the cook.
Of course, this is because Ken is a serial killer.
While hiding the bodies, Ken is interrupted by Rob and Kathy who bicker about her want for a divorce not moments before entering the diner.
Tending to them (with the intent of killing them, Ken is again interrupted by Sheriff Duke who strolls in for a coffee.
Mysteriously, the two dead bodies hidden in the freezer reanimate and end up biting Duke in the neck.
Rob and Kathy realize Ken is a killer and are essentially held hostage by him as he plays around carelessly for much of the film.
Eventually Rob is eaten by a zombie in a truck outside the diner and Kathy is shot by a incompetent deputy sheriff and eaten by zombies.
Ken gets his by being eaten by a group of zombies.
Oh, and a very important denouement of a zombie getting into a truck.
Too much rides on Ken talking mostly to himself as other characters whine and wince uncomfortably.
This of course is probably important as the whole film occurs on happenstance so to fill the void from one event to the next, needless chatter is placed.
Characters don't progress in any arch and the end result is everyone dies leaving me as a viewer to wonder...what was the point?
Was I supposed to side with Ken and his 2 cent serial killer philosophies which seem regurgitated from many other films or the whiney do nothing couple who have no respect for each other?
As this is a zombie film, gore has to me mentioned.
In fact, there's really only one decent zombie bite which is pretty tame and standard.
Continuity suffers a bit as boom shadows can be seen several times as well as blinds being open then closed at various times as well as general prop placement.
Also story continuity is lacking, They're supposed to be somewhere in rural Idaho where it's "the loneliest place on the loneliest highway" yet at the end there are 20-30 zombies pouring into the diner...
where'd these people come from?
Acting conveyed little for me as the characters are so unlikeable to begin with it's hard to say that had they been done better the story and film would have been different.
Camera work is basically fine minus the fact that in many shots actors are framed awkwardly and focus at times is poor.
(I say this is basically fine because you can't pick too much on such things given budget and what the film apparently was) Overall, just not very good.
I give credit to Josh Grote (Ken) who I think did pretty well overall.
And yes he does look and at times sound very much like Edward Norton.
Honestly, if you take Paul Rudd and Ed Norton you have Josh Grote.
I can't recommend this film based on the idea that I truly don't believe it's entertaining.
This film has little going for it other than being produced in 8 days and for $500,000.
Also called "KFZ: Kentucky Fried Zombies," "Die-ner" is probably one of the worst films I've ever seen.The script was probably written in crayon and, I'm theorizing, the entire film was made to just try and milk some money out of zombie and horror fans because absolutely no effort was put into this film.
Sure, one could argue that a lack of a budget was to blame (clearly this movie was made for about 10 dollars and change) but, after sitting through it, I would argue the entire film was made just to try and make some cash off of people seeing the halfway decent box art on the DVD and decided to spend the 5 bucks it will put them back after they pull it from the bargain bin.There's not much of a story to speak of (and the plot clearly forgotten about) and, not surprisingly, the acting is terrible--unless you're talking about the main character, the annoying serial killer who tries (and fails) to be charismatically cool.
However, the actor is a tremendous source of amusement as it is obvious he thinks he's the greatest actor to ever live despite looking like he moonlights as a Bud Bundy impersonator.The zombies in this film were lazily created, the camera work is painful to endure and look at, there's no horror or comedy to speak of in this poorly defined dark comedy (it's just insulting to even attempt to classify this one as such) and the entire movie is just a gigantic waste of time and it's only real purpose seems to be as a reminder of all the things you could be doing that would actually end with something productive and a better use of your time.This movie is lazy filmmaking at its more obvious..
A Comedy without Much Humor.
A serial killer named "Ken" (Joshua Grote) walks into a diner during the late-night shift and kills three people.
When two more people, "Kathy" (Liesel Kopp) and "Rob" (Parker Quinn) also come into the diner he decides to kill them as well.
But before he can do that a policeman by the name of "Duke" (Larry Purtell) just happens to come in too.
So while he is pretending to be a new waiter, all of a sudden the people he killed (and hid away) come back to life as zombies.
At this point the film begins to get strange.
Anyway, I thought Joshua Grote did a decent job as far as that goes.
But the plot appeared to drift rather aimlessly and the film just seemed to lack cohesion.
For example, when the zombies were first encountered it seemed that Ken, Kathy and Rob were more surprised than shocked or terrified.
Likewise, the zombies should have been more frightening.
Anway, when I first decided to watch this movie I thought it was a zombie-comedy.
So what was left was a comedy without much humor and a horror film without much horror.
In short, I would recommend this to zombie enthusiasts only--as they're probably the only ones who might find this remotely interesting. |
tt0367478 | Wake of Death | After being a gangster for many years, Ben Archer (Jean-Claude Van Damme) moves from Marseille to Los Angeles and decides to become legit to spend more time with his wife, Cynthia (Lisa King), and his child, Nicholas (Pierre Marais).
Cynthia is a social worker with the INS, helping to process illegal Chinese immigrants. Then she discovers Kim (played by Valerie Tian), a young girl on board a ship that is full of immigrants, and decides to bring her home. She convinces a judge that the girl is in grave danger if deported and successfully pleads with him to give her one-week to sort out her case against deportation.
However, it proves to be a fatal mistake. Kim's father, Sun Quan (played by Simon Yam), is a Chinese Triad. Once Sun Quan discovers where his daughter is, without provocation, he kills Cynthia, her parents and many of the workers in the restaurant at which they're dining.
After a shootout with the fleeing Triad members, Ben finds his wife brutally murdered. His son Nicholas and Kim are missing. He attempts to save the children and avenge his wife's death.
Ben, however, is not alone in his attempts to avenge his wife. With the help of French mobsters Max (Anthony Fridjohn)(who happens to be Cynthia's uncle), Raymond (Max's muscle / bodyguard) (Claude Hernandez), and Tony (Tony Schiena), a friend the character loves like a brother. Ben's child and Kim are found, Ben then decides to kill Andy Wang (Tom Wu), who he saw leaving his wife's murder scene. The hit is successful, and the investigation afterwards gives Ben a lead on where to move next.
The next morning, thanks to tips from a somewhat crooked cop, Ben finds that Mac Hoggins (Danny Keogh), Cynthia's partner in the INS, was at the investigation, completely out of his field. Ben and his comerades then capture Hoggins, take him to a garage, and they torture him for answers. Ben is called by the same cop that tipped him off about Hoggins, and is asked to meet him at the morgue.
Hoggins confesses to telling Sun Quan of Cynthia's involvement with Kim, and gives them information of Sun Quan's involvement with heroin in the United States, as well as his location. With all of the information, they kill him.
When Ben arrives at the morgue, he is quickly greeted with death, as everyone in the morgue (with the exception of a few scared nurses) has been killed, with dead immigrants on the table.
After a motorcycle chase, Ben disposes of both of the murderers, and heads back to Max's house. Upon arriving, there are 2 black SUVs speeding off, and Tony, who was riding with him, jumps out and runs inside, while Ben gives chase. Apparently, the Triads had kidnapped Kim and Nicholas, and Ben is only able to retrieve Kim, barely escaping with their lives.
Ben drives back to Max's house, where he learns that Max and Raymond have been killed. Then, Ben and Tony decide to take on Sun Quan with the information provided by Hoggins.
They go to Pier 19, to his boat, the Katrina, in which is used for Quan's heroin operations. After vicious fights on the ship, Ben and Sun Quan are faced off on a bridgewalk on the boat. They exchange gunshots right when the police arrive, Ben being hit in his shoulder or arm region, and Sun Quan being fatally wounded. | revenge, neo noir, murder, violence | train | wikipedia | Unlike his co-action hero's Steven Seagal who can't even be bothered hanging around to loop his on voice on his movies- VAN DAMME is making a comeback.
The action is great, Van Damme is in it, and the story is pretty good.
If your looking for a great action film with Van Damme and this movie is not at your local Blockbuster I suggest you spend a few extra bucks a purchase the film, you will not be let down.I have read that some people were let down by the films climax stating that it's far too quick for some.
I'll be the first to admit that the super butt kicking action was not the only thing I appreciated in Jean-Claude Van Damme's films back in the day.
The wonders of Hong Kong film.Looking to pack a recent weekend with as much action and gunplay possible, I found "Wake of Death" and decided to give JCVD another try.
This film is not for those who like their action mindless.I agree with all the comments about Jean-Claude's acting skills he has definitely earned to communicate emotion and real character depth.
Another thing I noticed is that this movie looked like it had a nice budget..100 times better then Derailed and better then In Hell..It was nice to see that Money was being dished out for Van Damme again.
I have always wanted Van Damme in a french style action-noir movie, like the old Alain Delon movies, I was very pleased when I saw Philippe Martinez mix Jean-Pierre Melville classic anti-hero lead with "MTV" camera work.
Doesn't matter what the hell you think of his past films or what u saw, Wake Of Death exposes a raw, gritty and capturing Van Damme like you will never see.
This is the first time that I'm going to write a review for a movie just because it was one of the best recent action films that I have seen and the rating is far below what it deserved.
For some reason it just all came together nicely and I definitely recommend this film especially if you enjoy action movies and are a van damme fan!.
Our revenger hero wages war against the criminals .The sad Van Damme must rescue the kids and revenge his spouse, meanwhile he's attacked and pursued from all sides by Chinese triads, being only helped by a French gangster's trio.This film direct to video-rentals, displays action-packed, extreme violence, pursuit cars, thrills and is quite entertaining.
However, Nicholas and Kim escape from the killers, and Ben calls his friend to revenge the death of his beloved wife."Wake of Death" is not a totally bad Van Damme's movie.
Fans and non-fans of Van Damme are gonna Like Wake of Death.It baffles one why Van Damme had not been making these types of movie earlier.He might still be the mid-level star he was.Gorgously shot,WoD finds Van Damme a retired enforcer named Ben Archer with revenge on his mind after a knife-wielding Triad Boss(Simon Yam)brutally KIlls his wife and in-laws.He goes back to the mob way for some Damme action.What seems like an average revenge flick is an action lovers flick:Bike chases,car chases,Gun fights,Fist fights,Drills,Shotguns to the face,and a scene that would make Tarantino proud.Van Damme surprises here by rising above his usual monosyllabic self.He emotes!Very well.Its a welcome change to see him with such acting chops.Yam is mostly on the sidelines,letting his goons do the hard work.He underplays San Qaun at times,but he always comes off cool,collected,and evil.Rest of the cast is mixed.The mob cronies are the best:Tony Scheina has a lot of presence as JC's mob buddy and could easily go on to be a good action star.Anthony Fridjohn delivers some pretty hard-boiled lines as the kingpin.Fellow enforcer Claude Hernandez is likable and quiet.But hes all action when need be.Valerie Tian is engaging as Kim; San Quans Daughter.
Bad:Choppy style.Lack of character background.I wonder if there is another cut to WoD.A lot of questions needed answers.The ending is too open-ended.I wish Ringo Lam would have stayed on.But whatever little perks are missing, Philippe Martinez makes up for it with visuals,style,and a great soundtrack.But all in all a great revenge flick that rivals Man on Fire.And great acting from Van Damme.Your on your way back!.
one of Van Damme's best movies ever and best acting wise this movie has everything in it and not to much karate but it has some this movie should have been in the theaters.He couldn't have done a better job in the scene after his wife was killed this movie has explosions gun fighting drama everything a movie needs.
It's gritty and unapologetic with its violence, clearly trying to effectively capture the mob world in which it takes place, and also features what might be Van Damme's best actual acting performance of his entire career.
There's an emotional scene in the movie that is so intense it's almost difficult to watch, so I don't want to hear any more from these people who are constantly whining that Van Damme can't act.
Quan, clearly, is not happy about his daughter living with some white people ("foreign devils," as they were called back when people really were trying to flee from China), so he sets out to find her, killing anyone who gets in his way.At this point, the movie becomes astonishingly violent, even for a Van Damme film.
Quan kills Cynthia, and Ben's grieving her loss is one of the best scenes in the movie, and one of the best examples of Van Damme's acting ability from his entire career.The soundtrack is suitably depressing when it needs to be, such as in the opening credits, which features one of those god-awful moody soap-opera-ish love songs, like the worst of the Bond themes.
Sadly, like the great Bruce Campbell, Van Damme is a little bit of what they call "box office poison," although I would like to suggest that the reason for this is because of the bad press that he gets from people who jump on the bandwagon, uniformly criticizing his acting and his movies without even really knowing what they're talking about.
Wake of Death was the first "Van Damme" movie I'd seen in a couple of years.
and Van Damme is in it!(PS: He's come a long way even since this movie; Watch "Until Death" to see where it's taken him today.).
One word for this movie - 'AWESOME' Quite simply put, Nobody to my knowledge comes close to this guy, Van Damme, hes a breathing legend in his own right , trying dissuading us JCVD fans otherwise.I saw all his movies in the late 80s and then from there went on to watch some of the movies he was in , in the 90s, and personally his presence on the big screen has almost always been memorable ones, in that all his movies are a big part of my 90s experience at the cinemas, or at home watching movies.When I saw this movie I was probably over treated to the slick production, cool style, directing was VERY good too for this kind of movie, lot of directors fail but not this director JCVD astounded me with his gift of on screen martial arts and athleticism, a living testament to how to remain in good shape even in your 40s, and trust me i may be 27 but I'm no where near the level of this guy and i cycle/jog/ play soccer a lot.To confess to being an action movie junkie and then to give this movie a miss would be sin, and your loss - as it has all the right ingredients one would except to see in a top quality spanking good action movie.Its not just the action that this movie excels in depicting on screen, I thought J.
Claude van Damme acted as good as any body prancing around on those over budget less than thrilling modern day big screen flicks in which all you get is a guy prancing around with a few corny lines to say and a weak plot.J. Claude van Damme's character was played exceptionally well, the acting was 10/10 by him, i thought the movie was gripping, but more so extremely entertaining and enjoyable and satisfying to watch on a giant 56 inch plasma TV with my girl friend and a couple of beers beside us - Friday evenings just don't get better than this !Shes no J.
Claude van Damme fan, prefers some guy named Vin Diesel or something, never heard of him but anyway - she too was in confession of admitting that this movie was as good as any action movie she'd seen in the last quarter of the decade or so.Great action scenes, cool story line, good character depiction on screen great acting - all in all a GEM of an action movie, MISS this movie at your own peril !
In this film, Claude Van Damme, (Ben Archer) is starting to burn out from his past method of making a living and decides to leave his present position and just enjoy his sexy good looking wife and son.
I am a big Jean-Claude fan and have almost all his movies.I have to say this now is one of my favorite JCVD movies, in my opinion one of his most dramatical movies, of course we don't normally associate JCVC with drama in the true sense of the word but the plot of this movie and how it developed towards the later part did prove to be pretty dramatic.He is definitely on the right track to rebuilding his movie career, I've really enjoyed all his recent movies, Wake of Death, In Hell.
In Hell was good for a direct to DVD film but it wasn't much of an action movie.
Either way I recommend this flick to Van Damme fans and anyone that wants to watch a good dumb action flick..
The thing about Van Damme is, having appeared in so many action vehicles, why should we believe that he would be able to portray a man whose very life and soul has been ripped out of him through his own personal tragedy.If memory serves, Gary Daniels has tried to do the very same thing, basically to reiterate to us the viewer that as an action star Mr Daniels much like Mr Van Damme can show emotion whilst in the midst of breaking many bones of many many bad men.Unlike Van Damme however, Daniels has failed to convince with his on screen inner turmoil, perhaps we should blame the storyline he finds himself involved in or maybe just maybe, he lacks that certain range to do himself and the movie justice, for every good action film that he made, 'Fist Of The North Star' he tried to act in such disappointments like 'Hawk's Vengeance'.The same of course could be said of Van Damme, for years he has parlayed his talents into showing us just how good his martial arts skills are, however there are grounds for believing that as a man grows older he also grows wiser.Trying something different in term's of both character and story Van Damme didn't quite pull it off, we have become used to watching action do what they do best, namely bust some heads, with 'In Hell' we didn't get that, I was quite ready to see Van Damme suffer six degrees of inner torment, that was not what I was expecting.That said with 'Wake of Death' all the elements were in position.
The first time I heard about this film was when I saw it on the shelf of my rental place and I was thinking "wow another Van Damme camp-fest" in the style of Derailed or the significantly better, though not great, In Hell.
I have never heard about Phillippe Martinez before, but he sure knows what he's doing mixing slow moments of film noir with pretty well directed action scenes and that makes for a solid movie.
Stuff like Street Fighter and Derailed being on the other end of the spectrum with their unrehearsed and choppily acted performances.Van Damme fans take note for he is definitely on the right track if he keeps making movies like this.
Seeing Van Damme try to act seems a bit weird at first but I can tell you that he is a great actor and he is improving in every movie he releases in the future.
not only with action but with more dramatic elements well-executed in films like this Wake of Death.Well, the first time I saw it, i thought it's a little bit more than average action flick with vd's better acting performance.
When I sat down to watch this movie last evening I expected a fairly ordinary direct-to-video (actually it was released to cinema in France) action movie with Jean-Claude Van Damme that would, at best, be somewhat entertaining.
Now the threshold for that wow was of course a bit lower than usual since I was not expecting that much from the movie but still, this is a surprisingly good movie.Sure it has its silly moves and plot holes like most movies of this kind but it is miles away from the usual brain-dead run-of-the-mill action movie.First of all, Jean-Claude Van Dame makes a quite decent, even good, performance.
Personally I am not much for these sentimental cry-scenes but Jean-Claude manages to make these parts well and at the same time he is brutally cool when he is out seeking his revenge.The action in the movie is also very enjoyable whether it is car chases, motorcycle chases or martial art displays.
I thought to myself when I saw it on the new release wall "Another Van Damme movie," but the blockbuster guy mentioned it was pretty good considering
So I checked it out and was pleasantly surprised overall!
It had no comedy whatsoever, but that didn't bother me at all and was actually kind of refreshing, especially being how all Action / Thriller / Horror movies now days are just packed with comedy.The fight scenes were pretty good, although there were a lot of bullets coming out of Damme's gun with very few noticeable reloads, but it's certainly not the first movie to forget to count the bullets.
JVC is doing good and i think he tries to make a comeback with movie like In Hell, Replicant and Wake of Death!
so is the rest of the cast the fights are as exciting as street fighter the movie(which coincidentally starred the great Van Damme) This is a film that shouldn't go straight to video, it should go straight to TV, or the refuse tip!
We'll both be better off.Wake of Death (2004) like my title say's it is very brutal, revenge, action, violence movie!
I love the man and his movies and Wake of Death is not a bad action movie but is not my favorite film from Van Damme.Jean-Claude Van Damme's acting is far beyond what he was able to do with previous material and the film has a nice dark edge to it.
So they kill everyone but the kids run away, when Ben Archer (Jean-Claude Van Damme) finds out about this he takes the matter in his own hands, the justice he delivers it is his own fury of hell.Philip Tan also played in this movie , I saw him in Tango & Cash (1989), Martial Law (1990) and Bloodsport II (1994), I mostly remember him from that movie.
Overall I am giving this movie a 8, I like it,it is my favorite Van Damme movie, it is hell of a better movie than Seagal all shitty direct to video movies and previous shitty movies that Van Damme did before.Wake of Death is a 2004 American/German action film directed by French director, Philippe Martinez and starring Jean-Claude Van Damme.
It contains a few brutal scenes, shows "serious feelings of Van Damme" and of course ...A....C....T...I...O...N. This movie hits hard on face.
I don't desesperate to watch other movies where Jean-Claude Van Damme is acting because I know that he has many fans, therefore there might be something I haven't catch yet.
Van Damme's performance is top notch, thanks to director Martinez who actually had the good sense to give him TIME to act.
Jean Claude Van Damme plays Ben Archer whose wife is killed early in the movie by some Chinese drug dealers and now Ben wants to get even.
Really sorry to see Van Damme ending into movies like this, cause I really used to like his older films, but somehow I understand after seeing some of the Steven Seagal's latest stuff, but this one is still in its own category, BIG TIME..
There's a few good action sequences such as the scene with Van Damme in moto but the ending is bad in every ways.
I saw this movie only because, once I was a fan of Van Damme and the reviews on it were good ( in fact they were better than most of his films, and so is the rating ).
van Damme is a very good actor and we can see that in "wake of death" or in "in hell".
Wake of Death is a very good action movie.
I'm happy that once in awhile, I'm able to rent out a "B" action movie and become pleasantly surprised.This movie is good for Jean Claude Van Damme fans.
Very good performance by Van Damme.....one of his best films in years!.
Van Damme DEFINITELY could've started his way back to the mainstream with this, it's a very good action film showcasing his acting skill (whoa...never thought I'd say that).
The good news is that Van Damme seems to be coming out of his rut, and, with this and IN HELL, making some of the best films of his career.
If you want to see a better recent van Damme movie then I suggest trying out In Hell which I thought was awesome and Replicant was pretty good as well. |
tt0035211 | The Pride of the Yankees | Lou Gehrig (Cooper) is a young Columbia University student whose old-fashioned mother (Elsa Janssen) wants him to study hard and become an engineer. But the young man has a gift for baseball. A sportswriter (Brennan) befriends Gehrig and persuades a scout to come see him play. Before long Gehrig signs with the team he has always revered, the New York Yankees. With the help of his father (Ludwig Stössel), he endeavors to keep his career change a secret from his mother.
Gehrig works his way up through the minor leagues and joins the Yankees. His hero, Babe Ruth, is at first condescending and dismissive of the rookie, but his strong, consistent play wins over Ruth and the rest of the team. Gehrig is soon joining teammates in playing pranks on Ruth on the team train.
During a game at Comiskey Park, Gehrig trips over a stack of bats and is teased by a spectator, Eleanor (Wright), who laughingly calls him "tanglefoot". Later, they are properly introduced, leading to a relationship, and then an engagement. Gehrig's mother, who still hasn't accepted the fact that her son will not be an engineer, does not take this news well; but Gehrig finally stands up to her and marries Eleanor.
The Yankees become the most dominant team in baseball, and Gehrig becomes a fan favorite. His father and fully converted mother attend games and cheer for him. In a re-creation of a famous (and possibly apocryphal) story, Gehrig visits a crippled boy named Billy (Gene Collins) in a hospital. He promises to hit two home runs in a single World Series game in the boy's honor—then fulfills his promise.
Gehrig is now the "Iron Horse", a national hero at the peak of his career with multitudes of fans, many loyal friends, and an adoring wife. Then he begins to notice, with growing alarm, that his strength is slowly ebbing away. Though he continues to play, and extends his consecutive-game streak to a seemingly insurmountable record, his physical condition continues its inexorable decline. One day, in Detroit, he tells Yankees manager Joe McCarthy (Harry Harvey) that he has become a detriment to the team and benches himself. After an examination, a doctor gives him the awful news: Gehrig has a rare, incurable disease, and only a short time to live.
A year later, at Lou Gehrig Day at Yankee Stadium, an older Billy (David Holt) finds Gehrig and shows him that he has made a full recovery, inspired by his hero's example and the two-homer fulfilled promise. Then, as Eleanor weeps softly in the stands, Gehrig addresses the fans: "People all say that I've had a bad break. But today ... today, I consider myself the luckiest man on the face of the Earth." | prank | train | wikipedia | The only reason I don't give this film a perfect 10 is that I think Gary Cooper was a bit too old to be playing Lou Gehrig as a youth.
In fact Gallico wrote himself into the film as sportswriter Sam Blake as played by Walter Brennan.Gary Cooper and Lou Gehrig and Teresa Wright as Eleanor Twitchell Gehrig both received Oscar nominations for their portrayals.
Okay, I won't make any weird noises while we watch it." So I was quiet (except for of course choking up in tears when Cooper delivers Gehrig's legendary "Today, I consider myself to be the luckiest man on the face of the earth" farewell speech).
Gehrig's retirement speech helped immortalize him as a hero and an all-American role model."The Pride of the Yankees" is the blueprint for the sports biopic, and is generally considered to be the best movie about baseball ever made.
She and Cooper had great chemistry on screen, holding her own ground as he towered over her petite 5'3" frame.Walter Brennan, a frequent Cooper co-star and real-life friend, and Babe Ruth as himself are two other co-stars who contribute much to the film.The film traces the rags-to-riches story of Gehrig, as his childhood dream comes true when he's signed to the New York Yankees, and his untimely retirement when he is stricken with the fatal, neurological disease ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis) which was afterwards simply called "Lou Gehrig's Disease".
Teresa Wright had the right flavor as Eleanor, his loving wife.There are fine supporting performances by Elsa Janssen and Ludwig Stossel as his parents.The film is great because it shows a warm, loving family, poor financially but rich in spirit.Rather than concentrate on all his baseball achievements, the film deals with Gehrig, the man and what a great, kindly gentleman that he was.Walter Brennan, who made so many films with Cooper, appears again this time as a sports writer.
He seems to have it in for Lou but succumbs like everyone else during that famous farewell speech.What also made this film a classic was the use of Babe Ruth and other Yankees play themselves.
The story of Lou Gehrig, son of German immigrants, who went on to play first base for the Yankees throughout the 20's and 30's and set the then record of playing in 2,130 straight baseball games until he'd be sidelined forever from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, the disease which now bears his name.
Gary Cooper and Teresa Wright were undeniably believable as Mr and Mrs Lou Gehrig, and I personally choke up each time I see this movie.
Gehrig was often in the shadow of the great Babe Ruth, but was tremendous player in his own right and a far better human being.It's tough to find many nicer movies than this one: a totally inoffensive, sentimental and old- fashioned film about a super-nice guy, played by a popular actor: Gary Cooper.
Teresa Wright plays "Eleanor Twitchell," who becomes Gehrig's wife and Walter Brennan plays sportswriter and friend, "Sam Blake." The real Babe Ruth played himself, which was nice to see.
A touching and emotional experience about the life of late-New York Yankees first baseman Lou Gehrig (played brilliantly by the always excellent Gary Cooper, Oscar-nominated).
Sportswriter Walter Brennan (who was always outstanding as well) becomes the biggest supporter of Gehrig, even though Gehrig seems out-of-place in the big city at times and seems more concerned about baseball than anything else (which bothers some inside of the Yankees circle, mainly due to Babe Ruth's famous antics).
York is another.Gary Cooper does a magnificent job as Henry "Lou" Gehrig despite being two years older, for starters; and, several years older (41 playing someone in their twenties) near the beginning of the movie while at Columbia University.Walter Brennan is brilliant as always!
Besides Babe Ruth, until watching this recently on TCM, I didn't realize that other New York Yankees' teammates of Gehrig's were also in the movie as themselves - Bob Meusel; Bill Dickey; and, some others.
To celebrate the 4th of July, I decided to watch this excellent movie about a great American hero, The Pride of the Yankees, which is an account of the life of the late, great baseball player, Lou Gehrig.
Even though you know the eventual fate of Lou Gehrig you cant help feeling that somehow he would get better.My favorite scene was after his marriage to Eleanor and they were in the car driven by Walter Brennan heading to Yankee Stadium.
The story of baseball legend Lou Gehrig gets the saccharine treatment in this biopic of his life.If you are looking for a realistic depiction of Gehrig's life you'd do right to skip this film,but it is brilliantly made and served the movie-going public what it wanted during the war.
Gary Cooper is magnificent in the title-role and is matched all the way by Teresa Wright as his wife.Wright was perhaps one of the best unsung actresses of the forties.Gehrig's legendary teammate Babe Ruth plays himself,which he does very well.There's competent support by Walter Brennan and Dan Duryea as sportswriters.As Gehrig's parents Ludwig Stossel and Elsa Janssen were a bit annoying.The highlight of the movie is Cooper's performance of Gehrig's farewell speech at the time he was suffering from the disease, that bears his name,which killed him.
So well before the end you know there is something special in this man's life, maybe something to learn from or emulate.At the same time, there are some obvious movie-making tricks at work here, some corny side characters, some simplifications, and some filler (like the two dance numbers, which get a big credit in the titles but which are pretty lame, even if you like the music of the period as much as I do).
Gary Cooper is Lou Gehrig in "The Pride of the Yankees," a 1942 film also starring Teresa Wright, Babe Ruth, Walter Brennan and Dan Duryea.
One nice, accurate touch - the bracelet Lou gives to Eleanor is the actual bracelet that Mrs. Gehrig received from her husband, and she lent it to the film.Despite criticisms, the film gives us the essence of Lou Gehrig, in large part thanks to the script by Paul Gallico (the Brennan character), the direction by Sam Wood, and the performance of Gary Cooper.
She was actually the fourth actress to be nominated twice in the same Oscar season, following Janet Gaynor, Norma Shearer and Greta Garbo, and was succeeded four decades later by Jessica Lange, Sigourney Weaver, Holly Hunter and Emma Thompson (Garbo, Weaver and Thompson all failed to take home the statuette in those years.) Although Gehrig saw many of his records broken, including the "iron man" record of 2,130 consecutive games, nobody has yet to beat Teresa's three-peat of Oscar nominations at the beginning of a film career, which is a bit of an "iron woman" mark to rival Lou Gehrig's once "unbreakable" record.
The movie balances Gehrig's athletic career with his personal life, focusing more on his relationships with his mother and his wife and his humble approach to fame, and less on his numerous achievements on the field.Babe Ruth got most of the publicity, but Lou Gehrig was an all-time great talent in his own right.
"The Pride of the Yankees" was a great film about one of the greatest baseball players of all-time who's life and career ended much too early.
Lou Gehrig's life and struggles with his muscular disease are told very well in this film and Gary Cooper, one of the greatest actors in Hollywood history, plays the character of Gehrig perfectly.
In one of his best roles, Gary Cooper portrays Lou Gehrig, the famous Yankee who played in 2,130 straight games.
The supporting cast includes Theresa Wright as Lou's lovely wife Eleanor and Walter Brennan, a co-star in so many Cooper films, as the local sports writer.
Check out Ray Liotta's ungainly effort as Shoeless Joe Jackson in "Field of Dreams," or Tom Beringer's wimpish swings in "Major League," or almost all of the supporting cast of New York Knights in "The Natural." Kevin Costner seems the only actor who looks like he's actually played some ball in his life, and the crucial athletic realism in any of his sports films is heightened because of it.
Cooper is probably best known for his memorable portrayals of Marshall Kane and other tough heroes, but he might be even better playing a man like Gehrig who keeps his great strength under complete restraint.Gehrig seems to be one of the very few sports legends whose lives are wholly admirable, or at least nearly so.
Even for the many baseball fans who have a hard time being enthusiastic about Yankee successes, Gehrig is a character who is easy to root for.Cooper seems very natural in the role, both in the way he handles Gehrig's rise to fame and in Gehrig's memorable farewell speech.
Even though there were casting problems in all the movies made about them, the quality of "Pride of the Yankees" and of "A Love Affair: The Eleanor and Lou Gehrig Story" is superb on both counts.
Cooper plays Gehrig as a rightie (take note of how he signs everything); a sportswriter (?), not his wife or parents are with Lou when he finds out he's dying (what an ego Gallico had); and Babe Ruth makes sure he's in the frame at the start of Gehrig's final address to the fans at Yankee Stadium (what a jerk!).
This is a biopic of famed baseball player Lou Gehrig (Gary Cooper) from his working class roots to his famous Luckiest Man speech following his disability from ALS.
Obviously you don't make a movie about baseball legend Lou Gehrig, played by Hollywood legend Gary Cooper, in 1942 when America was the latecomer of the then-roaring Worldwide conflict without the best intentions of the world.The film even opens with a disclaimer reminding us of the quiet heroism showcased by the "Iron Horse", the New York Yankees first baseman who achieved one of the greatest legacies of the history of baseball (with more than 2000 consecutive games) and died prematurely from a rare condition he gave his name to.
Cooper does make the scene work and it's genuinely sad (it was the original speech that prompted Samuel Goldwin to green light the project), this is an outcome that could have worked better with the proper set-up."The Pride of the Yankees" deals more with the romantic and domestic life of Lou Gehrig than any other element and what saves it from sheer dreadfulness stands in two names: Teresa Wright.
The Pride of the Yankees is an old fashioned biopic of Lou Gehrig, the legendary baseball player played by Gary Cooper.
As a young man working his way through school as a waiter, studying to become an engineer, Lou (Gary Cooper), a baseball athlete for Columbia University, is discovered by sportswriter, Sam Blake (Walter Brennan), who eventually signs him as player for the New York Yankees.
As time progresses with Blake and Hank Hannerman (Dan Duryea) watching and reporting first baseman Gehrig making baseball history from the press box, "The Iron Man" as he would be called, would not only rank along with Babe Ruth (Babe Ruth) as one of the greatest sports figures, but become a true pride of the Yankees.
All this would change after Lou faces something that would put an end to his powerful sixteen year career.In one of the finest sports movies ever made, THE PRIDE OF THE YANKEES, became producer Samuel Goldwyn's only biographical film, and one of his most admired.
Gary Cooper, having already won his Academy Award as Best Actor playing SERGEANT YORK (Warner Brothers, 1941), an American war hero, gets another home run here by the Academy once again for his portrayal of an American sports hero, Lou Gehrig.
There's also female vocalist on platform singing the classic Irving Berlin tune, "Always," that to become the Gehrig's personal love songAside from Teresa Wright's sensitive portrayal during its second half, and Walter Brennan, sporting glasses and mustache, as the sports writing friend, no scene comes close to Cooper's heartfelt closing speech on that historic Tuesday, July 4th, 1939, day at Yankee Stadium that would not only stay in memory long after the film is over, but prove his Lou Gehrig to be "the luckiest man on the face of the earth."Even if THE PRIDE OF THE YANKEES strays from the truth at times, it's every sports buff's dream to actually get to see such baseball legends of the past portraying themselves, Bill Dickey, Mark Koenig and Robert Meusel.
Gary Cooper plays New York Yankees star first baseman Lou Gehrig, whose career and life were cut short by a disease that now carries Gehrig's name.
Cooper gives a great performance (everyone thinks he won the Oscar for this _ he didn't, he took home the gold for "Sergeant York, and again for "High Noon"") and appearances by real-life ballplayers (pictured: Cooper with Babe Ruth, Gehrig's former teammate, during filming) give the picture a feel of authenticity.
Of course, I would never say that The Pride Of The Yankees was the worst movie ever made about the sport of Baseball, but, then again, I'd definitely never admit that it was the best, either.Yes. I do fully realize (much to my dismay) that this 1942 picture was clearly intended to be MGM's respectful homage to honour one of baseball's greatest and beloved stars, Lou Gehrig (who sadly died only one year before this film's release) - But, the thing is, I personally think that the revered memory of an idolized man like Gehrig certainly deserved so much better than the likes of this less-than-satisfying "rush job".One of this film's biggest and most detrimental deficits was the casting of one of Hollywood's dreariest and utterly non-charismatic actors of the 30s & 40s, Gary Cooper.Not only was Cooper (at 42) way too old for the part of playing a man 15 years his junior, but I also found Cooper to be such a totally forgettable non-entity in his part as Gehrig that it teetered on the very edge of being downright insulting and disrespectful.Gary Cooper clearly didn't have the capacity to bring any reasonable depth or life to his floundering character.
Gary Cooper is superb as Lou Gehrig, and is matched only by Teresa Wright's portrayal of his loving spouse, you don't have to be a baseball fan to be moved by this true story..
The movie tells the life story of a Yankees legend, Lou Gehrig who is considered to be one of the greatest first basemen of all time.
Gary Cooper gives a solid performance as Lou Gehrig and Teresa Wright lights up the screen as his wife.
So I was only slightly aware if I'm being honest of the Lou Gehrig story, the great New York Yankees batsman and fielder who made a record number of consecutive appearances before being stuck down by the AFS disease which curtailed his life at only 37 years old and which still bears his name in the States.With Gehrig being, by all accounts a modest, family man and dedicated team player, Gary Cooper was probably a natural choice to play him on screen.
The Pride of the Yankees' broad title suggests an all-encompassing look, or even history, into the renowned franchise, but its focus, while broad and far-reaching, profiles a wonderful life, and the film itself features tremendously engaging performances to compliment its story.Starring: Gary Cooper, Teresa Wright, Babe Ruth, Elsa Janssen, and Ludwig Stössel.
Everyone Loved Lou Gehrig, the Deservedly Famous Yankee First Baseman that was Cut Down in His Prime by a Devastating, Debilitating Disease, and This is a Fitting and Loving Tribute to a Great Baseball Player Who was Something Even More Difficult and Rare, a Great Man.So, Yes it's a Love Story, but it Wasn't Made "For the Love of the Game".
Even Yankee Haters Cannot Hate Lou. He Did His Job with Pride and No Prejudice, Obeyed the Rules, Unlike His Teammate Babe Ruth (played in the Film by The Babe Himself), Not Just the Rules of Baseball but the Rules of Life.Gary Cooper, it is Well Documented, Couldn't Hit the Broadside of a Barn and Was a Terrible Athlete, but Manages to Make Up for it by with an Endearing Performance.
The Movie has Added Bona Fides Like a Matching Great Role by Teresa Wright as Lou's Wife and a Memorable Walter Brennan as Gehrig's Sport's Writer Friend.A Few Real-Life Yankees Show Up for an Interesting Inclusion as Does the Real-Life Yankee Stadium.
Gary Cooper becomes Lou Gehrig in one of the best sports movies..
This movie is essentially a biography of Lou Gehrig, who was known mainly for his great work ethic, and his talent as a hitter, which resulted in his record 2130 consecutive games with the Yankees from 1923 through 1939.
Lou Gehrig and Babe Ruth in the same movie, what a treat for baseball fans!
But he still played on many World Series teams.The baseball part of the movie is really secondary as the purpose is to present the love story between Lou and Eleanor (Teresa Wright), his beloved and understanding wife.
Cooper and Teresa Wright were unsurpassable as Lou and Eleanor Gehrig and after a while the baseball element was incidental to their enduring love.
Lou Gehrig had been dead less than two years when The Samuel Goldwyn Company produced a biographical account of the New York Yankees' first baseman's life with Gary Cooper cast as 'the Iron Man.' "Kings Row" director Sam Wood and "It's A Wonderful Life" scenarist Jo Swerling with "Citizen Kane" scribe Herman J.
Some big examples are how Lou Gehrig (Gary Cooper) played the game.
The Life of Lou. Young Lou Gehrig (Gary Cooper) wants to play baseball, but his mom wants him to become an engineer like uncle Otto. |
tt0062407 | Two for the Road | Now a successful and wealthy architect, Mark Wallace (Albert Finney) and his wife Joanna (Jo) Wallace (Audrey Hepburn) fly their white 1965 Mercedes 230SL roadster to Northern France in order to drive to Saint-Tropez to celebrate the completion of a building project for a client, Maurice. Tensions between the couple are evident, and as they journey south they both remember and discuss several past journeys along the same road.
The earliest memory is their first meeting on a ferry crossing in 1954, when Mark was travelling alone and Joanna was part of a girls' choir. They meet again when Joanna's choir bus goes off the road and Mark helps get them back on the road. When the other girls get chickenpox, Joanna and Mark unexpectedly wind up hitchhiking south together.
The next story involves the two newlyweds travelling with Mark's ex-girlfriend Cathy Manchester (Eleanor Bron), her husband (William Daniels) and daughter Ruth 'Ruthie' (Gabrielle Middleton) from the USA. Ruthie is not given any limits, and her behaviour frustrates Mark and Jo. Eventually Ruthie reveals the unkind descriptions of Joanna her parents have made in private. At this point Mark and Joanna decide to travel alone.
One scene depicts Mark and Joanna dining in a restaurant during a particularly strained period in their marriage. They are not speaking at all. Joanna looks around the restaurant and asks Mark, "What kind of people can sit there without a word to say to each other?" Mark replies, quite sullenly, "Married people!"
Next the pair are seen driving an MG which begins to have exhaust troubles, finally catching on fire. On this journey Joanna announces that she is pregnant. They also meet the wealthy Maurice Dalbret (Claude Dauphin) and his wife Françoise (Nadia Gray). Maurice becomes a generous but demanding client for Mark.
The next story shows them travelling with their young daughter Caroline (Kathy Chelimsky).
In another episode, Mark is travelling alone and has a fling with another motorist. The fling is shown to be fleeting and unserious in nature. Later, Joanna has an affair with Françoise's brother David (Georges Descrières), which is portrayed as much more serious than Mark's and threatens to end the marriage. However, while Joanna dines with David, they witness a couple eating together without saying a word. David asks offhandedly, "What kind of people can sit there without a word to say to each other?" Joanna replies excitedly, "Married people!" and, realizing she misses Mark despite their faded passion, runs back to him.
At the end of the film, the Wallaces manage to end their long-term relationship to Maurice and find a new client in Rome. They honestly analyse the fears and insecurities which have plagued them throughout the film. Finally, they cross the border from France into Italy. This is new ground for them as well as for the audience, signalling a move beyond the old issues into a more mature future. | flashback | train | wikipedia | From the opening notes of Henry Mancini's evocative score (personally I think it's his best work) to the end where the main characters drive off into Italy after some verbal sparring, this movie still provides the same pleasure it did when I first saw it on TV in the early seventies.
"Two for the Road" is a time capsule of Carnaby Street fashion and French new wave scene juxtaposition, but it remains timeless in its emotionally piercing view of marriage and in the beguiling presence of Audrey Hepburn.
His dialogue is sharp and insightful, as he has the main characters often repeat one another for the sake of getting a different meaning from the same line of dialogue.As Joanna and Mark Wallace, Hepburn and Albert Finney get to live out more than a decade in their characters' lives from initial meeting to near-divorce.
The way that Mark and Joanna's relationship is displayed through the time changes is excellent, and while you'd think that keeping track of the time would be difficult, it's actually quite simple if you look at the hair and the attitudes of the couple.
you actually see her having fun in this picture.She plays Joanna Wallace who with her husband played beautifully by Albert Finney reflect on the good times and the bad times of their twelve-year marriage.This film is must see because it goes beyond the happy ending and into actually imitating life where marriage is not always perfect.
For this time of filmmaking it must have been extremely experimental doing a movie this way.There are times where Finney and Hepburn are unlikeable but even then it's hard not to root for this couple to somehow resolve their long term marriage.
He also gets excellent performances from all his actors, especially Audrey Hepburn and Albert Finney.At the end we appreciate this marriage so much more because we've seen all the work it has taken and learn that "bitch" and "bastard" can really be terms of endearment..
Eight more years would pass until she finally agreed to do 'Robin and Marian." Well Audrey Hepburn is my all-time favorite movie star.
If you're going to draw your career to a close, and I'm not sure she realized this was it, no actress could do better than 'Two for the Road,' and 'Wait Until Dark." Audrey was such a natural screen presence, and with 'Two for the Road,' she had a wonderfullyhandsome leading man in Albert Finney (there were strong rumors of a relationship during this film), and completely at ease with a director she had successfully worked with in the past--Stanley Donen.
The chemistry she has with Albert Finney is so wonderful, thanks mostly to the fact that for a rare time in her career she was given a male love interest who was close to her own age (Finney was actually 7 years YOUNGER than Hepburn).
As they journey through France they discuss and recall several earlier trips along the same route, especially those in the earlier days of their marriage when their relationship was a happier one.Trying to explain the plot any further would be difficult because the story is told in an extreme non-linear fashion, abruptly switching without warning between scenes set in the present and those set in the past and mingling the events of one journey with those of another.
The only way in which director Stanley Donen and scriptwriter Frederic Raphael attempt to maintain continuity is, at each stage of the journey, to juxtapose scenes of the present day with scenes set in the same geographical area during previous journeys.I have been a great fan of Audrey Hepburn ever since I fell in love with her watching "Breakfast at Tiffany's" as a teenager, but even I have to admit that "Two for the Road" is both one of her weaker films and one of her weaker performances.
Had Audrey been able to hint at a darker side to Joanna's personality, Mark's disillusionment with married life might have been more understandable, but Joanna comes across as just as totally lovable as every other Hepburn heroine from Sabrina to Suzy in "Wait Until Dark"- and, even though Audrey was 38 when she made the film, just as beautiful.Albert Finney, by contrast, has no difficulty in playing a man whose wife is tired of him; the problem here is that his Mark is so charmless and arrogant that it is difficult to understand why Joanna should have fallen for him in the first place, or why their marriage should have lasted so long.
Finney, incidentally, was seven years younger than Hepburn, which must have made a refreshing change for an actress who spent much of the earlier part of her career playing the love-interest to men old enough to be her father (Bogart, Fonda, Astaire, Harrison) or nearly so (Peck).As I said, the film is officially a comedy, and there are indeed some genuinely comic moments, ranging from the slapstick to the satirical.
The film retells the story of a marriage (whose participants are Audrey Hepburn and Albert Finney) in a somewhat random order, telling the stories of their various vacations, from when they meet to when other lovers come between them.
The acting is alright, and the charm of the Audrey Hepburn and Albert Finney keep this movie watchable, but overall it is sub-par stuff..
I was looking forward to this film.Audrey Hepburn is just Audrey Hepburn, the great Albert Finney was returning to films at that time known the world over as the star of 'Tom Jones'.Finney hadn't done a film for two years (since the weird and disappointing Night Must Fall); it seemed that he was waiting for a script good enough to lure him away from the theatre where his heart really lay.So we've got Hepburn, a great charismatic star; Finney, a great actor; the assumption of a good script and on top of that, the two had an affair during the making of the film and people have often talked about the chemistry between the two of them.Many romantic films are spoiled by a lack of chemistry between the stars, however Bogart and Bacall had a chemistry mirroring their off-screen affair that became legendary.
Despite rumours that for Hepburn their affair was much more than just a fling, there is absolutely no chemistry at all between her and Albert Finney.However, the film's biggest flaw is the God-awful, smart arse, gimmicky script that is so dated it's untrue.This was obviously made at a time when unimaginative dialogue where one character offers a slight variation on what the other character has just said was clearly seen as sharp and witty.Example:Finney (on seeing a miserable couple): That's marriage for you.Hepburn: That's marriage for them.Finney: That's marriage full stop.In a word,...
I didn't care for it when I originally saw it, and there as nothing in viewing again to change my opinion about the film.The the best aspect then was the film's locations/scenery - and today that remains true; but now it is probably better, since the scenery is still interesting, and has an added "nostalgic/period" component as well.Sorry, but Audrey Hepburn was never the favorite of mine she was for most others.
TWO FOR THE ROAD is an authentic road movie, with opening credits of miscellaneous traffic signs bode the marital turbulence of a couple, the architect Mark Wallace (Finney) and his wife Joanna (Hepburn), who has been married for twelve years, and through the haphazard narrative jump-cuts, as the title suggests, the film presents them in a continuously mobile fashion, mostly in flashbacks, whether they are hitchhiking, carpooling with another married couple (including a fast-forwarding sight-seeing in Chantilly), or later they can afford to travel on their own, their trips in the magnificent European land evokes an evident whiff of lyricism intermingled with their personal romances and crises.
Directed by the legendary Stanley Donen, and enabled by Frederic Raphael's wickedly astringent script, with golden maxim like "Marriage is when a woman asks a man to take off his pajamas because she wants to send it to the laundry." or "I still want a child, I just don't want that child."; and more strikingly, Donen discards the traditional linear account, instead he disarrays the over-one-decade time-span with sharp editing to hop erratically onto their various en route encounters and happenings, the film essays a full spectrum appraisal of what could happen during a relationship, from the budding romance, the unrestrained passion, the blithe squabbling alters into the bitter snide, the fatigue of bringing up a child, the extramarital affairs and finally spilling the beans of their dissatisfactions with blatant betrayal.
TWO FOR THE ROAD makes good use of the irrevocable fluidity of road-trip as a metaphor of one's tumultuous marriage journey, and it also shows audience a different Audrey Hepburn under the same dignified decorum, another good reason that the film should not be obliterated from a younger age group..
On the plus side: Jackie Bisset in one of her earliest roles, so gorgeous that she makes the enchanting Audrey look like a scare-crow plus more costume changes per minute of screen time than have ever been tracked by a leading lady in a major feature film.
Two For The Road was the last and least of the films that Audrey Hepburn did with Stanley Donen.
It's a matter of taste, but I don't think it is anywhere as good as either Funny Face or Charade.The film is the story of the marriage of Albert Finney and Audrey Hepburn told in jigsaw puzzle style, disjointed at different select times of their marriage and what they go through.
Workaholic architect Mark Wallace (Albert Finney) and his wife Jo (Audrey Hepburn) are unhappily married.
I would hardly call the status of Hepburn and Finney's relationship in the end as love.The film is honest and difficult for some to watch and, I think, very realistic, but Audrey Hepburn love story it is not!.
Two great performers here show how it's done: they make it look easy, but this film's intelligent, bittersweet script and its inventive, flawless interplay among flashbacks and and flash-forwards could not have been easy for Hepburn and Finney to have managed; kudos to Donen for his masterful direction.
And it's mawkish too, with a reassuring happy end (I imagine that at that time a big studio like Fox didn't want to co-produce a movie about marriage problems without a good ending...) "Two for the road", compared to contemporary films, shows also much modesty in the dialogues -hints to sexual problems are very very shy...!
The story is a good one and the lead characters are played by two of the great actors.This is a somewhat unusual film for Audrey Hepburn who we are use to seeing not make mistakes and always being or seeming to be so happy.
But through their trips ( the movie is shown in a series of road trips over ten years) we learn a lot about their characters, and love as it is in real life.
After all her great movies in the 50's, then Breakfast at Tiffanys, Charade, and My Fair Lady, she was indeed on top.But I am not one of them, and, although I like the three aforementioned films, I have no undying devotion to Ms. Hepburn.So I watch this film with an arm's length perspective and the film is weak, and Audrey Hepburn is terribly miscast-she was 37 years old at the time of the filming, and in some scenes is expected to play a college-girl.
Despite two agreeable stars (Audrey Hepburn and Albert Finney) and Christopher Challis' attractive location shooting, this is actually a very slight if occasionally witty romantic comedy-drama (courtesy of screenwriter Frederic Raphael) tricked out by fashionably flashy direction.
It is also the most adult-ish film of hers, because it deals with so many issues about marriage.Audrey was rumoured to have an affair with Albert Finney during the making of this movie, and I think maybe it shows because their on screen chemistry is pretty good.
Better still, Albert Finney and Audrey Hepburn are in their prime and in love for real when they made this.
Was made around the time when movies started changing for the (much) better.Finney has a hilarious line when he says: "Women always try to pigeon-hole you; but the only thing that fits into a pigeon-hole is a pigeon." Audrey Hepburn is her usual dietary self, even though in one scene, quite ironically, she hollers for food: "I'm so hungry I could eat a horse!" she exclaims, adding something about wanting a hamburger.
Film basically deconstructs in non-linear fashion the relationship between Joanna (Hepburn) and Mark Wallace (Finney).
Joanna (Audrey Hepburn) and Mark Wallace (Albert Finney) have been married for ten years but are now having troubles.
The story is still alive and doesn't change, because men are still men and women are still women.What I want to say is that this film is a real exercise of love understanding and how problems can be solved when love exists.Sometimes bitter, always sincere and perfectly performances, (great Audrey and an even better Albert Finney), makes believe in art inmortality..
Audrey Hepburn and Albert Finney are a married couple contemplating their life together in "Two for the Road," a 1967 film directed by Stanley Donen.
Hepburn and Finney are Joanna and Mark Wallace who remember the various road trips they've taken together and see them as signposts for their marriage - when they first met, first fell in love, dissatisfaction, infidelity, and disintegration.
The assorted car trips are shown as colliding with one another - Joanna and Mark in a car arguing in the present; then suddenly on a trip with the Manchesters (William Daniels and Eleanor Bron) and their hideous bad seed daughter mid-marriage; then Finney flirting with a young woman (Jacqueline Bisset, in her film debut) as he and Joanna ride on a bus in earlier days after their car breaks down.This is an often humorous and poignant story of two people who love each other but after so many years of hurts, of ups and downs, wonder if it's worth going on together.
It's rare to see a good film like that, a great love story, a 1967 movie that could be a blockbuster right now.
I always liked Stanley Donen-Audrey Hepburn movies, Charade, Funny Face.
Intentionally presented in fast forward and rewind modes to previous time-frame of situations/memories of various eventful moments and occasions in their relationship.These episodes were all somehow linked by specific cars/vehicle models the characters were in and the attire/fashion they were wearing, providing clues and suggesting the time period in their life together.The story is about Mark (Albert Finney) and Joanna (Audrey Hepburn), their marriage, love, and courtship essentially showing how a married couple could have been or not so.Music score was by Henry Mancini (`Breakfast At Tiffany's' -- Moon River).
A couple (Albert Finney and Audrey Hepburn) in the south of France non-sequentially spin down the highways of infidelity in their troubled ten-year marriage.Apparently the story is that Audrey Hepburn was either going to get an Oscar nomination for this film or for her work in "Wait Until Dark", and it went to the latter.
Albert Finney and Audrey Hepburn are transcendent as Mark and Joanna.
Solid, incisive, non-linear look at the genesis, progression, stagnation and dissolution of a relationship; invariably it's going to get a bit plodding and repetitive, so the film relies on the chops and chemistry of the always-quality Albert Finney and the always-lovely Audrey Hepburn, and for the most part, they deliver.
An American couple, played to perfection by Eleanor Bron and William Daniels, and their daughter, Ruthie, who travel with the Mark and Joanna on one trip, are the film's comedy relief.
"Two for the Road" was the third film that Stanley Donen directed Audrey Hepburn.
It helps she and her co-star, Albert Finney, seem to be having the time of their lives.Joanna and Mark meet on the road while vacationing in France.
Needless to say, they prove to be too much for Joanna and Mark.Audrey Hepburn and Albert Finney show an easy chemistry in all their scenes.
I guess I really am a sentimental guy down deep.The movie is about the love life and marriage of Audrey Hepburn and Albert Finney.
This is probably Audrey Hepburn's best performance, and one of Albert Finney's greatest.The film balances however on maintaining a balance between the earlier and later scenes and this duty falls mainly upon the director and the writer.
Wonderful memories of a young and virile Albert Finney and the late Audrey Hepburn as well.This is one film where the use of flashbacks does not work.
Two For The Road is directed by Stanley Donen and stars Albert Finney, Audrey Hepburn and Eleanor Bron.
Eventually they fall in love and begin a relationship and get married.This film is a funny and at times poignant and moving look at the highs and lows of marriage.
Audrey Hepburn and Albert Finney play a couple who essentially argue and love each other constantly through a two-hour road trip film through their lives and the French countryside.
It stars Albert Finney and Audrey Hepburn.Written by Frederic Raphael, the story is told in a non-linear fashion, with scenes from the latter stages of the relationship put together with those from its beginning, often leaving the viewer to interpret what has intervened, which is sometimes revealed in later scenes.It was directed by Stanley Donen.
This is one of the most enduring films of all-time.Despite its initial release back in 1967,many viewers will still find this movie a pleasure to watch primarily due to the great chemistry between Audrey Hepburn,which is considered to be probably one of her most realistic and resonant screen roles and Albert Finney.
Audrey Hepburn, Albert Finney, Eleanor Bron and William Daniels do their best.In viewing the movie recently I felt it may have seemed dated which is not true of Donen's other movies. |
tt0029087 | Knight Without Armour | Englishman A. J. Fothergill (Robert Donat) is recruited by Colonel Forrester (Laurence Hanray) to spy on Russia for the British government because he can speak the language fluently. As "Peter Ouranoff", he infiltrates a revolutionary group led by Axelstein (Basil Gill). The radicals try to blow up General Gregor Vladinoff (Herbert Lomas), the father of Alexandra (Marlene Dietrich). When the attempt fails, the would-be assassin is shot, but manages to reach Peter's apartment, where he dies. For his inadvertent involvement, Peter is sent to Siberia.
World War I makes Alexandra a widow and brings the Bolsheviks to power, freeing Peter and Axelstein. When the Russian Civil War breaks out, Alexandra is arrested for being an aristocrat, and Peter is assigned by now-Commissar Axelstein to take her to Petrograd to stand trial. However, Peter instead takes her to the safety of the White Army. Their relief is short-lived; the Red Army defeats the White the next day, and Alexandra is taken captive once more. Peter steals a commission as a commissar of prisons from a drunk and uses the document to free her. The two, now deeply in love, flee into the forest. Later, they catch a train.
At a railway station, the countess is identified by one Communist official, but Commissar Poushkoff (John Clements), an overly sensitive young man, is entranced by Alexandra's beauty. Insisting that her identity be verified, he arranges to take her and Fothergill to Samara. Along the way, they become good friends, but Poushkoff grows overwrought after drinking too much brandy with dinner aboard the train. He then allows the couple to escape at a stop, committing suicide to provide a diversion.
The lovers board a barge travelling down the Volga River. Alexandra becomes seriously ill. When Peter goes for a doctor, he is arrested by the Whites for not having papers. Meanwhile, a Red Cross doctor finds Alexandra and takes her for treatment. About to be executed, Peter makes a break for it and catches the Red Cross train transporting Alexandra out of Russia. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0103486 | Mann & Machine | Created by Dick Wolf and Robert De Laurentis, the series starred Yancy Butler as Sgt. Eve Edison, a beautiful police officer who is also a sophisticated gynoid robot capable of learning and emotion. She is partnered with Det. Bobby Mann (David Andrews), a human officer who holds disdain for robots. Rounding out the regular cast was S. Epatha Merkerson as Capt. Claghorn, Mann and Edison's superior officer.
The series focused on Mann and Edison's criminal investigations in a Los Angeles of the "near future"—sometime around the beginning of the 21st century though the exact year is never stated. An ongoing subplot of the series focused on Eve's continuing education about what makes humans tick, and her ever-growing capacity for emotion, highlighted by the penultimate episode "Billion Dollar Baby" in which Eve is placed in charge of caring for an infant, activating unexpected maternal feelings.
Although Butler received good reviews for her performance in one of her first major roles, the series was criticized heavily, with many comparing it to a failed 1970s comedy series with a similar premise, Holmes & Yo-Yo. The series was pulled from NBC's schedule after only four episodes. The remaining five were aired in a burnoff as summertime filler. | sci-fi | train | wikipedia | Canceled too early.
I remember watching this back in the early 1990's when, aside from the Star Trek franchise, there was very little in good sci-fi on TV.
This show had some good potential that, unfortunately, never got explored.
The vision of the future was well done (one of the better semi-dystopian interpretations on TV since Max Headroom), and the ongoing chemistry between the two leads was pretty good.
Never intended to be "the bionic woman" that one reviewer labeled it, Yancy Butler does well as the new-model robot/android, with the right touch of unintentional sexuality in a character just learning the nuances of actual human interactions (esp.
between the sexes).
Plus, they didn't bring on all of her artificial abilities all at once, instead developing them - and the relationship between the two leads - as they went along.
(The scene where she takes out her eyes, and her partner's reaction, comes to mind as an example.) Would it have survived if they'd given it the full season to blossom?
In the TV environment of the day, probably not, but it probably would have fared better today on the cable landscape..
Ahead of it's time......Time for another try?.
Being of the generation that was too young to have watched the Bionic Woman, I was just getting into SF when Mann & Machine came around..
*Wow* what a great show.
Until Mann & Machine, the only android character on TV that I was accustomed to was Data from Star Trek and even then as young teen, I was absolutely fascinated by his journey to and among humanity.
Mann and Machine neatly addressed my android fascination by following Eve in her learning of humanity, and to me this was by far the most interesting part of the series.
Today's equivalent (albeit in a different setting) might be Kyle XY.
I think that the cop show genre worked well, as did added that addicting little "will they or won't they" that seems to be present in so many cop series that have male and female partners.
Since Mann & Machine, technology has made huge advances (check out the Actroid Robot on YouTube), and Sci Fi is becoming more mainstream.
I think that this concept still has a lot of potential and hope that someone out there decides to give this idea another go, it could do really well..
Great Show.
Wonderful early 90s show.Full of life and with great performances.It's really too bad that NBC changed its mind about its commitment to Dick Wolf at that time and dumped this show and South Beach into the Summer so they could kill them without really giving them a chance.
Both shows were extremely well-made and would have been big hits if they had been given any support by NBC.Later Law and Order's ratings picked up and dick Wolf became again their knight in shining armor.It's also too bad for Yancy Butler who ended up doing awful movies and shows like Witchblade, and for David Andrews who is only now seeing a well-deserved career revival..
Excellent, great great sci-fi show I want to find a DVD.
Best show of the early 1990s to manage cancel the alarm.
Who episode Yancy Butler was cool..
Mann & Machine.
In the future a cop gets a beautiful female robot as his partner.
this is an experimental project.
Detective Mann knows he is being monitored, so he has to be careful, If she were a real woman and they were not being monitored, he would fall head over heels in love with her.
However he fears he would look foolish if he showed his true feelings for her.
The audience was not fascinated with this and the show got poor ratings..
She-Bo-Cop. Yancy Butler as the Bionic Woman?
The star of Switchblade played a robotic woman of the future who fought off the bad guys...
Mann & Machine was a filler show that only lasted about 9 episodes.
I remember getting very excited about this show coming on (as I LOVED the Bionic Woman) but this one just couldn't measure up.
It was actually yesterday (March 1, 2004) that I came across the pilot episode that I taped back in 1992...after watching it (12 years later) I see a lot of the hit show "Alias" & the motion picture "Laura Croft" mixed in it.
Still, it wasn't a great show, but maybe in 2016 (12 years from now) I will watch again & give it another shot!
Wish to know info about the pilot, whether or not it had the same title..
Any time I have seen a TV series, especially one like "Mann & Machine," which I found to have some of the best irony subplots of any movie or TV series, I find out what was used as a pilot for that TV series.
By viewing the pilot, I find myself even more interested in the series because things are generally revealed about the plot, or the characters or something intrinsic, that makes me want to see how it plays out in the upcoming episodes.I have been trying to corroborate who the actors were in the pilot, and to find out the name of the pilot, which I think was a made-for-TV movie, but have had no success.
I recall Craig Stevens and Gary (of Alien Nation TV series fame) as two of the main actors in the pilot.
For me, this pilot allowed me to enjoy the TV series more.
Does anyone recall the name of the movie? |
tt0455805 | Then She Found Me | Deeply religious April Epner, a 39-year-old Brooklyn elementary school teacher, finds her life derailed by a series of events over which she has no control. Her husband Ben abruptly leaves her, her abrasive adoptive mother Trudy passes away the following day, and shortly after she is contacted by Alan, a representative of Bernice Graves, the flamboyant host of a local talk show, who introduces herself as her biological mother.
Although intrigued by Bernice's claim that she was fathered by Steve McQueen, April initially resists her efforts to forge a relationship. At the same time, she finds herself attracted to Frank, the divorced father of one of her students, as the two get to know each other via lengthy telephone conversations. For their first date he escorts her to a party at Bernice's apartment.
Complications arise when April discovers she is pregnant, the result of a quick and clumsy coupling with Ben on the kitchen floor just before he left her. April has longed to have a child all her life and is delighted with the news, but is confused and upset by Ben's sudden return, Frank's hasty departure (when he discovers April and Ben had a "quickie" after visiting the gynecologist), and Bernice's insistent attempts to create a bond between them. Not helping the situation is the discovery Bernice voluntarily put her up for adoption a full year after her birth and not three days later at the urging of her parents, according to the scenario she initially presented. When April miscarries, her brother Freddy tries to counsel her, but ultimately she must rely on her deep-rooted faith to deal with the betrayals she has suffered not only at the hands of those she trusted but by the God she worships as well. Eventually she offers reconciliation and forgiveness to Bernice, if Bernice will agree to "buy" a baby for her. Bernice agrees, and then Frank forgives April when she goes to him to apologize for her behavior. Later, the ending shows that April could not have the baby which Bernice paid for, so she adopted a little Chinese girl. | romantic | train | wikipedia | The talent here is undeniable: Helen Hunt, Colin Firth, Matthew Broderick, Bette Midler.
You're not thinking about April Epner, you're thinking, "Hmm
how could Helen Hunt change her look?" Similarly, Bette Midler is never convincing as the character she is playing.
This film ignored all of those real questions and just plopped Colin Firth, the perfect man, and Bette Midler, STAR, in as phony, bogus attempts to stir up some kind of a plot.
Seen at a September 2007 Toronto Film Festival screening.First time director, Helen Hunt, said this movie was 10 years in the making.
Had she struck closer to that thread, the movie would have a tighter, more focused feel.As it is, the outer reach of her film, a foray into her intimate, romantic relationships, with the intent of colouring her main character (April) instead seems like an untrained hand that colours outside of the lines.
Unlike Ben, he feels the same about April but is fighting his own bitterness about his own recent divorce.Not only does Helen Hunt star as April, but she also co-wrote the screenplay with Alice Arlen and Victor Levin and makes her big-screen directorial debut.
Matthew Broderick effectively portrays Ben as the perpetually dazed man-child he is, while perennial love interest Colin Firth gives texture to the seemingly ideal suitor Frank, especially as he edges toward the breaking point in tolerating the sum of April's foibles.In one of her increasingly rare screen appearances, Bette Midler gives a scene-stealing performance as Bernice.
April Epner (Helen Hunt) is married to fellow schoolteacher Ben Green (Matthew Broderick) and longs to have a baby before her advancing age prevents her dream.
April's busy life implodes: Ben has decided he doesn't like his life and leaves April, April's mother dies, April meets Frank (Colin Firth) a recently divorced writer and father of two children, and April is contacted by a man who can put April in touch with her birth mother - popular TV talk show hostess Bernice Graves (Bette Midler).
The lives these people are living are hard to watch, but you can't look away.I'm a cinematography girl myself and this movie doesn't have stunning panoramic views or killer photography, but it does have great character development and a cohesive plot.Helen Hunt kills in the title role and as a director.
I saw the trailers, and though they did not immediately attract me, I decided to give this movie a go.In her late thirtees, schoolteacher April Epner (Helen Hunt) - seeking to be pregnant and be a biological mother - marries Benjamin (Matthew Broderick), but things do not work out her way and they saperate.
What is so great about THEN SHE FOUND ME is what Helen Hunt has directed, written and acted, in taking her audience on a journey with a character which seems so real to what many friends today are experiencing in wanting happiness and a self fulfilling life, after experiencing heartache.
I want to praise Helen Hunt for directing this unpretentious character study of people with real problems at a time when big budget super hero movies with all plot and no character development are the mainstream.Unfortunately, I felt that Bette Midler and Helen Hunt were acting in 2 separate films as the mother and daughter.
Midler seemed to be acting in a big budget over-the-top romantic comedy while Hunt was understated and subtle as a complicated lady in a small movie that was a fine character study.
An example was the fine actor Colin Firth yelling and cussing toward the end of the film after having been so contained the rest of the film.I do want to again compliment Helen Hunt for this sincere and intelligent film but feel that it was quite uneven at times.
April (Helen Hunt), a schoolteacher married to fellow instructor, Ben (Matthew Broderick), wants to become a mother above everything else.
Then, unbelievably, April learns she is pregnant, with Ben's child and that her birth mother, Bernice (Bette Midler), a television talk show hostess, wants to enter her life again.
Hunt herself gives a beautifully nuanced turn as the good-hearted but confused April while Broderick does a great job as the repugnant Ben. Midler is also a pleasure to watch as a woman with a thousand secrets.
I hadn't seen a movie in a while and had no idea what was playing or what "Then She Found Me" was about, but 'Colin Firth' and 'Helen Hunt' caught my eye so I figured I couldn't go wrong.I was expecting your typical light-hearted rom-com, but instead found myself engrossed in a very moving and believable story, thanks to the marvelous acting of Firth and Hunt.
I love women who age gracefully and Helen Hunt is certainly one of them - letting all of her wrinkles become part of her character but honestly why on earth would she try to play a 39 year old woman when she is 46?
I know 39 is not exactly young but I don't know any 39 year old with as many deep wrinkles as Helen Hunt - I just think it puts across a really bad image for women - whiny, desperate and ugly.Also, what on earth was Colin Firth doing in that film?
Also their relationship was completely ridiculous and why did he keep saying she was so beautiful when clearly she was ugly inside and out?And poor Matthew Broderick - made to look like a blubbering fool - has it really come to this for him?The only highight of the film was the wonderful Babs but she just kept getting treated appallingly by the god awful Helen Hunt character.
Along the way the film gets to comment on child abandonment (an American variation of Mike Leigh's Secrets and Lies) with a divine Bette Midler as talk show host Bernice (alleged mother to Hunt's April) only recently revealing herself ("I'm very verbal during sex") to April, an over-burdened, recently separated school teacher.
This film is directed by Helen Hunt, which makes sense, as she plays the 39 year-old "love interest" of Matthew Broderick and Colin Firth.
April Epner, a nearly 40-year old Jewish woman, is going through a crisis in her life.Her husband Ben leaves her and her adoptive mother dies.Then a talk show host called Bernice Graves is introduced to her as her biological mother.And she meets a new man named Frank at the school she teaches his two children.Then She Found Me (2007) is the directorial debut by actress Helen Hunt.She gives a great performance in the lead as April Epner.Bette Midler is terrific as Bernice Graves.Colin Firth is marvelous as Frank.Matthew Broderick, who turned 50 a couple of months ago, does very nice work as Ben Green.Ben Shenkman is great as Dr. Freddy Epner.Salman Rushdie, who is better known as a writer, does very good work as Dr. Samani.Lynn Cohen plays April's adoptive mother Trudy, and she's very good.As themselves in this movie are seen Janeane Garofalo, Tim Robbins and Edie Falco.This is a nice, yet flawed movie.The drama of it works pretty good, it's quite moving.But it doesn't go out to make some movie history.It doesn't succeed in rising above mediocrity.But it's a pretty nice little movie that proves Helen Hunt can also direct..
I don't like predictable, romantic movies.This movie, in spite of Helen Hunt in the lead part (sorry, Helen), delivers a lovely story, very human, very shot through with vulnerability in the face of reality.Helen delivers one of the most tender performances in her career (not that I am familiar with all of her work; but from what I've seen, she kind of comes across as a tough little cookie in a stunted sorta way, right?)...
And no, she doesn't abandon that toughness - that essence that Jack Nickelson captures in "As Good as It Gets": she says what she means, means what she says; something tells me HH is worth knowing: I do believe this is one of HH's strengths (as uncomfortable as it sometimes makes ME feel).The profound Jewish tale narrated in the beginning (rather shocking, and to me, mysteriously cruel), then fleshed out at the end (thank God) is one of this movie's attractions to me.I also find the outlandish behavior by its characters not unrealistic.
Hunt's character (April Hepner) is unexpectedly confronted by her birth mother (Bette Midler) and also finds herself in a potentially romantic relationship with Frank (Colin Firth), a single father with two children whose wife left the family to travel around the world with her lover.
The cast helps in the positive perception of the story: Helen Hunt is here April, a New York schoolteacher, an almost forty year old woman, coming to terms with difficult situations and with a constantly frustrated desire of motherhood.
Helen Hunt is still a great actress, I enjoyed watching her in this movie as much as I did in "As Good As It Gets" with Jack Nicholson!!!
Bette Midler, Colin Firth, and Matthew Broderick were also showed their greatness in this movie.
Played by first-time director Helen Hunt, April is a 39-year-old elementary school teacher in Brooklyn whose biological clock has been ticking so loudly it's been keeping her up at night.
On the positive side, though, the acting is good (why have we seen so little of Hunt on screen since she won her Oscar fourteen years ago?); the characters skew a little older than your typical romantic comedy figures; the story ends on a tremendously sweet note, and there's just enough genuine humor and charm in the movie to make it worth a look-see.One side note: the movie makes a continuity error by claiming that April was conceived in 1966 when McQueen was off in China filming "The Sand Pebbles," but later we're told she was conceived when her mother was at a drive-in showing of "Bullitt," which wasn't even released until 1968!.
Then She Found Me. In Helen Hunt's feature film directorial debut, Hunt plays April Epner, a 39-year old school teacher who wishes to have a baby of her own but is aware of her biological clock running out of time.
While coping with all the changes, she also meets a handsome divorcé Frank (Colin Firth), with whom a new relationship might be possible, but there are still more surprises waiting for her.I was worried the movie could turn out to be just another clichéd rom-com, but luckily Hunt and the other writers didn't go for the easiest laughs when adapting Elinor Lipman's novel for the screen.
Bette Midler's flamboyant antics work fine when contrasted to Hunt's more reserved, insecure protagonist, and while Colin Firth's British charm is closer to ordinary screen romance, he knows how to handle a role like this.
When I borrowed this film from my local library I was hoping it would live up to the abilities of its promising cast (Helen Hunt, Bette Midler, Colin Firth & Matthew Broderick), and yet it took me a while to actually sit down and view it.
Hunt proves to be quite a competent director as she tells a charming story set in a small town about a young woman (who was adopted by a Jewish lady) who desperately wants to have a baby but things go haywire when her husband leaves her, her adopt mother passes away and her eccentric birth mother unexpectedly shows up.
Casting herself along side Colin Firth, Bette Midler and Matthew Broderick, Hunt's film follows the uneasy emotional path to fulfilment of April Epner {Hunt}.
In early 1998,actress Helen Hunt seemed to be about to become into a big Hollywood star.After having won an Oscar and Golden Globe as Best Actress in a Leading Role for the movie As Good as It Gets,and an Emmy (not to mention having achieved another Golden Globe nomination) for the TV series Mad About You,her rising career was assured.However,after some commercial Hollywood movies (like the conventional drama Pay It Forward and the mediocre romantic comedy What Women Want),her career only limited to a pair of roles on independent movies,where she showed her talent was intact,but that she never became on the Hollywood star she seemed she was going to be.I have a theory to explain that : Hunt was more interested in exploring her talent than in selling herself to the fame many actors ambition to.As a possible proof of that,we have the movie Then She Found Me,which also represents her first work as a director and as a co-screenwriter.This movie resulted to be a humble but entertaining and very interesting melodrama with emotive details,credible characters,a honest romance and solid performances.The synopsis from this movie could suggest this is an "ethnic comedy" like My Big Fat Greek Wedding or Moonstruck.However,the screenplay from this movie is much more subtle and delicate,because besides of avoiding the characters to become into crude racial caricatures,it has the patience to developing them at a calm (but never boring) rhythm,at the same time it avoids the clichés from family drama and romantic comedy.The best attribute from this movie is that everything seems natural on it.Hunt brings an excellent performance,and although the rest of the cast is also solid,this movie clearly rests on her shoulders.There are a few fails on this movie.For one sight,some of the dialogs feel a bit forced and,although I appreciated the delicacy from this movie,there were some moments in which that made it seem a little bit bland.When we are in front of the debut of an actor as a director,the result is unpredictable.On some occasions,the result is a pathetic exercise of ego.But,on other occasions,there are actors who show genuine talent as directors because they find a good tone and rhythm for conducing a story and they can extract solid performances from the cast.Fortunately,Then She Found Me belongs to the second style,and I hope to see more movies directed by Hunt,because she shows potential.I can recommend this movie with confidence,because although it is not excellent,it kept me very interested..
It's more intelligent, heart-felt and down to earth, despite its somewhat eccentric and off-putting side.Telling the story of soon-to-be-forty, recently-married-and-then-promptly-abandoned April Epner (Helen Hunt) as she tries to get over her separation, her adopted mother's death and her last wish that she have a child, the directorial debut of Hunt isn't exactly a walk in the park affair.
Again, both actresses do a fine job and manage to craft something memorable out of the script, but despite all the good it does, you still get the feeling that a lot is left unexplored; there's comedy but very little heart, so when Hunt tries to make her mother resonate beyond her comical façade, the move falls flat.In the end Then She Found Me comes down to the question of trust; who we often bestow that trust upon, and why when we know we should be putting it in a much safer box.
My vote is for "Then She Found Me" to win Best Picture, with Helen Hunt as Best Director and Best Actress, Colin Firth as Best Supporting Actor, and Bette Midler as Best Supporting Actress..
First of All Helen Hunt Directed the movie, so her acting got a little on low, she did what she wanted to do without any orders, this have caused some little acting problems: Fast and strange Dialogue lines, strange acting behavior of Colin Firh although his British accent did the price, but his vulgarity was the thing i didn't like (Those strange bad words,that clownish temperament.
I think Helen Hunt is to old to act in her own directed movie.
For some reason, Helen Hunt decided to rewrite the story and take a likable heroine, who found true love unexpectedly with the school librarian and turn her into an anguished character who struggled with an immature husband (Broderick)who did not appear in the book,a divorced father (Firth), who did not appear in the book, a pregnancy which did not occur in the book, and adopting an Asian child, which also did not occur in the book.
Helen Hunt is a beautiful woman, as Colin Firth tells her, but she looks strained and worried all the time.
Up until almost half an hour into the film, the entire picture feels rushed with incident and things suddenly happening to April (Hunt), as she gets married, gets separated/sort-of-divorced, her adopted Jewish mother dies, and she maybe falls in love.
All she'd need is a bird going to the bathroom on her head to put the icing on the cake.What the story then develops as is how April deals with the men in her life- her new love played in the best performance by Colin Firth- and her ex played by Matthew Broderick, who may be the father of 39 year-old April's first possible baby.
The film has an uneven tone, is oblivious to how pathetic most of its characters are, never settles on what it's about, is littered with failed attempts at humor and wraps things up with a lovers' reconciliation that's turns into a powerful argument for celibate solitude.April Epner (Helen Hunt) is a 39 year old Jewish school teacher who desperately wants kids.
With Colin Firth and Bette Middler, two of my all-time favorite actors, in prominent roles, I had high expectations that were tempered somewhat by the lead being played by Helen Hunt.
Even Bette Midler, who is April's biological mother, shows restraint in a role that would have been wrong played by someone else.This film debut shows Helen Hunt in a dual capacity.
He has his own demons about his recent divorce from a woman that abandoned her children and left him sleep deprived and annoyed.Enter Bette Midler, a somewhat pathological biological mother to her whom she finds after her adopted mother passes.In the end Helen will choose if she wants to keep contact with her mother, which man she needs in her life, and the decisions that she needs to make to procreate, enough to get away from her own demons from her childhood.Excellent film, genuine emotion, and well crafted characters that you can feel yourself relating to. |
tt0026007 | Wonder Bar | Wonder Bar is set in a Parisian nightclub, with the stars playing the ‘regulars’ at the club. The movie revolves around two main story points, a romance and a more serious conflict with death, and several minor plots. All of the stories are enlivened from time to time by extravagant musical numbers. The more serious story revolves around Captain Von Ferring (Robert Barrat), a German military officer. Ferring has gambled on the stock market and lost, now broke after dozens of failed investments, he is at the Wonder Bar to try and pull a one-night stand before killing himself the following day. Al Wonder (Al Jolson) knows about Ferring's plan.
Meanwhile, an elaborate romance is unfolding. The bar's central attraction is the Latin lounge dancing group led by Inez (Dolores del Río). Al Wonder has a secret attraction to Inez, who has a burning passion for Harry (Ricardo Cortez). However, Harry is two-timing her with Liane (Kay Francis), who is married to the famous French banker Renaud (Henry Kolker). The story comes to a climax when Inez finds out that Harry and Liane plan to run away together and head to the United States. Inez, in a haze of jealousy, kills Harry.
Subplots are much lighter in nature. They involve several drunken routines by two businessmen (Hugh Herbert and an uncredited Hobart Cavanaugh) and Al Wonder's various narrations as emcee of the floor show and manager of the club. | romantic, murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0368909 | Ong-bak | The film begins in 1431 feudal Siam. It is a time of political upheaval, treachery and danger. The opening scene explains how during the reign of Boromarajatiraj II of the Ayutthaya Kingdom, the Ayutthaya royal court became more powerful than the Sukhothai kingdom and expanded to the east. The Ayutthaya army besieged the Kingdom of Gods for several months. The king sent his son, Prince Indraracha to rule the kingdom.
At the new kingdom, Lord Sihadecho is a provincial ruler, and a gallant and noble warrior of a formally great dynasty. His son, Tien, a spirited and unyielding youth, aspires to be just like his father, but is forced to undergo dance lessons instead much to his disdain. Meanwhile, the treacherous and power-craving Lord Rajasena, a former city administrator of the capital city, plots to seize total control of all Asia and has amassed the greatest army in Asia. Rajasena sends out vicious assassins to murder Lord Sihadecho's family and his loyal soldiers. The only survivor from this massacre is Tien, who manages to escape with deep vengeance in his heart.
Tien is captured by a group of savage slave traders, who throw him into a pit with a giant crocodile when he proves uncontrollable. Tien is saved by Chernang (Sorapong Chatree), leader of the renowned "Pha Beek Khrut" (Garuda Wing Cliff) guerilla group, who attack the slave traders. Chernang throws a knife to Tien, proclaiming "your life depends on you, young boy," with which Tien kills the crocodile. Intrigued by his physical prowess and attitude, Chernang takes Tien to a soothsayer, who says the boy has a great destiny, that "spirits will fear him" and that he will become the greatest warrior who will ever live, and as such Chernang takes in Tien as his adoptive son and raises him like himself as a guerilla and a bandit. Tien gets his wish to train as a warrior and more besides, growing up to excel in the arts of war, including man-to-man fighting, incantation, and subterfuge. Tien is instructed in a variety of traditional Asian fighting styles, including muay boran and krabi krabong, Japanese kenjutsu and ninjutsu, Malay silat, and various Chinese martial arts. He also learns the use of weapons such as the ninjatō, katana, jian, dao, talwar, nunchaku, rope dart, and three-section staff.
Now a young man and with all these martial arts heavily instilled, becoming the greatest warrior to ever live, Tien (Tony Jaa) is eager to quench the vengeance in his heart by killing the slave traders, which he does. He then goes on to kill Lord Rajasena by posing as a dancer during a celebration. Returning to the Pha Beek Khrut, Tien is mystified to find their village deserted. Suddenly, he finds himself confronted by wave after wave of masked assassins, the same ones hired by Lord Rajasena to destroy his original home. As the fight progresses Tien is too enraged to notice that the masked villains are none other than his Pha Beek Khrut comrades though their individual combat styles are glaringly recognizable. As Tien tries to defeat the masked assassins he climbs on an elephant but then Bhuti Sangkha a.k.a. The Crow Ghost (Dan Chupong uncredited) appears and kicks Tien off of the elephant. Bhuti's nature is unknown and he has a small role in the film. Then he takes the elephant away. At last confronting their leader, Tien finds they have been surrounded by Rajasena's army, which is led by the tyrant, himself. Lord Rajasena reveals he had survived thanks to an armored tunic concealed beneath his state robes. Chernang unmasks and admits to his part in killing Lord Sihadecho, as he was in league with Rajasena. Chernang explains that he must carry out Rajasena's orders, or his family (the Pha Beek Khrut) will be killed. As Tien reluctantly fights Chernang, Chernang pins him to the ground, once again calls Tien his son and asks him to take his life in payment for killing his father. Chernang then forces Tien's blade to snap and slash across his throat, taking his life.
The film ends on a cliffhanger with Tien, after defeating dozens of Rajasena's warriors, being finally overwhelmed by hundreds more. Rajasena orders Tien to be taken away to be slowly tortured to death. It is unclear whether Tien survives, and if he does, how it is so. An extremely ambiguous and vague voice-over explains that Tien "may find a way to cheat death again", and shows him with a fully-grown beard (which he does not have in the film) standing in front of a scarred golden Buddha statue, perhaps indicating reincarnation. | cruelty, violence, cult, good versus evil, action, sadist | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0102532 | Night Visions | The film opens with Ray sitting in a club angrily watching Aura dancing provocatively with other men in the club. Ray angrily removes her from the dance floor and after a short fight she storms out to take the car home. In the parking lot she is choked to death with a hose then left on the ground with her legs spread apart. The papers report that the "Spread-Eagle Killer" has struck a fourth time and Ray is brought in as a suspect for questioning, during which he is treated roughly by an overly suspicious Sergeant Thomas Mackey. The extremely intuitive Dr. Sally Powers, a specialist in criminal psychopathology, is brought in to give insight into the mind of the killer. Mackey is allowed to forego a ten-day suspension and to continue to work on the case if he agrees to supervise Dr. Powers. At the scene of the next murder Dr. Powers writhes on the floor in the tape outline of the victim and announces that the victim was raped. That night in bed Dr. Powers relives a murder she survived as a child. The next morning she is called in to the station to meet with the captain but instead has a hunch that leads her to a health club. She emulates the behavior of the instructors in order to take over a class when the next body is found in another room in the club. After an argument with Mackey she predicts the location of the next murder to be a biker bar. Mackey follows her and finds her in a back room with a knife in her hand next to a freshly murdered woman. The victim was not stabbed, though, but rather beaten with a blunt object. Mackey apologizes to her at a diner, where he witnesses her emulate the behavior of their waitress. She begins to think like the killer and Mackey encourages this but she becomes scared and runs away. The commissioner explains to Mackey that Dr. Powers is the survivor of an attack by a man who killed her family. She survived by hiding in a closet but now jumps into the personalities of others to escape her own tortured mind. Dr. Powers plots the murders on a map in the shape of Da Vinci's Vitruvian Man and determines that the killer is piecing together a perfect woman. She tracks the killer down but is led to the edge of a rooftop for a final showdown between her, the killer, and Mackey. | pornographic | train | wikipedia | The first version was very good!. I have a DVD of the first version of Night Visions and it's pretty damn good! I purchased the DVD after seeing the picture on local cable. I don't know why, but my version times out at 60 minutes. The newer version was 82 minutes. The 60 minute version is a beautiful film. It has a stained glass look and the women are truly beautiful!! The story has a unique quality to it. We enter the erotic imaginings of a lonely writer and at the end of the story, fantasy becomes reality in a nice twist. The main character, played by Dan Horton does a very good job in his first on screen role. At 60 minutes it's a well paced story. And, did I mention the beautiful women, and a lot of them? Night Visions is unique!. An awful movie! Zero on a scale of 1 to 10!. I can usually find something to praise in a movie no matter how bad otherwise. The photography or the plot, one of the characters might be good. In extreme cases one or another of the actors or actresses may be attractive even if unskilled. I could find no redeeming features in "Night Visions". Tane McClure, a beautiful if somewhat limited actress is listed here but is otherwise well hidden. The plot is incomprehensible and the main actors terrible. There are no well shot scenes and there is no suspense to speak of. If you do watch this movie be prepared for 82 minutes of pure boredom. |
tt0100813 | Treasure Island | Young Jim Hawkins Jackie Cooper) and his mother (Dorothy Peterson) run the Admiral Benbow, a tavern near Bristol, England. One dark and stormy night, during a birthday celebration, the mysterious Billy Bones (Lionel Barrymore) arrives and drunkenly talks about treasure. Soon after, Bones is visited by Black Dog (Charles McNaughton) then Pew (William V. Mong), and drops dead, leaving a chest, which he bragged contained gold and jewels. Instead of money, Jim finds a map that his friend Dr. Livesey (Otto Kruger) realizes will lead them to the famous Flint treasure. Squire Trelawney (Nigel Bruce) raises money for a voyage to the treasure island and they set sail on Captain Alexander Smollett's (Lewis Stone) ship Hispaniola. Also on board is the one-legged Long John Silver (Wallace Beery) and his cronies. Even though Bones had warned Jim about a sailor with one leg, they become friends.
During the voyage, several fatal "accidents" happen to sailors who disapprove of Silver and his cohorts. Then, the night before landing on the island, Jim overhears Silver plotting to take the treasure and kill Smollett's men. Jim goes ashore with the men, and encounters an old hermit named Ben Gunn (Chic Sale), who tells him that he has found Flint's treasure. Meanwhile, Smollett (Lewis Stone) and his loyal men flee to Flint's stockade on the island for safety. Silver's men then attack the stockade when Smollett refuses to give them the treasure map. While the situation looks hopeless, Jim secretly goes back to the Hispaniola at night, sails it to a safe location and shoots one of the pirates in self-defense. When he returns to the stockade, Silver's men are there and Silver tells them that a treaty has been signed. The pirates want to kill Jim, but Silver protects him. Dr. Livesey comes for Jim, but the boy refuses to break his word to Silver not to run away. The next day the pirates search for the treasure hold and when they find it, it is empty. When some of the pirates mutiny against Silver, Livesey (Otto Kruger) and Gunn (Charles "Chic" Sale) join him in the fight. Smollett then sails home with the treasure, which Gunn had hidden in his cave, and with Silver as his prisoner. Unable to stand by and let his friend be hanged, Jim frees Silver. As he sails away, Silver promises to hunt treasure with Jim again some day, as Honest John Silver. | violence, action | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0054782 | Daffy's Inn Trouble | Daffy Duck and Porky Pig work in the hotel business on the western frontier. At the start of the cartoon we see Daffy sweeping the floor, and exclaiming his dissatisfaction for his job. When Porky calls Daffy over, and gives him a new broom as a present, Daffy throws his hat on the floor in disgust and quits the job.
Daffy then proceeds to build his own hotel business directly across the way from Porky. Porky looks on, exclaiming all that because he gave Daffy a present. Daffy does everything he can to persuade business to his new establishment, hanging signs reading 'Free Lunch', 'Free TV', 'We Give Plaid Stamps' and 'Western Spoken Here'. After Porky wishes Daffy luck, he spots a customer whom he hastily invites to his newly built establishment. Upon his arrival to the hotel, Daffy tries to take the gentleman's order, but is instead robbed.
Despite Daffy's many attempts at wooing customers with his free advertisements, Porky's establishment is receiving all the business. Daffy wonders what Porky has that he doesn't, so he wanders over to take a peek. Daffy sees a (live action) vaudeville show. Determined to fight fire with fire, Daffy goes back to his hotel dressed up as a girl and then dances/lip-syncs to a record playing The Latin Quarter on the front porch to sway potential customers away from Porky's establishment. This works well until the record starts skipping and the bystanders realize what's going on. Insulted by Daffy's deceptive marketing ploy, they all throw fruits and vegetables at him. Daffy then attempts to join forces with Porky and asks him to be partners. When Porky replies by telling Daffy he has all the business he needs, Daffy accidentally shoots himself with his own gun, and then decides to forcefully destroy Porky's business.
First, Daffy tries to drop a boulder off a cliff onto Porky's hotel. It backfires when the boulder misses, bounces, and crushes Daffy's hotel, to which makes Daffy's head change to resemble a donkey, and he makes a he-haw noise. Daffy then decides to dress up like a woman, and places explosives under the floor boards in Porky's hotel. The explosives blow up and we see that Porky has struck oil. We then see that Porky's hotel is destroyed (as it was on top of the oil gusher) and closed, with a sign posted reading 'moved to a new location'. Upon the panning of the camera, we see his new and improved five-star hotel, in which Daffy now works for Porky again. Porky offers Daffy the chance to 'clean up', and gives him his own office. When he opens the door to his office, several brooms and mops fall out of the closet. Daffy then picks up a 'janitor' hat and puts it on. | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | Not Daffy's best, but a lot of fun.
Daffy's Inn Trouble isn't absolutely outstanding, but it is a lot of fun.
I also think it isn't Daffy's best, Duck Amuck and Duck Dodgers in the 24.5th Century were better.
While a tad predictable, and some of the jokes are reliant on slapstick, there are plenty of amusing moments and you are left satisfied.
The animation is good, the music is even better, the writing is witty and Mel Blanc's vocal characterisations are brilliant as always.
Daffy here, like Duck Amuck and Robin Hood Daffy is the butt of the joke, and he handles himself well.
If I were to be honest, I do prefer marginally the manic Daffy, some of the antics he gets into when he is manic are hysterical.
Porky is given more to do, and he is fine.
In conclusion, very nice and fun.
8/10 Bethany Cox. A fun Daffy Duck cartoon with a good enough mix of slapstick, witty and dialogue humour.
This Daffy Duck episode is not my favourite, partly due to the amount of boring, rather predictable slapstick jokes involved.
However, I find many good points with the cartoon.
Some of the jokes in "Daffy's Inn Trouble" are highly amusing, making this a cartoon worth watching.
Other things I like about this are the animation of the characters (the backgrounds are good as well), the theme of the episode and the personality of Porky is very good.
The only flaws I find with the cartoon are the fact that there are a few slapstick jokes that could have been transformed into witty jokes/dialogue and the fact that Daffy Duck's personality is not my favourite (although he is cleverer than he often was around Porky in the time the cartoon was made).
In this cartoon, Daffy Duck sweeps the floor of Porky's inn, which is in the middle of a desert.
He is fed up with having to work for him rather than running an independent business just like Porky.
When Porky buys him a new broom (which was kind of him but is a bit of an inappropriate present), Daffy quits and goes off to build and run his own inn.
Porky, who is very good at his business (even though it is small), can immediately see Daffy does not know how to run an inn...I recommend this cartoon to people who like a cleverer Daffy along with Porky and a mix of slapstick and non-slapstick jokes in a Looney Tunes cartoon.
Enjoy "Daffy's Inn Trouble"!
Not great but amusing.
Fed up sweeping floors for Porky Pig in his hotel, Daffy quits and goes across the street to open a rival inn in order to shut down Porky's place.
However no matter what he tries Daffy just can't manage to steal the business away from Porky - leading to more drastic actions.I'm a really big fan of Daffy Duck and always feel that he is at his best when he is in his early persona of being manic and wacky.
Even when he becomes more cynical and greedy he still manages to be one of my favourite Warner Brothers characters.
Here he is back in partnership with Porky Pig, a combination that usually sees Porky managing to avoid whatever it is that Daffy is trying to do to him - in this case force his hotel out of business.
Daffy is the butt of many of the jokes here while porky just stands by and watches Daffy hurt himself!
It isn't hilarious but it has a few good moments that are amusing.The animation isn't great but it isn't too basic, the characters are well drawn and the backgrounds and sets look OK (including a bit of live action in there too).
Porky doesn't manage to steal the film even though he gets the better of the outcome, but he still does well.
Daffy is good but I always find these ones hard to watch (where he gets beat) as I do like him!Overall this has a few laughs and is quite good but fans of Daffy may want to skip this in favour of a cartoon where he is in control rather than being a greedy jackass.
Despite this Daffy still leads the action well and I found it quite amusing..
"We'll settle it man-to-man, West of the Pecos style!".
Later Daffy & Porky short directed by Robert McKimson that doesn't quite click, despite a few funny moments.
Daffy and Porky are running a hotel out West but Daffy is frustrated with having to do menial tasks like sweeping, so he quits in a huff.
He decides he'll put Porky out of business by building a competing hotel across the road.
Despite his best efforts, however, Porky's hotel still does more business.
It's not one of the best cartoons featuring this duo.
There are some funny parts, including Daffy in drag and some inserted western movie footage.
Great voice work from Mel Blanc.
Lively music from Milt Franklyn.
Colorful, bright animation.
Probably my favorite bit is early on with all the signs outside the hotel, including one that says "Western Spoken Here." I don't know why but that cracks me up..
there will be duck.
Daffy and Porky continue their rivalry, this time by running businesses.
Fed up at performing menial labor in Porky's old west hotel, Daffy builds his own hotel (multitasking it, to be exact), but doesn't get any customers.
So, he decides that the only solution is to sabotage Porky's business.
Not that it's gonna go exactly as he planned!
The Warner Bros.
cartoons were obviously on their decline by this point, but "Daffy's Inn Trouble" still elicits some laughs, especially the smoke from the gun (must've been an ugly sight behind it).Truly some good times.PS: Does anyone know which movie the live-action scene is from?.
Pigs outsmart ducks .
. by importing half a dozen LIVE ACTION dance hall gals (apparently "going commando," for anyone with the benefit of 21st Century DVD player controls), taking center stage between 173 and 180 seconds into Warner Bros.' seven-minute Looney Tunes animated short, DAFFY'S INN TROUBLE.
During this brief time period, Daffy Duck dresses in drag TWICE (though it's unclear whether he's commando-styled amid either episode).
He orders Pate De Foie Gras at a restaurant, apparently not being fluent enough in French to realize that this constitutes cannibalism for him.
Daffy also manages to quit his job, build and destroy a tavern (enduring an armed robbery in the brief time between his building boom and bust), get Booed and Vegetabled off a stage (during his first transvestite foray), shoot himself, and strike it rich on behalf of his chief antagonist, Porky Pig. Since pigs eat duck brains for dinner, the only thing keeping DAFFY'S INN TROUBLE from perfectly dove-tailing with THERE WILL BE BLOOD is Porky's lack of a drinking straw..
Daffy's Inn Trouble has some funny gags though it's not one of the best of the WB shorts.
Just watched this on YouTube.
Made during the last years of the original Warner Bros.
cartoon studio before the 1963 closing, the full production crew is intact with the result of a pretty funny cartoon though the formula of Daffy Duck trying to one-up on Porky Pig (or Bugs Bunny in others) has been done better before.
In this one, he's trying to get Porky's hotel out of business by building his own with offers of free TV and whatnot.
Doesn't work since the pig has dancing girls in his place (courtesy of live action footage) so Daffy plays a record and makes himself up as a dancing woman.
That has a funny punchline as does another when the duck comes to Porky and tries to shoot him though I had to click on another link to see the punchline of that one (Daffy accidentally shoots himself) before going on.
There's one more funny gag involving a boulder before the not-as-funny end.
Anyway, for what I just mentioned, I recommend Daffy's Inn Trouble though like I said, there's better WB cartoons out there... |
tt3560148 | Fear, Inc. | A young woman, Jennifer Adams (Abigail Breslin) is seemingly chased by an attacker in a parking garage. She grabs her phone and attempts to end the attack by insisting that "it" wasn't part of the plan. The person on the other end of the line puts her on hold. Jennifer then spots the man robed and masked approaching her with a nail studded baseball bat. As she rushes to an elevator to escape, the attacker disappears. Jennifer walks to her car, assuming the chase is over. She is then stopped by a weird security guard telling her that if she finds anything creepy, do not hesitate to give him a call. She hops inside her car only to discover that several people are locating her through her radio. A man pops up from the back seat and strangles her to death.
Horror movie buff Joe (Lucas Neff), along with his girlfriend Lindsey, (Caitlin Stasey) goes to a haunted maze as part of their weekly date. Joe comments that the attraction isn't scary enough. They are then spooked by a random guy who gives Joe a calling card for a company called "Fear, Inc." where they bring fears to life. Joe takes interest in this and takes the card. On the way home, Joe realized he lost his wallet and phone and concluded the man from earlier stole it. Morning came and Joe's best friend Ben (Chris Marquette) and his wife Ashleigh (Stephanie Drake) arrive at their house for a Halloween party. Joe tells Ben and Ashleigh about the calling card but Ben warns him not to take part of it as someone he knew got seriously hurt because of it. After the night, Joe finds his wallet and phone back in his room with the calling card placed on top of it. Out of curiosity, he calls "Fear, Inc." only to be informed that their service has sold out. The next morning, while Ashleigh, Ben and Lindsey are hanging around the pool, Joe's neighbor Bill (Richard Riehle) warns him about spotting an intruder in Joe's home. Joe dismisses his warning only to be attacked by a seemingly crazy person. The police arrive and Lindsey and the others confirm that they saw no one in the house. After a night of partying, the group arrive back in the house and the television mysteriously turns on showing the news channel. The reporter seems to be reporting in front of Joe's house and informing that Bill, Ashleigh, Ben and Lindsey were killed by a suspect named Joe Foster. Ben looks outside only to see no reporter was there. The three scolded Joe for pulling up yet another prank. Joe admits to the three that he called "Fear, Inc." the other night.
Before Ben could scold him, the lights go out. Joe begs the others to just go with it. He volunteers himself to check the breaker outside, only for his attention to be caught by Bill, who comes running outside his home. Bill warns Joe about yet another intruder only to be stabbed by a cloaked and masked man (in the same manner as Drew Barrymore's character from Scream"). Thinking Bill was in on the prank, Joe returns inside and tells the others what happened. They attempt to escape only to find out that Joe's only car has been damaged. Thinking it is going way too far, Lindsey insists that Joe call the cops. Successful, they decide to lock all the doors and windows until all the cops get to the house. While on the run, Ashleigh gets separated from the group. Ben goes out to find her while Lindsey and Joe break bottles for weapons. Still convinced everything is a prank, Joe and a reluctant Lindsey go outside to continue to play with it. They find Ashleigh pinned to a tree with arrows (to which Joe recognized as a scene from Friday the 13th). Joe, amazed at what he thought was a great prosthetic, was warned by a barely alive Ashleigh to run back inside as a cloaked and masked man approached them. Lindsey and Joe return inside the house but another masked man knocks Joe unconscious. He wakes up to find Ben gagged and strapped to a chair next to a table filled with cutting contraptions. The TV turns on and a cloaked man instructs Joe to cut Ben's left hand or Lindsey (who was then shown through the TV tied to a bed with an armed man next to her) will die. Joe realizes he was still being pranked as he references his situation in the Saw films. He arbitrarily cuts Ben's left arm and Lindsey was spared from an attack. Thinking the special effects were cool enough, Joe continues to follow instructions from the man. He is then tasked to rip open Ben's chest to retrieve a key. As he did, Joe noticed Ben was unconscious and seemingly dead. He also discovers real blood was pouring out of his body. Joe realizes he killed Ben and screams in terror. The lights turn off and after several seconds, Ben's body disappeared. Joe hears Lindsey's screams and rushes to help her. He arrives in the room only to find Lindsey unconscious but alive. He grabs his phone and successfully calls the cops once more as the ones he called earlier were not there yet. While calling, he is attacked by a masked man but Joe was able to defend himself. Joe strangles and kills the man. As he grabs his phone once more to notify the emergency operator, Lindsey suddenly wakes up and unties herself from the bed. She tells Joe to hang up the phone. Confused, Joe asks Lindsey what is going on. Lindsey explains that everything is a prank and that Ashleigh and Ben are alive and well, to which is proven when they enter the house picking out their prosthetic.
Lindsey and Joe tell them that the man was actually killed. Ben and Ashleigh freak out when they explained that "Fear, Inc." is actually a very dangerous company and when they found out that one of their men was killed, they will be coming for the rest of them. Ben and Ashleigh flee, leaving Joe and Lindsey to deal with it. Lindsey explains that Joe's phone was reprogrammed by the company so that every time he makes an emergency call, it redirects to "Fear, Inc." Lindsey insists they bury the body in the desert. They steal the "Fear, Inc." van but on the way, they are stopped by the sheriff only for him to be hit by a stray van (as in Final Destination). They escape and proceed to bury the body. Suddenly, another van comes and "Fear, Inc." leader Abe (Mark Moses), along with his cronies, threatens Joe and Lindsey who are hiding among the bushes. Joe and Lindsey are captured and Abe tells Joe that he killed Tom (Patrick Renna) without knowing he has a wife and a daughter. Joe explains that he didn't mean it. Suddenly, Joe's face is covered with a cloth and his hands were tied. He is left behind the desert while Lindsey was taken away and killed. Joe gets out of his bindings and walks to a seemingly abandoned diner. He is let in by a man and allowed him to use the phone. Joe calls 911 again only for it to be answered by Lindsey, who was sitting on the other side of the empty diner. Relieved at seeing an alive and well Lindsey, he rushed to hug her. Lindsey then explains that it was all part of the package and that Ben and Ashleigh were in it the entire time. Abe and his cronies arrive at the diner along with Ben, Ashleigh and Tom and they celebrate Joe for overcoming the horror. While drinking, Ben admits to Joe that "Fear, Inc." is dangerous for real and is thankful that nobody got hurt Abe's cronies began to surround the four. Joe realizes he knows the scene from somewhere. Abe quotes a line from the movie Cobra saying, "You're the disease, I am the cure." Suddenly, they snapped Ben's neck, shot Ashleigh in the head with a gun and slashed Lindsey's throat. Before Abe kills Joe, he explains he can't let him leave without experiencing his all time favorite death scenes from films. He holds a knife to Joe's throat and says "Cut to black bitch!"
The film ends with a phone ringing and Judson (Leslie Jordan), "Fear, Inc.'s" phone operator answers the phone by saying their service is sold out. He then tells the rest of "Fear, Inc." that they've got another customer. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0765447 | Evening | The film alternates between two time periods, the 1950s and the present, in which a dying Ann Grant Lord (Vanessa Redgrave) reflects on her past. Her confusing comments about people she never mentioned before leave her daughters, reserved Constance (Natasha Richardson) and restless Nina (Toni Collette), wondering if their mother is delusional.
As a young woman in her early twenties, cabaret singer Ann (Claire Danes) arrives at the spacious Newport, Rhode Island, home of her best friend Lila Wittenborn (Mamie Gummer), who is on the verge of getting married to Karl Ross (Timothy Kiefer). Lila's brother (and Ann's college friend) Buddy (Hugh Dancy) introduces her to Harris Arden (Patrick Wilson), a young doctor and the son of a former family servant. Buddy tells Ann his sister always has adored Harris, and expresses his concern that she's marrying another man out of a sense of duty rather than love. Inebriated, Buddy passes out, and as Ann and Harris chat they find themselves bonding.
On Lila's wedding day, she confesses to Ann that she confronted Harris with her feelings for him and he rebuffed her, so she goes along with the ceremony as planned and marries Karl. At the reception, at Lila's request, Ann sings a song and is joined on stage by Harris. Afterwards Buddy, drunk again, confronts the two about their growing closeness. Then he unexpectedly kisses Harris. As Lila prepares to depart with her new husband, Ann offers to take the bride away with her, but Lila refuses and leaves for her honeymoon.
Buddy admits to Ann he's had a crush on Harris since his childhood, though he also claims not to be "that way" - he denies that this would be okay as Ann assures him. He then changes the subject, confessing he has loved Ann ever since their college days, offering as proof a note she once sent him he has kept in his pocket ever since. Ann is unconvinced.
By the sea the younger guests dance drunkenly and dive into the sea from a clifftop: Buddy joins in but fails to surface, prompting a panicked search. When Buddy reappears at the top of the cliff, Ann expresses her anger at the prank and berates Buddy for repressing his sexual orientation and building her up as his true love. She storms off and she and Harris slip off to his secret hideaway, where the two make love.
Buddy, in search of the couple, stumbles into the road and is hit by a car. His friends find him, but too late to save his life. The following morning, Ann and Harris, oblivious to what transpired the night before, jokingly consider sailing away, but at the Wittenborn house they hear the tragic news of Buddy's death.
In the present day, Lila (Meryl Streep) arrives at Ann's bedside to comfort her and reminisce. Ann recalls a day when she ran into Harris in the street in New York City. By then she had one daughter and was on the verge of moving to Los Angeles, and he was married with a son. He intimated he still loved her before the two exchanged cordial goodbyes.
As Lila leaves, she tells Nina about Harris and reassures her that her mother did not make any mistakes in her life. Nina sits with Ann, who encourages her daughter to have a happy life. Nina finally musters the courage to tell her boyfriend Luc she is pregnant with their child. An ecstatic Luc proudly announces the news to Constance and promises he always will be there for Nina. Their joy is interrupted by Ann's nurse, who urges the women to rush to their mother's bedside to bid her farewell. | romantic, flashback | train | wikipedia | Claire Danes is beautiful (appearing to be really, really tall, though just 5' 5" in reality), and is absolutely captivating in one climactic scene where her singing talents are finally put to the test.You can't really talk trash about the cast, which leads off with Claire Danes and doesn't let up from there: Vanessa Redgrave, Patrick Wilson, Meryl Streep and Glenn Close fill out the other major and minor roles in the film.I can't really say anything negative about this film at all, though Hugh Dancy's struggle to have his character emerge from utter one-dimensionality is in the end a total loss.
Playing the spoiled, lovable drunk offspring of the obscenely rich who puts up a front of great bravado but is secretly scared stiff of never amounting to anything probably doesn't offer much in the way of character exploration - he had his orders and stuck to them.In the end, gentlemen, your lady friend will most certainly weep, and while you'll likely not feel nearly as affected, the evening will definitely not be a waste for the time spent watching Evening.
Halfway through Lajos Koltai's "Evening," a woman on her deathbed asks a figure appearing in her hallucination: "Can you tell me where my life went?" The line could be embarrassingly theatrical, but the woman speaking it is Vanessa Redgrave, delivering it with utter simplicity, and the question tears your heart out.Time and again, the film based on Susan Minot's novel skirts sentimentality and ordinariness, it holds attention, offers admirable performances, and engenders emotional involvement as few recent movies have.
With only six months of the year gone, there are now two memorable, meaningful, worthwhile films in theaters, the other, of course, being Sara Polley's "Away from Her." Hollywood might have turned "Evening" into a slick celebrity vehicle with its two pairs of real-life mothers and daughters - Vanessa Redgrave and Natasha Richardson, and Meryl Streep and Mamie Gummer.
Richardson is Redgrave's daughter in the film (with a sister played by Tony Collette), and Gummer plays Streep's younger self, while Redgrave's youthful incarnation is Claire Danes.Add Glenn Close, Eileen Atkins, Hugh Dancy, Patrick Wilson, and a large cast - yes, it could have turned into a multiple star platform.
Instead, Koltai - the brilliant Hungarian cinematographer of "Mephisto," and director of "Fateless" - created a subtle ensemble work with a "Continental feel," the story taking place in a high-society Newport environment, in the days leading up to a wedding that is fraught with trouble.Missed connections, wrong choices, and dutiful compliance with social and family pressures present quite a soap opera, but the quality of the writing, Koltai's direction, and selfless acting raise "Evening" way above that level, into the the rarified air of English, French (and a few American) family sagas from a century before its contemporary setting.Complex relationships between mothers and daughters, between friends and lovers, with the addition of a difficult triangle all come across clearly, understandably, captivatingly.
Individual tunes are woven into a symphony.And yet, with the all the foregoing emphasis on ensemble and selfless performances, the stars of "Evening" still shine through, Redgrave, Richardson, Gummer (an exciting new discovery, looking vaguely like her mother, but a very different actress), Danes carrying most of the load - until Streep shows up in the final moments and, of course, steals the show.
Thankfully they got a top-notch cast....MerylStreep's daughter, Mamie Gummer, plays the young Lila, and then Meryl shows up at the end of the film as the old Lila...in addition to an amazing resemblance (duh!) the younger actress did a great job (perhaps not quite up to her mom's caliber, but who is?) All others in this film were fine, although I wish there had been more of Glen Close and thought the Buddy character was alittle too dramatic.
In other words, I got it from the first scene where Vanessa Redgrave looks out over her Newport memory at her young self (Claire Danes) and begins what have to be the easiest lines she's ever had playing an aging romantic: "Why didn't I marry Harris?" The variations on this theme in the movie are legion, even when it's not the young doctor, played by Patrick Wilson, whom her friend, Lila (Mamie Gummerlooking very much like her aunt, Meryl Streep), also regrets not marrying.One of my major problems is that it's never clear why these substantial women spent so much emotional coin on a character we never get to know, except for his Paul Newmanish good looks.
In the coda, Old Lila (Streep) makes an attempt at character deconstruction by saying about women, "We are mysterious creatures." Give me a break; could I have a bit more than platitude?A regrettable life is Buddy's (Hugh Dancy), Lila's drunken, poetic brother, who tries to prevent Lila from marrying the wrong man (not Buddy), whom Buddy loves also, but then this gay sub-theme is never explored beyond a drunken kiss.
From newly crowned Claire Danes who gets better with each movie she makes to the old standards that will never pass our way again like Vanessa Redgrave, Natasha Richardson, Meryl Streep and Toni Collette.
For this viewer, seeing the film on a DVD in the quiet of the home, a very different reaction occurred.Ann Grant Lord (Vanessa Redgrave) is dying in her home by the ocean and her medication and memories allow her to share a man's name - 'Harris' - with her two grown daughters Nina (Toni Colette) and Constance (Natasha Richardson).
As her daughters sit at her bedside Ann relives a particular summer when she was a bridesmaid for her best friend Lila (Mamie Gummer) - a marriage both Ann (Claire Danes as the youthful Ann) and Lila's alcoholic brother Buddy (Hugh Dancy) objected to, feeling that Lila was simply marrying a man of her class instead of the boy she had loved - Harris Arden (Patrick Wilson), her housekeeper's son who had become a physician.
The older Lila (Meryl Streep) visits Ann at the end and the secrets are revealed: 'there are no such things as mistakes - life just goes on.' The film is a delicate mood piece and the script by Minot and Cunningham is rich in atmosphere and subtle life lessons.
The film is graced by the presence of not only Redgrave, Richardson (Redgrave's true daughter), Collette, Gummer (Streep's true daughter), Meryl Streep, Claire Danes, Eileen Atkins, Glenn Close, Hugh Dancy and Patrick Wilson, but also with an ensemble cast of brief but very solid performances.
This intermittent account of the death by cancer of an elderly lady named Ann Grant (Vanessa Redgrave), enlivened by lengthy and elaborate flashbacks to her medication-enriched memories of the early Fifties Newport wedding day of her upper class college friend Lila Wittenborn (Mamie Gummer; and Mamie's mother, Meryl Streep) is glamorized to the point of extinction by its cinematographer-director Lajos Koltai.
But the scenes, which ought to have you weeping uncontrollably, just make you look at your watch and wonder where the payoff is, in the Fifties or in that house where Ann Grant is dying while her two squabbling and unlikely daughters, the proper Connie (Natasha Richardson) and the confused but honest Nina (Toni Colette), hang around downstairs.The cast is so heavy-laden with divas (besides those mentioned, there are Clare Danes as the young Annan imperfect match; Glenn Close as Lila's stylish, patrician mamá; and Eileen Atkins as the night nurse) it renders the movie's conventional scenes unimportant and sinks its gossamer profundities.
And there was always a huge number of words that were annoying and depressing me next time I read.Only when I watched the film "Evening", I was able to formulate what I feel about cinema at all.Even though, this copy of filmmaking absolutely has no shortage of the stars of the 'first' magnitude, and some people most likely consider, that there are too many of them, but I could say that this movie is not a masterpiece and it won't be shown on every March 8.
Vanessa Redgrave is dying but before she goes she begins to tell her daughters the story of her life and of her secret love...This is one of those movies which has the look and expectations of being a great film simply because they have so many great actors and actresses in it so it seems to be about something other than the potboiler that it really is.
Not bad as such but with Redgrave, Toni Collette, Glenn Close, Meryl Streep, Clare Danes,Natasha Richardson,Eileen Atkins, Patrick Wilson,Hugh Darcy and others (all giving fine performances) you expect more than a weepy story thats a bit more than a harlequin romance.Wait for Cable..
Sure this one is filled with women, but the enchanting story is truly about living one's life to the fullest and recognizing that regrets or "mistakes" are really not that at all.Vanessa Redgrave plays Ann on her death bed and Claire Danes is the twenty-something Ann in flashbacks.
In a tremendous performance, up and comer Hugh Dancy plays Buddy, Lila's brother who pines for Ann through the bottom of a bottle.Redgrave is magnificent in her role and the scenes with she and Streep in bed are truly moving.
"Evening" features some of the biggest female stars in the biz in parts both large and minor (really cameos): Vanessa Redgrave, Meryl Streep, Glenn Close, Claire Danes, the late Natasha Richardson, Toni Colette, Mamie Gummer.
Vannessa Redgrave (god of acting), Natasha Richardson (always reliable and ironically Redgrave's daughter in real life as well as the movie), Meryl Streep (need i say any more?), Mamie Gummer (a very good newcomer who is Streeps real daughter and plays Streep's younger version), Glenn Close (really needs an Oscar god dammit!), Eileen Aitkins (always creates interesting characters), Toni Collette (your terrible Muriel!), Claire Danes (terrific as the lead.
It's too bad all these factors compound each other because a stellar cast has been assembled, and except for a few key scenes, they are unfortunately presented like chess pieces on a postcard-pretty tableau.The time-spanning story concerns free spirited Ann Grant Lord at two points in her life, as a young woman in 1954 about to be the maid of honor at her best friend Lila Wittenborn's Newport society wedding and at her deathbed 45 years later with her two grown daughters tending to her.
Wiser casting choices prevail elsewhere with an underused Natasha Richardson, Redgrave's real-life daughter, playing the older Ann's sensible daughter Constance and with Mamie Gummer and her mother Meryl Streep as Lila then and now.
As the story edges ever more tediously to its end, we find that Glenn Close is almost entirely wasted, that Meryl Streep has only one meaningful scene that is so awkwardly directed and - again - tediously executed that the viewer is left begging for a timely resolution that, in all honesty, never really comes."Evening" is a work that could have lived the potential held by its cast if its story had held the same potential.
Nina, having always felt inferior, cannot maintain a relationship.Stir all of these relationships into a span of fifty years, and you get an intriguing look at society, its values, and its effects upon the personalities and actions of the complex people involved.All of the acting in Evening is excellent, but there are some extraordinary performances and scenes - along with two unique family relationships - that make this film so very, very special.Claire Danes plays the 1950's Ann, and she does it in a style that clearly shows an intelligent woman of those times who is conflicted by what she is supposed to do as opposed to what she wants to do.
Collette is perfect for a part such as this, but I have never seen her give a bad or unbelievable performance no matter what part she plays.Mamie Gummer plays 1950's Lila and shows us a woman even more conflicted of her expected role in life than her good friend, Ann. She is very good.Meryl Streep - Gummer's mother - plays present day Lila.
What is there to say about Meryl Streep other than she always gives an insightful and rewarding performance.Director Lajos Koltai states in the DVD extras that he sought out Glenn Close to play the relatively small part of Lila's mother because he felt she was the only actress he could think of to play one scene in the film.
Just to review: Vanessa Redgrave, Meryl Streep, Claire Danes, Patrick Wilson, Hugh Dancy, Glenn Close, Toni Collette, Natasha Richardson and I still probably forgot someone.
In the earlier timeline, we begin with Ann (now played by Claire Danes) and good friend Buddy Wittenborn (Hugh Dancty) en route to attend the wedding of his sister Lila (Mamie Gummer, and if you think she resembles Meryl Streep, then yes, because she's her real life daughter), who through body language confesses to them both that she's having second thoughts about her impending marriage, because of her still nursing an old flame affection for hunky doctor Harris Arden (Patrick Wilson), the son of their family's caretaker.And as the story develops, we see how relationships turn, some for the better, though it may be fleeting, while others turn for the worse.
The sibling rivalry between daughters Toni Colette and Natasha Richardson looked stereotype although again the acting rose above the simplistic script.In my opinion these actors are all victim of a bad script and in some cases bad directing.Patrick Wilson in his role as Harris, is a cardboard version of a person.In the end ,in this story, life is a struggle that we find a neatly wrapped up solution for in the last ten minutes.In a children's book, maybe, but for a film with the appearance of quality and depth?
However, the story that takes place in the current time, where Vanessa Redgrave (as the older Ann) is dying and her two daughters (Toni Collette and Natasha Richardson) hang around her bedside, is not as involving.More troubling for my experience of the film - I was seriously distracted by the way most of these wonderful women looked.
It is tremendous to see such a brilliant cast in EVENING: "Mother" Streep and her very own talented daughter, Mamie Gummer; Vanessa Redgrave and her Natasha Richardson; and to see a group of talented young American actors rising to the forefront of their careers in Claire Danes and Patrick Wilson,as well as Britain's Hugh Dancy and Australia's Toni Collette; and finally, the magnificent Glenn Close, along with Barry Bostwick and Eileen Atkins, to round out a simply superb cast.In closing, EVENING at times, became a bit maudlin watching Vanessa go back and forth "into the light", but Ms. Streep made the day with her entrance and the final closure to the film.
The last thing I want to watch on screen is Tom Cruise leap off another tall building - I would much rather watch a thought provoking film of with legendary actresses Vanessa Redgrave, the lovely Claire Danes, Toni Collette, the late Natasha Richardson and Meryl Streep and Glenn Close fill the screen with their brilliance.
If you have a longing for an era gone by, when men were gentlemen and women were ladies, this film will take you on a trip to Newport, Rhode Island, home of the very wealthy on the East coast and through a story happening in the mind of Ann Grant in her last days, dreaming of that one evening that was life captivating and a story in real-time as her daughters Nina and Constance wait at their mother's home in her last days as she nears death upstairs in her bed and dreams of her youth and the lost love she had with Harris that weekend in Newport.
I suspect that, if so much male talent had been dissipated, we'd know more about it.Imagine a movie with Vanessa Redgrave and daughter Natasha Richardson, Meryl Streep and daughter Mamie Gummer, Glenn Close, Toni Colette, and Claire Danes.
What I especially appreciated was the performance of Vanessa Redgrave, one particular scene, the one when she hallucinates that the love of her life is somewhere in the background smiling at her, was the highlight of the entire movie.Other than that all the actors played really well and if the soundtrack wasn't so terribly melodramatic (pun intended) I would have probably graded the film with a 9..
Although I admit that i believe that it is rather a "ladies movie" (it is mostly about women, and is, perhaps, more interesting to women than to men).Well, the movie itself consists of two story lines: one is about an old woman, Ann (Vanessa Redgrave), who is dying, and her daughters (Natasha Richardson and Toni Collette).
The other storyline consists of Ann's recollections of one weekend, when Ann was a young woman (Claire Danes gives an excellent performance here) who came to her best friend's (Mamie Gummer) wedding, and the way it affected her life.The movie is mostly about memories and lost opportunities, and I think that the writers, the actors and the director made a great job.
EVENING (2007) * Claire Danes, Toni Collette, Vanessa Redgrave, Patrick Wilson, Hugh Dancy, Natasha Richardson, Mamie Gummer, Eileen Atkins, Meryl Streep, Glenn Close, Barry Bostwick.
A stellar cast, consisting of Vanessa Redgrave, Claire Danes, Toni Collette, Natasha Richardson, Glenn Close and Meryl Streep, is reason enough for watching "Evening," one of those high-toned, slightly stuffy, intergenerational family dramas that is all about lost loves, wasted lives and missed opportunities, this time among the champagne-sipping upper crust of Newport, Rhode island.Redgrave stars as Ann Grant, a terminally ill woman whose dementia is leading her to reveal secrets on her deathbed that have been locked away in her memory for years.
These scenes set in the present are intercut with those from the past, the 1950's in fact, when a young Ann (now played by Danes) fell in love with Harris (Patrick Wilson), the servant of her best friend, Lila (Mamie Gummer, who looks for all the world like a young Meryl Streep, who indeed steps in as Lila for the present scenes). |
tt0094578 | War of the Worlds | Yet across the gulf of space, minds that are to our minds as ours are to those of the beasts that perish, intellects vast and cool and unsympathetic, regarded this earth with envious eyes, and slowly and surely drew their plans against us.
=== The Coming of the Martians ===
The narrative opens in an astronomical observatory at Ottershaw where explosions are seen on the surface of planet Mars, creating much interest in the scientific community. Later a "meteor" lands on Horsell Common, near the unnamed narrator's home in Woking, Surrey. He is among the first to discover that the object is an artificial cylinder that opens, disgorging Martians who are "big" and "greyish" with "oily brown skin", "the size, perhaps, of a bear", each with "two large dark-coloured eyes", and lipless "V-shaped mouths" which drip saliva and are surrounded by two "Gorgon groups of tentacles". The narrator finds them "at once vital, intense, inhuman, crippled and monstrous". They briefly emerge, have difficulty in coping with the Earth's atmosphere, and rapidly retreat into their cylinder. A human deputation (which includes the astronomer Ogilvy) approaches the cylinder with a white flag, but the Martians incinerate them and others nearby with a heat-ray before beginning to assemble their machinery. Military forces arrive that night to surround the common, including Maxim guns. The population of Woking and the surrounding villages are reassured by the presence of the military. A tense day begins, with much anticipation of military action by the narrator.
After heavy firing from the common and damage to the town from the heat-ray which suddenly erupts in the late afternoon, the narrator takes his wife to safety in nearby Leatherhead, where his cousin lives, using a rented, two-wheeled horse cart; he then returns to Woking to return the cart when in the early morning hours, a violent thunderstorm erupts. On the road during the height of the storm, he has his first terrifying sight of a fast-moving Martian fighting-machine; in panic he crashes the horse cart, barely escaping detection. He discovers the Martians have assembled towering three-legged "fighting-machines" (tripods), each armed with a heat-ray and a chemical weapon: the poisonous "black smoke". These tripods have wiped out the army units positioned around the cylinder and attacked and destroyed most of Woking. Sheltering in his house, the narrator sees a fleeing artilleryman moving through his garden, who later tells the narrator of his experiences and mentions that another cylinder has landed between Woking and Leatherhead, cutting off the narrator from his wife. The two try to escape via Byfleet just after dawn, but are separated at the Shepperton to Weybridge Ferry during a Martian afternoon attack on Shepperton. One of the Martian fighting-machines is brought down in the River Thames by artillery as the narrator and countless others try to cross the river into Middlesex, as the Martians retreat back to their original crater. This gives the authorities precious hours to form a defence-line covering London. After the Martians' temporary repulse, the narrator is able to float down the Thames in a boat toward London, stopping at Walton, where he first encounters the curate, his companion for the coming weeks.
Towards dusk, the Martians renew their offensive, breaking through the defence-line of siege guns and field artillery centred on Richmond Hill and Kingston Hill by a widespread bombardment of the black smoke; an exodus of the population of London begins. This includes the narrator's younger brother, a medical student, also unnamed, who flees to the Essex coast after the sudden, panicked, predawn order to evacuate London is given by the authorities, a terrifying and harrowing journey of three days, amongst thousands of similar refugees streaming from London. The brother encounters Mrs. Elphinstone and her younger sister-in-law, just in time to help them fend off three men who are trying to rob them. Since Mrs. Elphinstone's husband is missing, the three continue on together. After a terrifying struggle to cross a streaming mass of refugees on the road at Barnet, they head eastward. Two days later, at Chelmsford, their pony is confiscated for food by the local Committee of Public Supply. They press on to Tillingham and the sea. There they manage to buy passage to the Continent on a small paddle steamer, part of a vast throng of shipping gathered off the Essex coast to evacuate refugees. The torpedo ram HMS Thunder Child destroys two attacking tripods before being destroyed by the Martians, though this allows the evacuation fleet to escape, including the ship carrying the narrator's brother and his two travelling companions. Shortly thereafter, all organised resistance has ceased, and the Martians roam the shattered landscape unhindered.
=== The Earth under the Martians ===
At the beginning of Book Two the narrator and the curate are plundering houses in search of food. During this excursion the men witness a Martian fighting-machine enter Kew, seizing any person it finds and tossing them into a "great metallic carrier which projected behind him, much as a workman's basket hangs over his shoulder", and the narrator realises that the Martian invaders may have "a purpose other than destruction" for their victims. At a house in Sheen "a blinding glare of green light" and a loud concussion attend the arrival of the fifth Martian cylinder, and both men are trapped beneath the ruins for two weeks. The narrator's relations with the curate deteriorate over time, and he eventually is forced to knock him unconscious to silence his now loud ranting; but the curate is overheard outside by a Martian, who finally removes his unconscious body with one of its handling machine tentacles. The reader is then led to believe the Martians will perform a fatal transfusion of the curate's blood to nourish themselves, as they have done with other captured victims viewed by the narrator through a small slot in the house's ruins. The narrator just barely escapes detection from the returned foraging tentacle by hiding in the adjacent coal-cellar.
The Martians eventually abandon the cylinder's crater, and the narrator emerges from the collapsed house where he had observed the Martians up close during his ordeal; he then approaches West London. En route, he finds the Martian red weed everywhere, a prickly vegetation spreading wherever there is abundant water. On Putney Heath, he once again encounters the artilleryman, who briefly persuades him of a grandiose plan to rebuild civilization by living underground; but, after a few hours, the narrator perceives the laziness of his companion and abandons him. Now in a deserted and silent London, he begins to slowly go mad from his accumulated trauma, finally attempting to end it all by openly approaching a stationary fighting-machine. To his surprise, he quickly discovers that all the Martians have been killed by an onslaught of earthly microbial infections, to which they had no immunity: "slain, after all man's devices had failed, by the humblest things that God, in his wisdom, has put upon this earth." The narrator continues on, finally suffering a brief but complete nervous breakdown, which affects him for days; he is finally nursed back to health by a kind family. Eventually, he is able to return by train to Woking via a patchwork of newly repaired tracks. At his home, he discovers that his beloved wife has miraculously survived. The last chapter reflects on the significance of the Martian invasion and the "abiding sense of doubt and insecurity" it has left in the narrator's mind. | satire | train | wikipedia | "War of the Worlds: The Series" continues the storyline from the original movie while giving it a new twist, with the Martians, or the "alien invaders" as they are called now, taking over people's bodies to prevent them from succumbing to the bacteria that "killed" them in the original movie.
Also seen were their war machines with the heat rays, and Sylvia Van Buren (Ann Robinson), the heroine of the original who fell in love with Dr. Clayton Forrester (Gene Barry's character).
Set in modern times, this series employed so many disturbing images and stories, it genuinely gave me creeps at night.
The first series of WAR OF THE WORLDS is great television and great TV SF-- rivetting, exciting, thought-provoking, well-acted, and well-written.
The off-hand killing of two main characters, the addition of an unneeded extra male lead, and a drastic switch in the series format from covert action to urban guerilla warfare.....
What was unfair was the fact that many things that were building towards the second season NEVER took place, thanks to the fatal change in direction.
The first episode of the second season should have been the last episode period, unless the producers could find a way to bring more reinforcements from the original aliens homeworld.
That would have been a REAL 'War of the Worlds', as the humans could have faced both sets of warring aliens in a battle to save Earth.
I'd like to believe that the series could be revived, since one of the early episodes dealt with a list of 10,000 aliens held somewhere that disappeared.
The first season was very much like a game of chess between the Blackwood Project and the aliens- led the triumvirate Advocacy (featuring the underrated actress, Ilse Von Glatz- who was chilling as an Advocate).
Towards the end of the season, there was a mythology carefully being built with the introductions of new characters such as the renegade alien/human hybrid- Quinn and the Qar'To Synth, Katara.
The best thing about this series was that, in the first half of the first season, you never knew who was going to win the battles.
War of the Worlds season one was my favorite television series.
Rather than being cliched and boring, War of the Worlds managed to be trendy and dark, attempting to deal with mature themes and violence in an intelligent fashion all too rare today.Perhaps the best season was the second, when the war becomes a drawn-out war of attrition, culminating in one of the most thought-provoking finales I have seen this side of Babylon 5.
The idea of bringing back the aliens from War of the Worlds is simply great, especially for those who wonder "what if the aliens had attacked us with our technology today, instead of back in the '50s?" The answer is clear; they would STILL kick ass!
The heat rays they used are just as unbeatable in the 80s as they were in the 50s, and the idea of the aliens going into hibernation to survive rather than just dying was a great plot device to bring them into the present.
You had strong plots, good acting, and a good overall storyline.Then the second season started.What the hell was Frank Mancuso Jr. thinking when he made this series?
For one thing, it's never explained how much time has passed between the first and second seasons, and there's also the matter of where the woman who owned the house where lived in the manor went?
She just disappeared.3) The main characters now live in an underground pipe.4) Even when the main character (Harrison) said he never used a gun, he just broke his own moral code and shot some guys in the second season premiere.5) The plots just sucked.
Now, 21 years later, I still have nightmares.The reason may be the complete lack of human emotions within the aliens.
The aliens are portrayed as total different from us - not "almost human/American" like in other sci-fi shows.
Since Mars is a dead planet and presumably any presence of an indigenous civilization would be noticed from earth, it made sense to change the origin of the aliens to a faraway solar system.It was a shame that the series did not capitalize on the episode, "Angel of Death".
The unexpected, ironic, and somewhat twisted humorous ending would have made for a much more interesting second season had the original plot line been followed.
As it was, some viewers, including myself, disliked the second season's post-apocalyptic setting and stopped watching the series.I present here my own speculative analysis of the aliens from Mortax, for anyone curious enough to read on.Most likely the inhabitants of Mortax originated from a tightly controlled, rigid, caste-driven society.
Of course one of the biggest logical flaws is that the US government admits to three scientists that they do believe the world is being threatened by invasion from a superior alien threat, but that the only resources they can spare to help stop it are in the form of one annoying Army colonel!
Of course this is absurd, but due to the small scale of the series they were acting more as investigators.In my opinion, the best things about this series were the eccentric Dr Blackwood, the interesting dialog, and the alien threat.
It worked more like a sci-fi version of Vichy/ Maquis France in World War 2.Not a great series, in many ways, but a worthwhile and entertaining effort..
I first started to watch the series when i was in Pakistan in 1989/90, i was like..13 years old I was so inspired by the plot the secrecy the commando actions the science and the character of Dr. Blackwood and Lt. Col Paul iron-horse that i took up Physics in university in London six years later, and also decided to join the army..
At almost the same time the original "Star Trek" series was being done at Paramount..
This series, especially upon it's second season (Adrian Paul came aboard here), was incredibly ahead of it's time on several fronts.
A great alien premise ( cloning, infiltration, etc.), cinematography ( lighting, atmosphere, creating "other" localities), and characters ( almost NO cliches, enough said), marked this show as awesomely full of potential.
I do think it would have been a bit more interesting if the aliens had to pay a price for taking over human bodies...
A year or so later, the Morthrai arrive, dismiss the incompetent Mor-tax for their bungling of the Mars project, and proceed with conquest of Earth, which does, they come to realize, seem like the only viable option.Now, that's just my way of rationalizing what we saw in 1953 and in 1988 and 1989.There was a Star Trek link in the series: in one episode, a boy is playing with STTNG action figures while his now-alien parents drive the car, and he makes a sign to appeal to a pair of nuns speeding by ("Nearer My God to Thee!")..
Since our society seldom sees any kind of sci-fi as "cool" I'm really amazed that this ever came out on DVD.Yes the picture quality is lacking and I do wish the animated alien had grabbing the Earth segment was intact but overall I'm very pleased.AS far as sound quality is concerned I was very pleased.
OK, some effects are a bit dated and some aren't up to par but they it was the late 80's and it's television what are you going to do.I like two of the different into themes which I think are solid because both have their own tone which reflects the season's and personally it's something I which most TV shows would do often change their theme in each season.I really like both plots for the show which are the basic covert silent invasion plots which to me I like more and I think are a lot more thrilling because you see the aliens initiate intelligence more than just their weapons and tech all the time, which to me I find even more dangerous.
Yeah it's does sort of takes it's cues from John Carpenter's "The Thing" and "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" with the idea of aliens taking on human identities to look and act like us.
From just the sense of paranoia, dark atmosphere, and feeling of dread as the plans of the invaders escalates and the human team isn't getting steps closer to stopping them.But what really makes this show stand out is that it's really dark because the good guys don't always win which was rare at the time for most shows even alien invasion stories.
Which all the more made this group feel human and made you want to win, hopping they'll score a victory or do even better next time; which is a feeling I don't get much and I like that.The only problem I have is the series really feels uneven.
I'll admit this move indeed alienates even polarizes fans, depending on which season you like more.
I'd love to see a revival of this, may'be make the new series take place after the current Speilburg film "War of the Worlds".
I see no reason for this to happen, just a thought.Overall, it's a solid sci-fi series, this is one hidden alien tripod that is worth a ride.Rating: 3 stars.
I am impressed with some of the reviews on the series, "War of the Worlds The Second Invasion" was a great and modest series based on the HG Wells novel and the movie in 1950's.
Its sad to see that its taken about sixteen years or so for people to catch on to the fact that this was a great series, but in retrospect, it shows how of our culture is of here unable to appreciate a good thing until it's good.The series ran for 42 episodes, and it premiered with a 2 hr movie, which gained some success and it gained popularity as the series went out.
The series had some interesting plot lines and twist.For instance, episode six which I saw again called "An Eye for an Eye" uses the clever story tbat the fake broadcast by Orson Welles on Martian Invasion was NOT a fake but FACT and the government covered it up in 1938.
We then in several shots see the full alien body, more than the original movie in the 50s.
In fact the aliens use this to their advantage like in episode 7 "Second Seal" where theyuses as hosts the bodies of Army personel to attack a base and gather weapons.
Jared Martin as Dr. Harrison Blackwood, who is one of the first to discover the alien invasion is great.
The first season is great though we do see a lot of "recycled footage" to essence save money on episodes, but oh well, its still a great series to watch, and for all you Highlander fans, will appreciate the appearance of Adrian Paul in the second and final half of the season.The series has not been released officially on DVD, although people have been selling DVR copies converted from VHS, however, a word to the wise, sometimes these transfers are of low quality and I wouldn't fork over the 50 or 80 dollars some people ask..
For a television series, it was quite a cinematic experience- Full of sex and violence (when the sci-fi channel re-ran it years later, those bunch of hippies cut out all the gore and such.) The first season was action packed and exiting, great fun for any sci-fi or horror fan.
Unfortunately, with the advent of the second "wave", the creators of the show killed off the two most likeable characters, changed the entire WORLD into this weird techno-post-apocalypse-war zone, and eliminated an entire species of aliens in favor of a much more clean cut, less violent, and generally less interesting breed.
Aliens could take over the bodies of real humans, leading to all sorts of depressing plot lines mostly involving otherwise nice people being turned into aliens.Then if the series wasn't bad enough, they decided to make it worse in Season 2 by turning it into a depressing Cyber-Punk future where a new group of aliens pops in.Thankfully, it was put out of its misery after two seasons..
Let Sleeping Aliens Lie. I vaguely remembered hearing about American TV doing a series based on the events after the Martians tried to invade Earth in the 1950s classic movie WAR OF THE WORLDS and thinking to myself this might be a bad idea .
It`s not actually a continuity error - it`s bad planning on the part of the producers because nearly every episode of the first season uses the film version legacy around the plots including a cameo by Ann Robinson playing the same character she did in the movie .
There`s also a severe lack of on screen chemistry by the lead roles ( especially Jared Martin - I`ve seen forests that are less wooden ) but I guess I shouldn`t be too hard on Richard Chaves as Col Ironhorse , after all it must be very difficult for any actor to play a narrow minded military officer battling against aliens week in week out The second season of WOTW is actually a completely different show format wise .
And when this series came out on TV I was excited and loved it, I knew that the acting left a lot to be desired, but I liked the story and the fact that it was a continuation of the film from the 50's.
As the series came along (I can't believe I watched the WHOLE THING!) the dialogue and effects started to get better.
I can not believe that the censors would allow it to be aired.As the show evolved so did the Alien dialogue - toward the end it really sounded like a language rather than a bunch of made up words.Well, that about sums it up, I can't fault the producers for using, what today is, 'bad' science, but, one must remember the show is set in the 80's, you know curly blown hair you know the ultimate holding gel that a hurricane could not muster and womens dresses with shoulder pads out, way out!
I was stunned at the 2nd year changes and thought the first episode would have been a fantastic season 1 finale.
Oh, if you like this look for First wave and Friday the thirteenth the series, two other GREAT shows.
War of The Worlds the series: What went wrong?.
And overall it was a great concept.Then came season 2.I don't mind the idea that the aliens turned the tables and now our hero's had to fight an uphill battle that much.
Cause the first episode has not even been restored to it's original airing cut that included Dr. Blackthorn as a child watching the war machines fall.Avoid this DVD set at all costs.
The series showed a great deal of creativity with the premiere episode, but unfortunately the quality degraded over the course of the first season; many of the stories were lackluster, and the acting was not of great quality except by the principal actors (especially Richard Chaves as Lt. Col.
The second season, though, brought a new life to the concept and was very engaging and well-done throughout, which is something that does not happen often with syndicated TV series.
The leads in the first season are all likeable, the stories were ahead of their time in terms of television science fiction and it's later obsession with paranoia, as perfected by 'The X Files'.
It's creepy aliens and their catchphrase "To Life Immortal", and the somewhat grisly scenes in which they murder humans or die and break down into a strange acidic goo are certainly not family viewing material, but they are a precursor *to* shows like "The X Files" which occasionally relied on the new-found ability to provide grisly shocks without falling foul of the censors.However, the second season was an utter mess.
Two of the leads were killed in the first episode, the original aliens also bit the dust, and some ridiculous lower-budget "Mad Max" look took over as new aliens with the ability to clone people, and that strange fellow Adrian Paul of "Highlander: The Series" fame appeared on the scene.
I gave up before the show finished its late-night runs, no longer interested in the show which once showed great promise.The first season was, and still remains a classic slice of American television, and if you can get hold of any episodes, its worth a look..
The 1953 "War of the Worlds" is one of my all time favorite movies, and the TV series that's inspired from it is one of my favorite shows of all times, too bad it was cut short for it had great potential.
In my comment I will cover Season 1 & 2 separately and the DVD set.Season 1: The series begins about 35 years after the movie where the aliens are resurrected by nuclear waste and set out to conquer the world.
By adding the viewpoint of the aliens it made for a more unique and interesting storytelling (some episodes are influenced by other movies like "Alien" "The Thing", and "It's Alive!") that were also well-written, though at times it did lag.
Like many fans I wished the 2nd Season continued on this pace, however...Season 2: ***Spoiler begins*** Killing off Drake and Ironhorse was a huge mistake ***Spoiler ends*** Season 1 is practically discarded, with character's personalities altered, a new apocalyptic-"Blade Runner" setting, and even a drastically different alien invaders.
The aliens are giving more familiarity, the new dark world setting is interesting, and the story lines deal with some touchy issues like religion, ecological & urban decay, and the influence of music and movies on the brain.
It's just great to see it out on DVD."War of the Worlds" the series was a fantastic short-lived show that may have helped paved way for others like "X-files". |
tt0293741 | Mashuranbo | In the distant past, the Guardian of the Milky Way galaxy named Lanancuras began to harbor a desire for more power. Because of his connection to the galaxy, he was able to absorb parts of planets and add them to his strength. As a result, he began invading the worlds he was assigned to protect. In the wake of his destruction, a following of creatures from across the galaxy pledged allegiance to Lanancuras and became known as the Kadrians. Taking notice of his ever growing power and followers, the other Celestial Guardians confronted him; however, he had become too powerful, and they were defeated. Unable to subdue Lanancuras, the Celestial Guardians each gave up a part of their power and combined it into a single new Guardian, Mushra. In a final desperate attempt, they used Mushra's core by transforming it into a powerful card with which to seal Lanancuras in a prison. The prison was created from the remains of planets that had suffered under Lanancuras' tyranny. Because planets are themselves large beings, their combined strength- along with the power of the card- was able to restrain him. Thus Lanancuras was successfully sealed in a large meteorite.
The meteorite was sent off into the galaxy to be sealed forever. Meanwhile, the way Lanancuras had increased his strength had consequences on the planets of the Milky Way. On Earth, it was in the shape of a virus that merged with human DNA and destroyed the humans that way. In order to eliminate the virus, scientists worked on combining human DNA with the DNA of animals and other creatures immune to the effects. They succeeded and created a sentient race known as Enterrans (a race of engineered Earthlings) where the Enterrans are based on humans, insects, reptiles, birds, sea creatures, wild beasts, and phantom beasts. Eventually, a cure was found and the human race survived. This all took place around the 22nd century.
Thanks to Lanancuras' influence, the Enterrans fought the robots and the humans where the humans were placed in a near extinction state. Luckily, a scientist named Dr. Daigo Tatsuro placed his 4 year old daughter Yakumo in a sleep chamber in hopes that she would save the human race and find the human sanctuary Shinzo and bring peace back to Earth which was then renamed to Enterra. When the meteor that Lanancuras was imprisoned in struck Earth during the earlier parts of the Human-Enterran War, it's fragment had struck an infant Yakumo giving her abilities that should later discover.
=== First Season (Episodes 1-21) ===
Upon waking up 300 years later at the age of 17, Yakumo Tatsuro stumbled upon her soon to be companion Mushra while he is strung above a waterfall for impersonating a king. After Yakumo rescues Mushra, they soon run into their other companions Sago and Kutal.
Mushra, Sago. and Kutal are then shown to be Hyper-Enterrans, Enterrans who can transform into stronger powered-up versions of themselves, these forms allow them to fight the various creatures that come after them. Throughout the first season the main characters fight a collection of Enterrans known as the Seven Kings/Generals, and various independent Enterrans. Each of these Kings rules a region that the gang travels through, which have different types of Enterrans, such as King Daku's land having a majority insect based Enterrans. The defeated Enterrans become En-Cards, which are card-like structures that can be used to increase power in both Enterrans and several machines such as Yakumo's vehicle Hakuba.
=== Second Season (22-32) ===
When the timeline was altered upon Yakumo finding Shinzo where the Enterrans and humans have settled their differences, the Kadrians had devised a plan to free their master: crashing the meteor into Earth would destroy the seal, thus allowing Lanancuras to escape. The Guardians eventually discovered this plan, but it was too late. With the meteorite already redirected and heading towards Earth, the Guardians held a vow that they would not directly intervene. They reasoned it was the duty of the planet and its inhabitants to defeat Lanancuras. In a stroke of luck, the Kadrians' plan was not a complete success. At impact, the seal holding Lanancuras merely ripped due to the impact; therefore, the Kadrian King was still trapped by the planetary pieces.
This also meant that in the second timeline, Lanancuras never used up a lot of energy to control the Human-Enterran War when his meteor struck Earth and while he was completely dormant in the first timeline, he was about to break free from his imprisonment in the second. | fantasy | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0329390 | Monte Walsh | Montelius "Monte" Walsh (Tom Selleck) is an aging cowboy facing the final days of the Wild West era. He and his friend Chet Rollins (Keith Carradine), another long-time cowhand, work at whatever ranch work comes their way, but "nothing they can't do from a horse". Their lives are divided between months on the range and the occasional trip into town. Camaraderie and competition with the other cowboys fill their days. They seek work and take a job at the ranch of Cal Brennan (William Devane), where they meet an old friend, Shorty Austin (George Eads), another ranch hand.
Monte has a long-term relationship with an old flame, prostitute and saloon girl "Countess" Martine Bernard (Isabella Rossellini), who suffers from tuberculosis. Chet, meanwhile, has fallen in love with Mary Wilder (Lori Hallier), a widow who owns a hardware store. As barbed wire and railways steadily eliminate the need for the cowboy, Monte and his friends are left with fewer and fewer options. New work opportunities are available to them, but the freedom of the open prairie is what they long for. Shorty loses his job and gets involved in rustling and killing, gunning down a local lawman. Then Monte and Chet find that their lives on the range are inexorably redirected.
Chet marries Mary and goes to work in the store, telling Monte that their old way of life is simply disappearing. Caught up in the spirit of the moment, Monte asks Martine to marry him, and she accepts. Monte goes on a drinking binge and rides a wild bay horse that even Shorty could not tame through town, causing considerable damage.
A rodeo owner, Colonel Wilson (Wallace Shawn), sees him and offers him a job. Monte considers the high salary, but decides the work is too degrading and refuses. Eventually, they all must say goodbye to the lives they knew, and try to make a new start. When Shorty shoots and kills Chet while trying to rob the store, Monte, distraught after the death of his beloved Martine, goes after him.
Shorty arrives, and it is apparent that he knows of the fight to come with his former friend. He tells Monte he is sorry to hear of Martines death, and walks off. Perhaps trying to give Monte a choice to kill him or walk away. Monte, unable to shoot Shorty in the back as he walks away, pursues. Shorty makes a long shot with a pistol at Monte, but runs off when the shot only wounds Monte in the left side. Monte then manages to slip around Shorty and shoots him. As Shorty is dying, Monte tells him that he rode the wild bay horse.
Seven years pass and Monte returns from working all over the West. His friends have gotten older, prices are rising, and he is seen by the townspeople as a relic of another time. However, one little boy asks for lessons in roping. When the accountant who manages the lands he used to ranch drives his primitive car into a mud puddle and asks for help, Monte jumps his horse over the vehicle and rides away. | violence, murder | train | wikipedia | The film starts at the ending XIX century when appears railway , big companies buy ranches and new technologies put difficult things for traditional cowboys who lost their jobs .
It deals about a veteran cowboy( Tom Selleck in Lee Marvin's role) and his colleague (Keith Carradine) , they see declining the ending days of Wild West era and the transition to a new century where horses are left .
Monte only lives his work and is enamored for a prostitute named Countess Martine Bernard (Isabella Rossellini, in Jeanne Moreau's role).
Monte Walsh and his partners are left with few options for survive, tough new jobs opportunities are available .
Then , Monte embarks on mission to revenge best pal's death (Keith Carradine in Jack Palance role).This melancholic picture is a magnificent TV western with action , a love story , shootouts , and spectacular scenarios .
Moving and sensible Western where the cowboys must say goodbye to the lives they know and some of them attempt to make a new upright start and others way to crime.
Great performances for all casting with excellent main roles from Selleck and Carradine .
Special mention to Isabella Rossellini as an aging whore and James Gammon as veteran cowboy with sad ending .
Sensational directorial by noted Simon Wincer , a Western expert , but he previously directed to Tom Selleck in ¨Crossfire trail and Quigley Down Under¨ and usually directs episodes for TV mini-series, such as ¨Into the West¨, ¨The Ponderosa¨ and ¨Lonesome Dove¨ among others.
Best known for the novel "Shane," Jack Schaefer also wrote the novel "Monte Walsh," a depiction of the life of the itinerant cowhand.
The first film of "Monte Walsh" was a great little picture, with a nice uncharacteristic role for Jack Palance as Monte's pal Chet.
Tom Selleck is just grand as Monte--getting a bit old for bronco-busting, but still full of piss-and-vinegar.
But "Monte Walsh" really earns its spurs by showing a 21st century audience how wonderful and horrible life on the 19th century range could be..
It's unlikely anyone will ever make another western as good as Wincer's LONESOME DOVE but MONTE WALSH is a good effort.
'Monte Walsh' is not just a western or a cowboy movie.
It's a movie about cowboys and that point make all the difference.In fact, 'Monte Walsh' tells a story that is universal in it's own theme; a story concerning the end of a time, the novelties of the beginning of the 20º century and the progressive death of a code of honor and a way of life.The movie is beautifully directed by Australian director Simon Wincer.
Tom Selleck is perfect in the title role and the support cast is good too, especially Keith Carradine and William Devane.The only problem with the movie lies in some scenes, like the suicide of the veteran of the Civil War (in my opinion, a bit overacted) and the last scene, that brings a irony that sounds strange and dislocated with the rest.But after all, this movie is a really standout among the most recent western movies..
The TNT remake of "Monte Walsh" is a wonderfully detailed character study of aging cowboys and their struggle with the decline of the old west.Tom Selleck, Keith Carradine, William Devane, James Gammon and Barry Corbin are the last of a dying breed and they don't accept the inevitable change that progress brings.
"I won't do anything I can't do from a horse" is the condition Monte Walsh demands for accepting a job at a corporate ranch.There is more than a little humor in this film as the cowboys deal with their own mortality as well as the end of their way of life.
William Saunders small but engaging turn as the trail cook Skimpy provides some welcome comic relief to an otherwise wistful and touching story.This film has great acting, beautiful photography, gorgeous music and a wonderfully understated style of direction by Simon Wincer.Worth the time and commercial breaks..
Tom Selleck as "Monte Walsh" is a natural for these westerns.
Yup, this is a very deep and diverse cast.You also get one of the better directors doing this made-for-cable TV movie in Australian Simon Wincer, who directed "Lonesome Dove." Plus, the film is based on a book from perhaps the most famous western author of all- time: Louis L'Amour.The story is not an upbeat one, but not overly depressing despite the fact that few people are left by the end of the film.
A line heard a few times in this excellent film is "Aint nobody sits on a horse like Monte Walsh." I'll amend that by saying aint nobody looks so at home in a western as Tom Selleck.
The time is the late 1800's and the cowboy way of life is coming to a close.
I dearly loved the original "Monte Walsh" (1970), starring Lee Marvin, Jeanne Moreau and Jack Palance.
That was one of the best westerns (and best movies) I've ever seen.This version, a more modern telling of the same story, is also quite good, but I found it lacking in the "grit and dirt" of the earlier one.
Tom Selleck is convincing enough as a cowboy, but unfortunately he still has that "just stepped out of the pages of GQ magazine" aura to him that I don't think he is ever going to shake.
There is nothing wrong with being as handsome as Tom Selleck, it's just that I found it hard to feel totally convinced of his portrayal of an authentic, hard-scrabble cowboy of the dying Old West.I felt that too much attention was devoted to making it all so "pretty pretty" instead of letting it gather a patina of cow dung, as must have been the case in the *real* old West.
All said, it's really a good movie with a powerful, timeless story about people losing their way of life thanks to rapid technological progress and corporate cynicism.
I would recommend this film to any die-hard western movie fan, but please try to pick up a copy of the earlier 1970 version, and watch that one as well.
Selleck has found his post-Magnum PI niche with Westerns, such as Monte Walsh and Quigly Down Under, among others.Selleck delivers a quiet, strong performance.
Monte Walsh is a story about times changing and how that impacts the lives of those that need for times to stay the same.
Watch for the great characterization by Selleck, a very good supporting cast, and wonderful cinematography..
Very good western with a very strong core cast (Selleck, Rossellini, Carradine x2), and an equally good supporting cast.
Strong story about the "last cowboy" and his escapades at the turn of the century.It would be nice to see Selleck and Rossellini together in another western with more screen time together.
Not sure where this movie was shot, but the scenery was magnificent!Keep the Selleck westerns coming!.
Tom Selleck does an excellent job playing a cowboy in 1892 Wyoming, whose way of life is quickly becoming obsolete in a country rapidly moving towards the automated 20th century.
I found myself sympathizing strongly with this group of cowboys who are trying to cope with getting old, being able to sustain themselves and their family, and stubbornly refusing to give up a way of living that they have held onto their entire life.
The entire movie is very entertaining, and it has everything: a solid plot, a good bit of humor, and a few cameo appearances that help to put the icing on an already great film.
After watching this, I almost wish I was born 125 years ago, as Monte Walsh does a great job portraying the cowboy life in an accurate manner...Two thumbs up!.
Monte Walsh is a great western film...The acting is excellent,the location stunning and the direction handled expertly..In short i loved this movie...
It is clearly as labour of love for all those involved making the film..The tale of the old cowboy refusing to change as the old west dies out has been told before but not with as much pride & passion as this effort has...Tom Selleck has at last found a genre that shakes off his Magnum Pi days with success...The last two previous TNT westerns(Saber River & Crossfire Trail) were good but this really stands out above the two.I won't go into plot detail as those who haven't watched the film yet i'll leave that for you to discover for yourself but i will say that this is one of my favourite westerns ever made & i for one can't wait for Selleck to saddle up once again.........
As far as I'm concerned, Selleck should have a western in production all the time.
I like him in other stuff, too, but since he's the main western actor right now, I'm really focused on them.
While not packed with shoot-em-up action like lots of Westerns, this film really depicts what a 19th Century cowboy's life was like--lots of boredom, bad food, foul weather, and little comforts.
The supporting cast of cowboys accurately portray the life of a real cowboy better than most movies of this genre.
It celebrates the "wild west" more like it really was than many of the usual Westerns and I would recommend it unless you want nothing but action..
Monte Walsh(Tom Selleck)struggles to maintain his identity as the job of cowboy is becoming obsolete.
It was like watching the old westerns that used to be on t.v.
Tom Selleck is one of the few actors in Hollywood able to play a convincing cowboy.
Although Tom Selleck's performance is comparable to his others, the supporting cast is average.
The greatest disappointment comes from having seen the original "Monte Walsh" movie in the 1970s with Lee Marvin, and then comparing.
The original movie was sad and gave you the feeling that a way of life had disappeared and things would never really be the same.
In contrast, the current version of "Monte Walsh", while following the same basic plot, and quoting some and paraphrasing other from the original movie, doesn't seem to convey the emotion of the situation, but is more like just the telling of a story of hard times.
The relationships between Monte and his friends and his lady seemed closer and more genuine in the original movie than Tom Selleck conveyed.
Very seldom these days do you see a western that is not simply "look at the young star for 90 minutes." This movie actually has a plot, and tells a marvelous story about a man who simply will not accept the changing of his world.
He is "going to ride all the way down to Mexico and up to Canada and get paid for it." I strongly recommend this modern day classic to anyone who really likes a good western..
another great western in tom sellecks' film library!!!
as a budding 53 year old actor who has longed to be in a good if not great western i am truly envious of someone like tom who makes it look so easily real on film..
Extremely accurate historically, this western chronicles the clash of the cowboy culture with 20th century progress - a popular theme in U.
Selleck is excellent as Monte (as he is in most roles!) The production is very accurate, amazingly so for a T V western; "...Dove" was the archetypal western but this comes very close.
Tom Selleck cuts a World-weary figure trying to cope with the changes that take the cowboys' Western World into the 20th century.
With a small but talented cast of work-soiled trailmates, he plays out the end of an era in fine form.The beautiful scenery of Alberta substitutes well for the Wyoming Territory it portrays.
Monte Walsh is one of those movies that at the time of viewing, appears to amble along at a slow pace with no apparent direction.
The movie delivers a powerful message about how change affects people as they grow older and how much they long for the way things were in 'their' younger days.
This a movie that has the same pleasant after affect as a trip down memory lane does and has so many elements of cowboy life in the late 1800's that I recommend it not as a history lesson but a very enjoyable period movie the whole family will enjoy.
Monte Walsh was a good movie that my wife and I enjoyed very much..
Released in 2003, "Monte Walsh" chronicles the mundane adventures the title character (Tom Selleck) & Chet Rollins (Keith Carradine) and other itinerant cowhands in remote Wyoming in 1892-93, with an epilogue taking place in 1900.
Can these old cowboys adapt to the new century?
Isabella Rossellini plays Monte's romantic interest while George Eads and William Devane play Shorty and Brennan respectively.Being made-for-cable (TNT), this newer version of Jack Schaefer's novel lacks the sheen of, say, 2003's "Open Range," but it's not far off in overall quality and shows that a superlative Western can be made on a TV-budget.
I've seen the 1970 version, but it was so long ago that I can't compare the two.The movie starts out dull as it shows the everyday life of the cowhands, but I caught a grip with the realistic vibe and was fully immersed into the story by the second half where the story perks up.
The story is nigh elegiac in tone as we witness the limited opportunities for these tough Westerners as their way of life is stifled by progress.
"Monte Walsh" is akin to similar Westerns like 1967's "Will Penny," which was hampered by its subplot of cartoony villains.
"Monte Walsh" has no such flaw.The film runs 117 minutes and was shot in Alberta, Canada.GRADE: B+.
Better than a lot of westerns, but still there's really nothing there.I suppose the irony is that this "vanishing way of life" was really only around for about sixty years (ca 1850-1910).
So, if the above is true, the end of the cowboy way of life is...
Excellent portrayal of the wild west cowboy in the waning years of the 19th century.
Tom Selleck has done justice to the part of Monte Walsh.
Tom Selleck looks like he was born to play Monte Walsh, but he still talks like Magnum, P.I. Keith Carradine would have been a better choice for the lead role, but then I suppose he doesn't have the audience drawing power of Mr. Selleck.
The story is just after the turn of the 20th century and there just isn't much of a role for real cowboys any more, but there are still a lot of them about.
William Devane finally puts in a performance I like and Isabella Rossellini does a nice job as the whore with a heart of gold.
Every element, every line, every character falls into place perfectly, like a work of nature, rather than a mere movie script.
You really care whether they live or die.And like a true tragedy, you even care when a bad guy dies, having a sense that it is a waste of a life that could, and should have turned out differently.Perhaps what is so remarkable about this movie is that, like High Noon, it does not exactly have a happy ending.
Selleck plays the symbolic last cowboy of the open range West, who resists or tries to ignore all the technological and economic changes that threaten to diminish or end his lifelong cherished working life as a wandering open range cowboy -for-hire.
The point was that the cowboys wanted respect for their jobs and way of life.
I found most all the characters well cast especially Selleck as the mule-headed last cowboy.
Unlike most cowboy stars of the past, Selleck typically spends considerable time meditating and grinning, slowing down the overall action.
At some point, Monte considers giving up cowboying to join a wild west show, to make a more proper husband for her.
Monte somehow manages to find enough work cowboying to get by.
Penny's problem is he's getting old rather than the free ranging cowboy is becoming obsoleteThe current DVD, part of a small set of Selleck's westerns is of excellent quality.
I believe that the movie, Monte Walsh tells me to strive for my desires and dreams because in the movie, Monte continues doing his job as a cowboy even though he lost his close friends and he continues even with technology taking his job away.
However, at one point he has second thought on whether he is doing the right thing to leave his passion for being a cowboy.I saw this movie at my father's house on DVD on September 25th 2005.
At one point I never had an intention of seeing this movie until my father recommended it, so I decided to watch it.In the movie, it shows Monte and his friends enjoying their jobs as cowboys.
With automobiles making horse obsolete and trains doing the job of moving animals much faster; the need for cowboys was decreasing.
Recently, I have been getting more social and this difficulty is starting to disappear.When Monte lost all his friends; he had second thoughts on whether to continue his job or not.
A Waste of Great Skies & Tom Selleck.
Well, I guess I expected another satisfying Tom Selleck movie.
I had watched two excellent TS Westerns prior to this one - that were part of a 3 pack: Last Stand at Saber River & Crossfire Trail.
Selleck and Carradine are members of the cowboy subculture of post-war Wyoming and, boy, do they have fun when they're not working.
As his way of life is squashed by higher economic powers, he loses his friends one by one and turns into a kind of Willy Loman, talking alone to his horse.I don't want to repeat any observations from my earlier review of the original "Monte Walsh", with Lee Marvin.
The stories, and even the individual scenes, are pretty much the same.Tom Selleck is okay in the lead role. |
tt0091981 | Solarbabies | In a bleak post-apocalyptic future, most of Earth's water has been controlled. The Eco Protectorate, a para-military organization, governs the planet's new order. Orphan children, mostly teenagers, live in orphanages created by the Protectorate, designed to indoctrinate new recruits into their service. The orphans play a rough sport which is a hybrid of lacrosse and roller-hockey. Playing is the only thing that unites them other than the futile attempts of the Protectorate to control them. These orphans are Jason, the group's leader (Jason Patric), Terra (Jami Gertz), Tug (Peter DeLuise), Rabbit (Claude Brooks), Metron (James LeGros), and a young deaf boy named Daniel (Lukas Haas).
While hiding in a cave, Daniel finds a mysterious orb with special powers. The orb is an alien intelligence called Bohdai, who miraculously restores Daniel's hearing and has other powers, such as creating rain indoors. Another orphan, Darstar (Adrian Pasdar), takes the orb, hoping that he will be able to use it. He leaves the orphanage on rollerskates and Daniel soon follows. The rest of the group chase after Daniel. The E-police learn of Bohdai while chasing the teens and catch Darstar with the sphere. The teens are eventually rescued by a band of older outlaws called the Eco Warriors. They have retired from fighting and are led by Terra's long-lost father. The teens leave the Eco Warriors and using their rollerskating skills, break into the Protectorate's high security Water Storage Building. The teens discover the E-Police are trying to destroy Bohdai and they manage to recover the alien, but as soon as they do the sphere dematerializes and destroys the facility, releasing the water back to where it belongs as they rush out. As they all gather on a nearby hillside, Bohdai sparks the first thunderstorm the teens have ever seen and returns to space, but not without leaving a bit of himself behind in each of them.
Ultimately, the orphans are seen swimming together in the newly restored ocean, Darstar being fully accepted into the group and Jason and Terra sharing a kiss. | violence | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0111271 | Squanto: A Warrior's Tale | Set in the early 17th century, a Patuxet tribesman named Squanto (Adam Beach) is captured by English settlers. He is then taken to England but escapes with a group of men, along with Epenow (Eric Schweig), a Nauset from Martha's Vineyard who was also captured by the English.
When the English ship arrives in Plymouth England, Squanto and Epenow are considered as slaves after meeting the employer of the crew, King George. As a welcome, Squanto gets thrown in a ring with a giant bear. Their battle becomes a spectacle for the English.
Squanto is able to escape, and soon after escapes in a row boat. When he's discovered, he's lying unconscious on a rocky shore, and soon found by a trio of monks who had been fishing.
Squanto is taken into their monastery, in spite of the reluctancy of head Brother Paul. The monk who offers the most open arms, Brother Daniel (Mandy Patinkin), becomes a mentor and friend to Squanto. From Brother Daniel, Squanto learns English, and at the same time, he imparts some knowledge about his world to his new housemates, introducing them to moccasins and popcorn. Brother Paul remains skeptical of 'the pagan' and in any possibility of a "New World".
Meanwhile, Sir George firmly believes that Squanto belongs to the Plymouth printing company, and he has men on the hunt. In another cinematic sequence, Squanto pulls off an improbable escape to accompany Epenow and the crew setting sail back to America.
What Squanto returns to devastates him. His tribe (including his wife, Nakooma) has been entirely wiped out due to illnesses that the Europeans brought. Epenow wishes to turn violent against the English who mistreated them. The Englishmen and Nauset tribe are ready to do battle, but Squanto manages to settle things peacefully. The last scenes of the film portray the first Thanksgiving celebration. | romantic, action, cruelty, murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0148583 | Passion | Christine, an advertising executive, is attempting to gain professional and romantic power over her up-and-coming subordinate, Isabelle, as revenge for her affair with Christine's lover, Dirk. Christine does everything in her power to ruin Isabelle's reputation and relationships. She also tries to fire Isabelle's secretary, Dani. Because of these events, Isabelle seemingly becomes emotionally destitute and develops an addiction to prescription drugs.
After Christine is found dead, Isabelle is arrested and confesses to the murder while in a drug-induced trance. Desperate to prove her innocence, Isabelle shows the police that she has an alibi on the evening the murder took place. Dirk, having been drunk after being rejected by Christine, is arrested after a scarf with Christine's blood on it turns up in his car. Isabelle is freed and Dirk is charged with the murder despite his denials.
Eventually, it is revealed that Isabelle had murdered Christine, and set everything up to convince everyone that she was having a nervous breakdown while framing Dirk for the crime. Dani, who secretly is in love with Isabelle, reveals that she had captured Isabelle on video with her cellphone at various moments during the night of the murder. Dani then tries to blackmail Isabelle into becoming her lover. That night, Isabelle has a strange dream where she strangles Dani after being seduced by her, but not before Dani sends the video incriminating Isabelle to the investigating police detective. Suddenly, Christine's twin sister appears and strangles Isabelle from behind with a bloodstained scarf. The next moment, Isabelle wakes up in her own bedroom from her nightmare only to face a new one with Dani lying dead at the foot of her bed. | sadist | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0387914 | Voces inocentes | In 1986, Chava is a young 11-year-old boy from El Salvador. His father escaped to the United States at the start of the civil war when he was only 5. His family lives in a small town of Cuscatancingo that is currently heavily fought over between the Salvadoran army and the El Salvador guerrillas. His mother makes a living for the family by sewing, and Chava sells the clothes in shops. When he's not in school, Chava works for a bus driver announcing stations for him as a part-time service to help his family with money.
He is nearing his twelfth birthday, when the Salvadoran military forces will recruit him into active service against the guerillas. Chava witnesses the army recruiting twelve-year-old children from his school inside, and also witnesses a 10-year-old recruited when he trips another boy as a bad prank on him, and he is violently restrained after he tries to run away, and his teacher is almost shot while trying to defend him.
One day, his uncle Beto, who has joined the guerrillas, comes to visit Chava's family. Beto wants to take Chava with him so the military can't recruit him, but Chava's mother is against it. Beto gives a radio to Chava and tells him how to listen to the guerrillas' banned radio station, Venceremos. Throughout the scenes in the village where they live, there are firefights between government and rebel forces, as the settlement is on the border of the conflict. Chava knowingly plays a song banned by the Salvadoran Army in front of the soldiers, but the town's priest saves him by playing the same song over the church's loudspeaker, focussing the soldier's attention away from Chava.
During class, Chava falls in love with a girl in his class named Cristina Maria. The guerrillas attack the army from the school building and the school is closed. Kella and her family move out of town to her mother's house in a safer area. One of the guerrillas, Raton, tells Chava of the army's next recruitment day, and Chava and his friends warn the entire town to hide their children. Chava decides to visit Cristina Maria but only finds the bombed-out shell of her house. He and his friends decide to join the guerrillas, but they are followed and the guerrilla camp is attacked by the army.
Chava and his friends are taken from the camp, and forcibly marched to an unknown destination, repeating the opening scene. It appears to be an execution ground on a riverbank, where other bodies litter the scene. Ancha, the mentally handicapped local from Chava's village is seen to have been hanged. The soldiers begin to shoot the boys one by one, and two of them are killed. Chava is next in turn, but at the last moment he is saved by a guerrilla attack. He runs back into the undergrowth right into a raging firefight. After seeing a guerrilla get killed by a government soldier, Chava feels he should fight against them. He picks up the rifle, but realizes the government soldier is another young boy who he knew in school. He cannot bring himself to kill his old friend, another human. He flees, and the camera shows the boy he was aiming at, who realizes that his life was in another child's hands. Chava runs home to find his mother in the burnt out ruins of their house. She decides to send him to the United States to prevent him being caught by the authorities, and he promises to return and rescue his brother before he too turns twelve.
In 1992, six years later, it is shown that he also rescued his brother and brought him into the United States, and the war has ended. | murder | train | wikipedia | I remember visiting during war time, seeing soldiers with their guns, though i was a very young child unaware of the true situation.This movie brought to light the horrible scenes and awful truths of the atrocities that occurred during the war, and that still happen in warfare today.
The film depicts the story of Chava, an 11 year-old boy, whose main concern is that as soon as he turns 12 he will be recruited by the Military to fight the Guerillas.
Though it is set in El Salvador, this could be a story from anywhere around the world, where a Civil War breaks out and the effects on its own people.The characters are well written; the plot well told and the actors, especially, the kid playing Chava are very good.
I cried remembering those nights when bullets were flying over my house.WAR is a crime no matter what the objective is and specially if innocence is stolen from children.The movie travels through every place in which children are forced to take a weapon in their innocent hands: Africa, Middle-East, Asia, Colombia, etc; or to every place in which children suffer the consequences of war.For those who has not lived a war by themselves and enjoy watching the news about IRAQ, AFGHANISTAN, ISRAEL, COLOMBIA it is time to think about what you can do in order to stop this human massacre in the name of "freedom" ..
I just read all of your comments guys..it doesn't matter which side mistreated kids more..the fact is kids were recruited to fight...i come from Lebanon, a country that knew 15 years of civil war..and yes in my country too, kids fought side to side with militias..."Voces Innocentes" is for me a very sad movie..it tickles our state of mind in the sense that it reminds us that life isn't as pleasant anywhere else on earth..here El Salvador is shown torn by civil war, but elsewhere daily wars are still going on (Darfour in Ethiopia, Sida in Africa, poverty in India...) I received the movie from Mexico..It is a shame it was only shown here in Canada in Toronto's Film Festival..Movies like "Voces Innocentes" should be made known to the public...Instead of bombarding people with loads of commercial pointless movies, let them think for a change....
A Truly Moving Picture "
explores the human journey by artistically expressing hope and respect for the positive values of life."The film is set in war-torn El Salvador in the early 1980s.
They also rape girls, execute anyone they are suspicious of regardless of age and sex, and harass the Catholic Church and its priest.This story is told via a poor family consisting of a Mother, a 11-year old son (Chava), and a younger brother and older sister.
The film, set in El Salvador during the years of civil war in the '80s, is told through the voice and eyes of 11-year old Chava.
Boys were forcefully drafted into the army and thrown into battle-infested areas as soon as they reached 12, sometimes younger (amazing that this movie neglected to depict the fact that the guerrillas were worse, they took kids at 9 years of age and gave them Ak-47's to attack military bases).Anyways, I really enjoyed this "coming of age" movie in a war-torn country, at least it was accurate and not preposterous like James Wood's/Oliver Stone's 1985 "Salvador"..
It was an emotionally moving and raw account of a boy's life in a horrific place at a horrific time and hopefully brings spotlight to the plight of hundreds of thousands more children who are in a similar fate today in many parts of our world.The movie makes you ask yourself how man can treat its own offspring in such a callous and cold manner.
Had it no been for a teacher who cared about him and was strong enough to literally pull Oscar from the life of a gang-member, take him to the track and field coach to get him involved in sports and also help him to explore his liking for poetry, his life may have been much different today.One other issue that this movie leads you to explore is our inability to counsel and rehabilitate these children who have been through more as a child emotionally in their tattered youth than most go through in their lifetime.
When governments are finally pressured into taking action and rescuing these children from their plight, we leave them to fix their battered bodies and souls by themselves.I thought this movie told the story about a child and his family during a horrific time in El Salvador's history and brought to the forefront a several current global problems that many have chosen to ignore.
The story of a 11-year-old boy and his family who live in El Salvador during the times of civil war.
The story of a 11-year-old boy and his family who live in El Salvador during the times of civil war.
i liked it because i know a lot of people in my country found themselves in the same situation, and i've heard so many stories about what it was like during the civil war, i've read books about it, and it matches so perfectly with the movie it amazed me.
A great nationalism helped the army from recruiting, young men presented themselves at the age of 18.Another fact, soldiers and guerrilla people didn't go into schools, and priests wore jeans and t-shirt.Tradition such as those balloons with fire aren't from El Salvador, and the accent or some words like "orale" are Mexican, Chava is not even a Salvadorian nickname, or kella...The good things about it: Salvadorean women are like that, they fight until death if is possible for their children, they are strict and hardworking, the country houses are represented very realistic, the kids eating mango from the trees, and the houses near the river...
This movie is about an 11 year- old boy who has to make tough decisions or who is involved in the chaos that was the civil war in El Salvador between 1980-1992.
"Voces inocentes" is the powerful, tightly-directed--yet difficult-to-watch--story of a group of pre-teenage children caught in the madness of El Salvador's civil war.
As the movie bounces back and forth between happy scenes of children playing and the staccato bursts of machine gun fire, the audience senses that things will end badly.This is clearly a political film, but director Luis Mandoki appears to have two conflicting messages that he wants to send.
The soldiers destroyed the house of his girlfriend and decided to go with the warriors but the soldiers cached them, kill to children but Chava scape, finally hi found her mother crying for him thinking he is dead, he left his country and 6 years later see his family again.
The young actor Carlos Padilla ("Chava")delivers a brilliant performance, all the casting is right, the movie feels immediate and its characters feel like real live people.
Everything was outstanding - for example the editing (beautiful), the acting (three thumbs up if that's possible), the cinematography and the director's vision (eye candy), the screenplay (fantastic), the music (completely in sync with the mood every time and it actually seemed like the music had created the film), the casting (where do you find these people?
Consummated, exquisite and utterly hardcore, Innocent Voices is the kind of movie that imprints those two or three masterfully created scenes on your unconscious that, after you leave the theater, next week, next year
forever, you are reminded that you have it easy and you should be grateful for that.Although this movie is base directly on a war in an specific place and time, it never becomes a documentary, not even a commentary about such conflict, instead, goes above the good and evil, the right and wrong, life and death and to the credit of the director, Mr. Mandoki the film mirrors an 11 year-old boy's recognition of reality and his ways to deal with it.Relentless.
The film centers around a young 12-year-old boy Chava, in danger of becoming recruited by the military in El Salvador's brutal civil war; and partly around his mother, abandoned by her husband, struggling to keep her family together in wartime.
I was 12 years old during the time of the Iran-Contra scandals, and I am very happy to finally see that a film of such power that addresses the war in El Salvador.
A gripping and convincing looking picture about one village's experiences during the Salvadoran civil war of the 80's, with a touching performance by Luis Padilla as Chava, an eleven year old facing forced recruitment into the army on his twelfth birthday.
Living in the Eye of War. INNOCENT VOICES (Voces inocentes) is a 2004 film from Mexico that relates a true story about he civil war in El Salvador from 1980 - 1992.
It is a disturbing film in that in addition to relating the terror of living in a land where war raises it's spectral head randomly at day or night, but the focus of the film is on the fact that once boys reached the age of twelve years they were forcibly conscripted to become killing soldiers.According to the way history books have defined this war, 'The Salvadoran Civil War (1980- 1992) was a conflict in El Salvador between the military-led government of El Salvador and the Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front (FMLN), a coalition or umbrella organization of five left-wing guerrilla groups.
Countless disappeared and More than 75,000 people were killed.'The story is brought to life by following a young boy Chava (Carlos Padilla in an outstanding performance) whose father left El Salvador for the US in 1980 leaving Chava as the man of the house for this mother Kella (Leonor Varela, in another fine performance) and his brother and sister.
The movie depicts the story of a little boy, "Chava", who lives just with his mother and the military drafted him to fight against the guerrilla.
Being born in El Salvador and at a young age being a witness to the Civil War that almost torn our country apart, I was impressed by how well it was all represented through this film.
Innocent Voices is one of the movies that affected me emotionally the most out of everything I've seen.The directing and story telling is excellent in that it is told through the eyes of a 12 year old boy living in perilous times.
This powerful and eye opening portrayal of the civil war in El Salvador is beautifully done and enough to make anyone experience a plethora of emotions during this heartfelt story.Another aspect that truly makes this film amazing is the outstanding acting performances by every character, most notably Carlos Pidilla who absolutely made the movie for me with his performance.
The movie opens with the hard truth that the children are mostly likely about to be executed for their involvement with the guerrillas and the narrator set the frame of telling the story of his last year of childhood.
The story follows Chava an 11 year old boy and his friends facing the reality of being drafted into the El Salvadoran military once they turn age 12 during the civil war in the 1980's.
In this film, the spoken language is Spanish and the main character of the story is an 11 year old boy, named Chava.
In the Drama/Thriller , Innocent Voices (Mexico 2004) by Mexican director, Luis Mandoki, is a coming of age story revolved around Chava, an 11 year old boy living in El Salvador.
This film focuses on Chava and his friends just wanting to live a normal kids life during the time of the Civil War in the 1980's.
This film does a good job at displaying everyday life for not just children, but all of the people living in El Salvador during the war.
The UN report indicates that indeed only 5 percent of any human rights violations were committed by the opposition fighters; also it was proved as indicated in the same UN report, that the FMLN guerrilla fights were not responsible for massacres of civilians however the military government and the associated death squads were found to be responsible for the majority.The movie also brought up the interesting issue regarding the activist role the church played in El Salvador trying to resolve the conflict.
This movement advocated that praying was not enough to end the terrible poverty and oppression of the peasants who were the majority of the population of El Salvador.In closing, Innocent Voices is a well-made movie, a simple story with likable characters and beautiful and realistic cinematography.
Innocent Voices is based on the true story of a young boy growing up in war torn El Salvador.
Luis Mandoki writes and directs a very real and suspenseful film, which follows the difficult daily life of a young boy and his family amidst the civil war in El Salvador during the 1980s.
It is a grand reminder of what humanity should be, and what we can make it over petty issues.Though there were warm, funny and touching moments I cried, felt scared and angry through the entire movie and was left contemplative for quite a while after viewing it.It's a struggle of a mother with abandonment issues trying to keep the rest of her family together in a war, during her sons rapid coming of age and the circumstances surrounding their village and the life they must live there.
This one is definitely a movie that i'll recommend to anyone anywhere to watch...brilliant work by the director, extremely earthly presented scenes, beautiful touching story revealed in hard times of living.
"Innocent Voices (Voces inocentes)" is a beautiful looking dramatization of the impact of civil war on children and and families, in this case the drawn-out war between the U.S.-backed government of El Salvador vs.
I have no idea who were the bads guys, the Army or the Guerrillas, and I don't think Chava or his family ever knew throughout the film, but the story was told wonderfully.Chava is a real star and the acting throughout is incredible.
Stunning film about the Salvadoran Civil War, told through the eyes of an 11-year-old boy, who, once he hits twelve, will be rounded up with other children and forced into military service, fighting for the US supported government.
Although, "I" personally greatly appreciated the "movie" mainly because, it SHARES one person's individual experience and it also unknowingly makes an attempt to educate this society on the realities of war and its effects on those caught in the middle of it; my partner says he did not like the inaccuracies in the military's "recruiting" tactics because from his personal experience he saw the guerrilla, not the army, recruiting young boys from within the schools.
It's no surprise that this was a true story, according to the wrap-up at the end.The movie that many scenes most brought to my mind was "Bloody Sunday," because both films really make you feel like you're right there in the middle of the action, as horrifying as that would be.
This is a sensitive and detailed account of 11 year old Chava, portrayed movingly by Carlos Padilla, growing up during some of the most violent times during the civil war in El Salvador in the 1980's.
I just saw this movie two days ago and i must say i expected more but i really wasn't disappointed all thought its very powerful I did see tiny details that really affected the movie like the accents used by a few cast members or the license plates on the bus but other than than it is very powerful but yet it captures the innocence of the children they are not bad kids they are scared """"SPOILER""" The scene were Chava picks up the AK 47 ready to shoot and army soldier and then sees that the soldier is child it shows us the innocence being broken but the humanity that overcomes it its very powerful and hands down that Padilla "Chava" Performance is excellent i think that he carried the movie all the way, he has great charisma and you really want him to be safe and overcome all the obstacles that are put in his path and like i said earlier don't forget it is a true story because i read some comment about not being true and that government soldiers didn't recruit well from what i know its not true one of my friends is from El Salvador and his family had fled to the US and he did tell me that it was because of the recruiting and that there was no safe place, both sides were recruiting children, he was 12 years old when i met him he had just arrived..
I appreciated that even though the movie took place during a war with all of it's horrors, the director still took time to show the innocence of children by shooting scenes of them playing, laughing, and having fun together.
The civil war that was going on in El Salvador was very harsh on the people living there, but I don't need to tell you all about it, just watch the film.
Great film about the Civil War in El Salvador.
This film is about an eleven year old boy named Chava who is affected by the Civil War occurring in his village in El Salvador.
I really enjoyed this film, because Chava who was scared to be recruited into the army knowing that he was turning twelve soon, set the movie to become so captivating to watch.
I think the movie did a good job of showing the horrible situation in El Salvador during its civil war and the struggles of its citizens.
One of the best movies out there on the caste war effects on the lives of a family in El Salvador. |
tt0477078 | Rocket Science | Hal Hefner is a fifteen-year-old student of Plainsboro, New Jersey with a pronounced stutter. His older brother Earl is an obsessive-compulsive kleptomaniac, his father Doyle has recently walked out on the family after a heated argument, and his mother Juliet has begun to date the father of his school friend, Heston.
Hal is riding the school bus home one day when he is approached by Ginny Ryerson, the articulate, competitive star of the debate team. She urges him to join her and replace her former partner, Ben Wekselbaum, who has dropped out of high school after falling silent mid-speech and losing the New Jersey State High School Policy Debate Championship. Though Hal initially declines, he finds himself besotted with Ginny and agrees to be her partner. Hal and Ginny begin to study for the upcoming tournament and form arguments on either side of whether the federal government should support the teaching of sexual abstinence in public schools. When Hal finds himself unable to talk during a practice debate, he runs out of the room and hides in the janitorial closet, where Ginny joins him. Hal kisses her hopefully, and they make out, but she subsequently falls out of contact with him. Ginny's parents assure him that she is confident with the work they have already completed and that she will meet him on the day of the debate.
On the day of the tournament, Coach Lumbly tells the debate team that Ginny has transferred to Townsend Prep for the remainder of her senior year and that Hal will be paired with Heston for the day. Struggling with his speech and his stutter, Hal calls his therapist, who suggests that he sing his speech or talk with a foreign accent. Hal and Heston finish the day without much success, while Ginny wins a trophy for First Place as an Individual Speaker, which inexplicably goes missing. Coach Lumbly asks Hal to leave the team, telling him that Ginny had never planned to debate as his partner and had only recruited him as a cruel joke to damage the school's chances of winning. He breaks into Earl's bedroom and takes a bottle of stolen tequila, then rides with Heston to his friend Lewis's house, who lives across the street from Ginny. A drunken Hal drags Lewis's mother's cello across the street and throws it through Ginny's window just as she is arriving home with her new teammate, Ram.
Later in the year, Hal's mother breaks up with Heston's father, and Hal decides to seek out Ginny and return her trophy, which he stole. She rejects his apology, and he travels to Trenton—the "Big City"—to find Ben, Ginny's former debate partner. Hal convinces Ben to debate with him, and they register as a home-schooled team in the upcoming Policy Debate Championships. In order to overcome his stutter, Ben helps Hal to write his entire speech to the tune of "The Battle Hymn of the Republic". During the tournament, Hal is interrupted in the middle of his song-speech by Coach Lumbly and a Debate Official who disqualify Hal and Ben on the grounds that neither of them is home-schooled. Ben is satisfied with their efforts, but Hal finds Ginny before leaving. He insists that one day will be his day, while she tells him that it was not easy for her to betray him as he walks off, having gained a sense of confidence. He spends the evening at a nearby beach, and when his father picks him up, Hal tries to tell him that life and love "shouldn't be rocket science", although he is unable to say the phrase "rocket science" due to his stutter. | revenge, psychedelic, cruelty, romantic | train | wikipedia | The film's mood pushes the limit of tongue- in-cheek, and it is certainly felt as a comedy because after all, the premise is a stuttering boy joining a debate team, but despite all the hilarious non sequiturs and plot-driven laughs, I take that essential theme to heart.
Hal Heffner is an innocently gawky young high school kid, portrayed in a should-be career-making performance by Reece Thompson, who has a severe stuttering problem and experiences a change of events that he finds to have had a tempestuous emotional effect on him that I'm just dying to give away but won't.
Watching this film, we watch this naive stuttering boy crippled by inhibitions and shyness mature, reaching the extremes of anger, confusion, love, intellectual growth, and introspection.There are plenty of movies about high school, and they're full of comeuppance, humor targeted for that age, discovery of sex, et cetera, but there is very very rarely a movie like Rocket Science, a movie about that particular time in your life when you were just growing into yourself and you didn't even know it, and you hardly look back at that time because of the unawareness of self at that point and, hopefully, the growth since then.
The acting is top notch as well as the soundtrack, writing, editing, and photography.I'll start with the general story:Hal Heffner (Reece Thompson) is just an ordinary , no frills high-school kid who happens to have a severe stutter.
Here though, as unrealistically hyper-articulate as this high school debate team, indie-romance styled dramedy feels, Blitz possesses the rare ability to seamlessly merge it with a whole bunch of tender awkwardness and create something far superior then a wit-fest.
Encapsulating this neurotic whimsy is the gifted Thompson (amongst other very well casted performances) who like a younger, more accessible Jason Schwartzman, takes an annoyingly exploited trait of stuttering unease and mines it into a tender, thoughtful coming of age characterization that should inspire even the most cynical of introverts.Littered with scene after scene of a simply far more perceptive quirk then what Hollywood's continuously dumbed-down interpretations of independent film used to be, Rocket Science blasts off with personality and style to spare..
If you want to see a movie with intelligent dialogue with a good message and great acting, go and see Rocket Science.
The entire time I was watching rocket science, I was gob smacked by the performances of the entire cast, but in particular Anna Kendrick and Nicholas D'Agosto.
I think it's difficult to portray a character that you hate and love quite like Anna has done in this movie, and even now..
Literacy will be required to appreciate this movie.This has to be the best dialog in any film ever made with a stutterer as a central character.
But I did think of it as a companion piece to "Welcome to the Dollhouse." Both set in NJ, and both with central characters at the bottom of their school social ranking, and coping with their realities better than one would think.I particularly liked the relationship between adults and kids in this film.
Case in point - Hal Hefner, a fifteen year old attending Plainsboro High School in New Jersey, who is trying to make sense of growing up but is burdened by a stutter so debilitating that he cannot even tell the cafeteria worker at school that he wants pizza instead of fish.
Rocket Science, the second feature by Jeffrey Blitz (Spellbound), who overcame his own stuttering disability, is a teen comedy that poignantly captures the painful loneliness of adolescence.While on paper Rocket Science sounds like other coming of age films such as Election and Rushmore, it manages to capture something unique and very special about being a teenager without having to rely on grossness, stereotypes, or implausible situations.
Surprisingly however, Hal is recruited by top debater Ginny Ryerson (Anna Kendrick) to be her debate partner after her former partner Ben Wekselbaum (Nicholas D'Agosto) went blank at last year's championship match.Ginny, a charming but overly aggressive super student, tells Hal that "deformed people" make good competitors because they have so much anger to express.
Partly out of revenge and partly out of desperation, he turns to failed debater Ben Wekselbaum, now working in Trenton in a cleaners, to be his new partner after Ginny transfers to a different school.
Instead he relies on the inner strength of the characters to see them through, not on a contrived narrative.While there are some predictably oddball characters like Philosophy major Lionel (Jonah Hill), pint-sized Josh (Lewis Garrles) who spies on Ginny for him (and models her bra that he has stolen), and an older couple who practice the Kama Sutra and play Violent Femmes "Blister In The Sun" duets on the cello and piano, Rocket Science has few false notes.
High school can be a painful time, so to expect some Disney version of perfect, perky kids, who all look like teen models, is downright unrealistic.
Particularly liked 'Earl' and, of course, Hal, who managed to portray everything from the frustration stutterers feel, to the sheer jubilation of being able to vocalize, even if only occasionally.The characters were engaging.The cinematography gave the film a sense of movement through time that dramatically raised the stakes for the characters.
Extremely good soundtrack that perfectly matches the tone.The ending was realistic.Bad: The film moves a little quickly in places, leaving it easy to miss key aspects of the plot.The main cello scene was the best portrayal of everyday anger that I have ever seen.The film has one scene that veers slightly too far into 'Artsiness for Artsines's sake' territory, and had me cringing.
More could have been done with the little transvestite boy; an extremely interesting actor underused.If the ending was intended to show Hal accepting both himself and his stutter and thus finding his voice, why did the final scene show him struggling.
The exchange says more about the mother, aptly played by Lisbeth Bartlett, and her appetite for the exotic than the Asian-ness of her guests.Later in the film, the protagonist and Heston pair up in a speech competition, and employing a technique suggested by his school counselor to quell the stammer, Hal decides to affect an accent.
Jeffrey Blitz creates something as precise as something Wes Anderson put on film, without the elements becoming ornamental.Yes, there are jokes in "Rocket Science," but it's not the joke-gag-joke rabbit punches of Apatow and his bunch and none of that numbing repetitive dissonance of their adult language spoken by what we're supposed to believe are goofy high school kids.
I've just been burned too many times by movies like this, movies that are apparently made to cause people to suffer, and I'm beginning to wonder if the nation's movie critics are getting together and having a good laugh at all the people who they've sent to the cinematic abattoir of awfulness by recommending painful snoozers like Rocket Science..
Billed as 'Election' like and the first feature from the director of 'Spellbound', the documentary that followed American students through the harrowing spelling bee competitions, 'Rocket Science' is quite frankly disappointing.
I haven't bothered to read all of the other comments but I'm sure it must have been stated before -- this is a completely mediocre comedy that is simply yet another attempt by Hollywood to ride on the coattails of much better films like "Rushmore" and "Napoleon Dynamite." Whereas those films had one or two quirky characters, the hack director of this film decided to up the ante and make ALL but one or two characters "quirky." Was this an attempt to quadruple the laughs?
If so, he failed miserably.I was thinking about a great teenage comedy film from the late '70s/early'80s - "My Bodyguard" which carried a similar theme of a young, loser kid trying to find his place in the world.
I don't believe this film has any chance of winning any Oscars, and it def was not a highlight of the year for me, id advise anyone watching this movie, to be prepared for dragged out scenes, and at some points in the movie, unwatchable acting.
You don't think you're watching actors act in Rocket Science, these young people achieve a level of reality in their work that you don't often get.They're given good support by the rest of the cast which centers around Thompson's dysfunctional family.
You'll also like Steve Park who moves in with Bartlett and her kids and his budding young gay son, Aaron Yoo.Rocket Science is a really well done piece of film making, John Waters would be proud..
The ineffectuality of the pasty-legged teacher, the mixed genius for nasty/sweet of the motive force female, the search for love of our main man and just about everyone else in the piece, excepting the mother who will spoil her own life again and again, the endearing Korean boyfriend who moves in and seems to really attach to the kids, the sweet/authoritarian hopeful debate coach, the Summa Theologica kid, and that beachside Pizza sign come together to make a very satisfying movie.
First, as many others have pointed out, the people behind the excellent movie Rushmore should sue this writer/director for plagiarism.It is cool seeing Anna Kendrick in an early (2007) role, but you know how some movies show where the main character ends up in a year?
Seriously.It was one thing for comedies made in the 1980s to show obsessive, even violent behavior as entertainment, but watching this movie in 2018 I felt like it should be renamed "Making of a School Shooter.".
Ben Wekselbaum and Ginny Ryerson (Anna Kendrick) are fast-talking high school debate teammates in Plainsboro, New Jersey.
I found 'Rocket Science' the way I've found several wonderful little indie films that nobody seems to know about: the sale bin at Blockbuster.Now I know why there were so many copies in there.The cast is chock-full of actors ranging from competent to spectacular; the script is fairly reeking of obnoxious characters with stereotypical indie-style quirks.Exception: the character of Hal is generally a good kid with a lot of heart and was played well by Reece Thompson.
The stutter was endearing at first, then pitiful, then it just got annoying near the end of the movie when it finally dawns on the audience that Nicholas D'Agosto's character doesn't actually help him conquer it.The movie starts out pretty okay.
So many rancid indie films are shot with shaky-cam or heavy shadows to emphasize the realism; Rocket Science makes unbelievable use of white light to the point of it being blinding, especially in the school scenes.
They chart the lift that debating--the single most educational endeavor in which a student can participate-- can give to those who learn to wage warfare with rapid-fire words.The film opens with promise--the promise us that our protagonist, the stuttering Hal Hefner, played by Reece Thompson, along with his even better partner, the perfectly cast Anna Kendrick, will rise above his prior limitations.But halfway through, the movie loses its direction and wanders aimlessly.
Along the way we can enjoy what Blitz gives Hal...a high school speech counselor who only knows about hyper-active kids; Hal's continuing battle to deal with the choice of pizza or fish in the cafeteria; Ginny Ryerson's neighbors, a couple who work through their marriage issues with a cello, a piano and a copy of the illustrated Kama Sutra; the debate technique of "spreading," or cramming a breathless, fast-talking debate position into 30 seconds (ten if you're responding).
Rocket Science is a good-natured, good-humored movie about a kid with a stammer who is willing to try for the sake of love.
This is not a happy story, i sat through all the frustrating bits in the movies, putting my shirt over my head whenever he tried to debate with his enormous stutter, thinking its okay, because I'm gonna see some scenes at the end where he has finally lost his stutter.
Maybe i had the wrong idea when i watched this movie, i was convinced from start till perhaps the last scene, that i was going to see an inspiring transformation, where i would no longer feel sorry for the kid, and that marred my view on the film.
I felt at the end of 'Rocket Science' that the kid was never going to get rid of his stutter, and when did his last debate and he turned to the judges and said 'Im killing it right?' that he was in fact, not killing it, he sucked, you can't debate in a musical tone, there was no growth there.
Hal Hefner, a stuttering innocent living in a half-broken home; Ben Wexelbaum, a pressured prodigy trying to break free of the life that has had him lost for so long; and Ginny Ryerson, a using overachiever who lets nothing get in her way of getting what she wants.
It's a movie about a little, annoying twit with a stutter who gets to help a girl out on the debate team.
The boy is Hal (Reece Thompson, just annoying as hell in this.) The girl is Ginny (Anna Kendrick, also pretty bad in this.) Together they form an annoying, stupid predictable relationship.
I realize they can't all be gems but the latest offering had me grinding my teeth in deep hatred.Hal Hefner (newcomer Thompson) is a NJ teen who has a difficult life: namely his father has just left his family to fend for themselves as if he was going onto a better job position instead of total abandonment for no good reason (well maybe the mother is a bit of a clinger), and more notably a persistent, heart-breaking stutter that has made him a complete social misfit at his high school (and life in general).Add to the mix debate team extraordinairre Ginny Ryerson (newbie Kendrick), whose hyperkinetic speech is an obnoxious, grating device that inspires her to force hapless Hal to join the club in spite of his woeful absence of speech in general.Ginny has her reasons: namely she was robbed the previous year of the state championship when her partner Ben Wekselbaum (D'Agostino) suddenly froze in the midst of his patter ruining their chances altogether and sending him into self-exiled seclusion.While documentary filmmaker Blitz is said to have based this alleged comedy on his own childhood battle with stuttering, you could have fooled me in this highly mean-spirited, ugly and too-proud-of-itself attitude that I immediately disliked it from the get go and the cutesy touches (Hal's creepy friend's parents use musical therapy with a cello and piano recital of the Violent Femmes' "Blister in The Sun"), the fact NJ (my home state) is once again a one-note joke (and um, shot in BALTIMORE!!!), and namely no likable characters (nope even Hal becomes a real jerk in the long run).
And even if they threw out all that, they should've reversed the father scene (although they should have made it better, he was the only bad character in the film) and the pizza scene, and ended it with Hal flawlessly asking for a piece of pizza.
Jeffrey Blitz and his Rocket Science don't measure up, but they do provide moments of insight into teenage angst, in a decidedly figurative way that saves it from obscurity.Hal Hefner (Reece Daniel Thompson) stutters but enters a statewide high school debate contest to prove a number of things I'm not even sure I understand.
Rocket Science focus on Hal Hefner, a kid who suffers with a very terrible stutter.
While the movie is quite clearly getting so much from Election (one of the best satires of all time), it really is in truth, how so much works in today's high schools and society.
Despite Hal's shortcomings, he is determined to make it big in the school debating team after falling in love with one of their more nubile super-brains (the phenomenally speed-talking Anna Kendrick), and the story begins with its ending, in depicting someone for whom the hopeful journey was everything, a strong similarity to 'Loneliness of the Long-Distance Runner' before going back to show us the run-up, taking in D.I.V.O.R.C.E., the Kama Sutra, the Mystery of Life.
But fortunately this is not a main stream silly movie: a stutterer cannot even be recruited for a debate team, thus Hal is out of the competition.
Maybe that's why I like the quirky, coming-of-age opus, "Rocket Science" and relate to its' hero, Hal Hefner (gawky but likable Reece Daniel Thompson of "Assassination Of A High School President" and "Daydream Nation"), who can't pronounce "pizza" when trying to order a slice, getting fish or some other alternative.Along with his verbal handicap, Hal has to deal with parents being separated (the dad moved out because the mother's an emotional wreck!) and his kleptomaniac bully of a brother Earl (Vincent Piazza, also of "President") while living in New Jersey.
The opening and early part of the movie is OK (if you like that sort of thing) and we are introduced to Hal Hefner (Reece Thompson), a lad with a severe speech impediment.
Sometimes Earl actually is supportive but, most of the time, he delights in bullying Hal.The whole movie is centered around the New Jersey State High School Debating Championships which, I guess, tends to feature what many viewers might call "geeks" or "Nerds" - those students who are in the upper intellectual echelons.
After far too long, I was beginning to wonder where the movie was going until Ginny Ryerson (Anna Kendrick) and Hal's paths cross.
Although I couldn't help wondering why Hal even considered the invitation knowing his own limitations - maybe, like me, he expected love to work a miracle!
Although the actors weren't necessarily chosen because of this trait, they do it very well.Reece Thompson is arguably the main actor as Hal Hefner, the meek high school kid with a bad stuttering problem. |
tt0186241 | Iolanthe | Act I
Twenty-five years before the beginning of the opera, the fairy Iolanthe committed the capital crime (under fairy law) of marrying a mortal human. The Queen of the fairies commuted Iolanthe's sentence of death to banishment for life on the condition that Iolanthe left her husband and never communicated with him again. After the passage of 25 years, the fairies, still missing Iolanthe deeply, plead with their Queen to pardon Iolanthe and to restore her place in fairyland ("Tripping hither, tripping thither").
Summoned by the Fairy Queen ("Iolanthe! From thy dark exile thou art summoned"), Iolanthe rises from the frog-infested stream that has been her home in exile. The Queen, unable to bear punishing her any longer, pardons Iolanthe, who is warmly greeted by the other fairies. Iolanthe tells her sisters that she has a son, Strephon, noting that he's a fairy down to the waist, but his legs are mortal. The fairies laugh that Iolanthe appears too young to have a grown son, as one of the advantages of a fairy's immortality is that they never grow old. Strephon, a handsome Arcadian shepherd, arrives and meets his aunts ("Good-morrow, good mother"). He tells Iolanthe of his love for the Lord Chancellor's ward of court, the beautiful Phyllis, who does not know of Strephon's mixed origin. Strephon is despondent, however, as the Lord Chancellor has forbidden them to marry, partly because he feels that a shepherd is unsuitable for Phyllis, but partly because the Lord Chancellor wishes to marry Phyllis himself. In fact, so do half the members of Britain's House of Lords. The Fairy Queen promises her assistance ("Fare thee well, attractive stranger"). Soon Phyllis arrives, and she and Strephon share a moment of tenderness as they plan their future and possible elopement ("Good-morrow, good lover"; "None shall part us from each other").
A cadre of the peers of the realm arrive in noisy splendour ("Loudly let the trumpet bray" and "The law is the true embodiment"). They are all smitten with Phyllis, and they have appealed to the Lord Chancellor to decide who will have her hand. The Lord Chancellor hesitates to act upon his own regard for Phyllis due to his position as her guardian. The Lords send for Phyllis to choose one of their number, but she will not marry any of them, as virtue is found only in a "lowly" cottage ("My well-loved Lord" and "Nay, tempt me not"). The peers beg her not to scorn them simply because of their "blue blood" ("Spurn not the nobly born" and "My lords, it may not be"). Strephon approaches the Lord Chancellor, pleading that Nature bids him marry Phyllis. But the Lord Chancellor wryly notes that Strephon has not presented sufficient evidence that Nature has interested herself in the matter. He refuses his consent to the marriage between Strephon and Phyllis ("When I went to the Bar").
Disappointed, Strephon calls on Iolanthe for help. She appears and promises to support her son. Spying on the two, the peers – led by the brainless and stuffy Earls Tolloller and Mountararat – together with Phyllis, see Iolanthe and Strephon in a warm embrace. All three jump to the obvious conclusion, since the centuries-old Iolanthe appears to be a girl of seventeen ("When darkly looms the day"). The peers scoff at the seemingly absurd claim that Iolanthe is Strephon's mother as Strephon pleads: "She is, has been, my mother from my birth!" Phyllis angrily rejects Strephon for his supposed infidelity and declares that she will marry either Lord Tolloller or Lord Mountararat ("...and I don't care which!"). Strephon then calls for help from the fairies, who appear but are mistaken by the peers for a girls' school on an outing. Offended, the Fairy Queen pronounces a magical "sentence" upon the peers: Strephon shall not only become a Member of Parliament, but will have the power to pass any bill he proposes ("With Strephon for your foe, no doubt").
Act II
Private Willis, on night guard duty, paces outside the Palace of Westminster and muses on political life ("When all night long a chap remains"). The fairies arrive and tease the peers about the success of MP Strephon, who is advancing a bill to open the peerage to competitive examination ("Strephon's a member of Parliament"). The peers ask the fairies to stop Strephon's mischief, stating that the House of Peers is not susceptible of any improvement ("When Britain really ruled the waves"). Although the fairies say that they cannot stop Strephon, they have become strongly attracted to the peers ("In vain to us you plead"). The fairy Queen is dismayed by this. Pointing to Private Willis of the First Grenadier Guards, who is still on duty, the Queen claims that she is able to subdue her response to the effects of his manly beauty ("Oh, foolish fay").
Phyllis cannot decide whether she ought to marry Tolloller or Mountararat, and so she leaves the choice up to them. Tolloller tells Mountararat that his family's tradition would require the two Earls to duel to the death if the latter were to claim Phyllis. The two decide that their friendship is more important than love and renounce their claims to her ("Though p'r'aps I may incur thy blame"). The Lord Chancellor arrives dressed for bed and describes a nightmare caused by his unrequited love for Phyllis ("Love, unrequited, robs me of my rest"). The two peers try to cheer him up and urge him to make another effort to persuade himself to award Phyllis to ... himself ("If you go in you're sure to win").
Strephon now leads both parties in Parliament, but he is miserable at losing Phyllis. He sees Phyllis and reveals to her that his mother is a fairy, which accounts for her apparent youth ("If we're weak enough to tarry"). Phyllis and Strephon ask Iolanthe to plead with the Lord Chancellor to allow their marriage, for "none can resist your fairy eloquence." This is impossible, she replies, for the Lord Chancellor is her husband. He believes Iolanthe to have died childless, and she is bound not to "undeceive" him, under penalty of death. However, to save Strephon from losing his love, Iolanthe resolves to present his case to the Lord Chancellor while veiled ("My lord, a suppliant at your feet").
Although the Lord Chancellor is moved by her appeal, which evokes the memory of his wife, he declares that he himself will marry Phyllis. Desperate, Iolanthe unveils, ignoring the warnings of the unseen Fairies, revealing that she is his long-lost wife, and Strephon is his son. The Lord Chancellor is amazed to see her alive, but Iolanthe has again broken fairy law, and the Fairy Queen is now left with no choice but to punish Iolanthe with death ("It may not be ... Once again thy vow is broken"). As she prepares to execute Iolanthe, the Queen learns that the rest of the fairies have chosen husbands from among the peers, thus also incurring death sentences – but the Queen blanches at the prospect of slaughtering all of them. The Lord Chancellor suggests a solution: change the law by inserting a single word: "every fairy shall die who doesn't marry a mortal." The Fairy Queen cheerfully agrees and, to save her life, the dutiful soldier, Private Willis, agrees to marry her. Seeing no reason to stay in the mortal realm if peers are to be recruited "from persons of intelligence", the peers join the fairy ranks and "away [they] go to fairyland" ("Soon as we may, off and away"). | fantasy | train | wikipedia | Wonderful performance with a few minor glitches. When I bought this video, I had no idea what this opera was about, not to mention no idea what the music was like. I bought it because I was, and still am, a big fanatic of the Gilbert and Sullivan operas. So this video was my first exposure to this particular opera. I enjoyed this video more than I had some of the previous videos I bought (H.M.S. Pinafore for example). The cast delivers a wonderful performance, especially Derek Hammond-Stroud in the role of the Lord Chancellor. Though I prefer the D'Oyly Carte recording with John Reed as the Lord Chancellor, Hammond-Stroud gives a strong performance along with most of the other cast members. The only member of the cast I didn't care for was Alexander Oliver in the role of Strephon. I just can't figure out why they cast a tenor in a baritone role. Not only that, he also kind of "overacted" a bit during some of his dialogue scenes. Another complaint is that a member of the chorus of peers was noticeably flat, which made the processional song sort of uncomfortable to listen to. Over all, however, it's a wonderful production with many strong points which more than compensate for its few faults.. Intoxicating. I always have loved Gilbert and Sullivan, for their wonderful, catchy music, memorable characters and witty lyrics and dialogues, who more than makes up for the occasionally daft stories. I found this D'Oyly Carte Iolanthe intoxicating, and one of the better D'Oyly Carte G&S productions alongside Cox and Box and Patience, better than HMS Pinafore, Pirates of Penzanze and Yeomen anyway.Visually, it is quite charming. The costumes and sets are certainly handsome, and while not amazing the effects are better than average. Iolanthe rising from her watery sojourn is an effective touch. The choreography has some clumsy moments, but again some nice moments like the fairies with their wings out to dry and the fairy struggling to keep up with the others that add some light-hearted entertainment to the proceedings. The dialogue is suitably witty, the chorus apart from some flatness in the processional scene are well-balanced and pitched and not too static, the orchestra play stylistically and beautifully and the conducting not too rushed and dragging.The performances are great. Alexander Oliver may turn some heads as Strephon, especially as it is a baritone role rather than a tenor role, but I found him quite fun, far better than his Frederick in Pirates of Penzanze. John Helmsley may lack a little bit of resonance for When Britain Really Ruled the Waves, but otherwise sings and characterises well. David Hillman is likewise excellent, and Derek Hammond-Stroud is an exemplary Lord Chancellor. Kate Flowers is a charming Phyllis, and Richard Van Allan's Willis luxurious casting. Anne Collins's Queen of the Fairies is superb. The little bits of business are never too overdone.All in all, an intoxicating Iolanthe. 9/10 Bethany Cox. Very enjoyable. This production of Iolanthe was one of a series produced by the same people.I liked it a lot, despite the use of some "special effects" that are supposed to be magical and fairy-like and which look, after 25 years, rather dated. This is probably because of the lively performances of the leading members of the cast.The first-act finale was great, and the nightmare song in the second act was handled in an interesting way that worked pretty well. However, "If you go in," the famous trio that follows it, looked awkward. At least until they all got going and the joy of the music outweighed the strange staging.All in all, it was a very entertaining performance.. Okay, but not good. As a fullblown Gilbert and Sullivan Fan, I found this version of the opera rather strange. The cast was good, Kate Flowers (Phyliss) and Anne Collins as the Fariy Queen were standouts. The effect were really bad though, And I just don't like Good old Derrik in the part of the LC. The sets were imagentetive, but weird. |
tt1674775 | Keyhole | The gang of Ulysses Pick (Jason Patric) shoots its way into his former home, which the police have surrounded, with a hostage and a stuffed wolverine (named "Crispy") in tow. Big Ed, the gang's second-in-command, then evicts the dead gangsters (who seem otherwise alive), after asking them to identify themselves: "Those of you who have been killed, stand facing the wall." They leave reluctantly, and the gang waits for Ulysses. The film's narrator, the ghost of Ulysses's father-in-law Calypso/Camille (Louis Negin), reveals that the house is haunted (and not only by him) because although a house's happiness is able to vacate the premises after its inhabitants have left, its sorrow is doomed to remain inside forever. This house had once belonged to Ulysses and his four children with his wife Hyacinth (Isabella Rossellini).
Ulysses himself arrives, carrying a drowned young woman named Denny. After entering the house, Denny is able to stand under her own strength, and seems alive although injured and blind. She reveals that she can hear the thoughts of Ulysses as he wanders through the house, examining the objects that he had previously left behind. Calypso reveals that Hyacinth remains in Ulysses's former bedroom at the top of the house, where she has chained him (her father's ghost). Ulysses and Denny join the gang, who are confused about their plan (and don't understand why the police haven't shot their way into the house). Ulysses deflects questions about the plan and claims that the police won't enter the house while the storm is still in force. Big Ed, annoyed at being kept in the dark, criticizes Ulysses for adopting Heatly after he killed one of Ulysses's sons, and is thrashed.
Calypso reveals that although he is chained to Hyacinth's bed, his chains stretch to unknown lengths, and torments Ed further through supernatural flogging. Ulysses collects the gang's guns and throws them into the ducts to be destroyed in the house's furnace. The gangster Ogilbe (Kevin McDonald) thinks he hears a noise and goes to investigate, exiting with a Scream-esque "I'll be right back." He is immediately killed when he tries to have sex with one of the ghosts even though Ulysses just warned him not to bother the ghosts (upon contact with a washerwoman ghost, he's electrocuted—his ghost shortly completes the sex act). The bullets from the guns that had been thrown into the furnace begin to fire throughout the house (the laughing face of Calypso suggests that this is somehow the ghost's doing) and a stray bullet kills Heatly. As he dies, Ulysses reveals that he had at first adopted Heatly to torture him and himself as revenge for the death of his son but grew to love Heatly more than any of his sons. (Ulysses is unaware, as he says this, that the hostage who watches/hears is his only living son, Manners, having forgotten and failed to recognize him.)
Ulysses disposes of the corpses of Heatly and Ogilbe in the bog located in the house's centre (Hyacinth's secluded outdoor garden located in a quadrangle within the labyrinthine house). Ulysses gathers his scout knife, the stuffed wolverine Crispy, Denny and his hostage son and sets forth into the house to find Hyacinth, ordering his gang to stay put but leaving the untrustworthy Big Ed in charge. Ulysses orders Denny to stay focused on reading his memories and forget about drowning, since he has forgotten too much to find Hyacinth without her help. She recounts his memory of coming home early to find Hyacinth at home alone, running naked with the family's dogs. Ulysses remembers being distressed at how the episode revealed the extent to which Hyacinth was a stranger to him, even though at the same time this moment was when he loved her the most. Ulysses contemplates the first of the house's many locked doors (which "all have to be opened").
In her bedroom at the top of the house, Hyacinth is startled by Calypso screaming awake from a nightmare of a young girl drowning. Calypso begs Hyacinth for release from his chains, revealing that Hyacinth is now sleeping with Chang, and Hyacinth fondly remembers her son Manners. Calypso tells Hyacinth that Ulysses is in the house coming to either save or kill Hyacinth (or both). Ulysses himself then speaks to Hyacinth through the keyhole of the first locked door, offering her his scout knife and convincing her to pretend he isn't there, allowing him to open the door. Ulysses investigates the room (the blind, drowned Denny helps him "see" the room as it once was) and begins remembering past events. He discovers the ghost of his son Brucie masturbating/playing Yahtzee in a cubbyhole (but doesn't recognize him or his milk-drinking ghost son Ned). Calypso's narration reveals that the hostage is Ulysses's only surviving son, Manners (also unrecognized). Meanwhile, the gangsters have begun to construct an electric chair. Ulysses makes another offering to Hyacinth (of Ned's bowl) to have her allow him through a second locked door.
A doctor (Udo Kier) has been summoned to examine Denny. The doctor relates the tragic story of his only son's death, which occurred earlier that day from a fall that broke his neck and was followed by a wasp attack. In the next room (a bathroom), Denny bathes Manners while Ulysses remembers trying to console Hyacinth in her grief. The girl climbs into the bath with Manners, and Ulysses remembers accidentally breaking Ned's bowl after his death, upsetting Hyacinth. Denny discovers a secret passage that passes the "cyclops" (a penis sticking out the wall: "That penis is getting dusty," remarks Ulysses). Calypso begs Hyacinth to release him so that he can stop Ulysses, who he has discovered is "bent on forgiveness," a much worse scenario than the revenge he had feared.
As ghosts and gangsters mill about, attempting to restore the house to its former glory, the doctor examines Denny and declares the drowned young woman to be drowned, and therefore dead. Manners frees himself from his gag and reveals his identity to his father, and that he was in love with Denny but she broke up with him and then drowned afterward. Manners tries to revive Denny but fails, and Ulysses leaves the doomed lovers to return to his gang, who strap him into the homemade electric chair (which is powered by pedalling). However, electrocuting Ulysses fails since he is revealed to be already dead (having been, ironically, executed in an electric chair).
Having now fully recovered his memory, Ulysses has Big Ed electrocuted for insubordination and thrown with the chair into the bog. Ulysses takes Manners and the somewhat recovered Denny into the house's next room, where Manners relives a fond memory of Hyacinth. Calypso begs for release from Hyacinth before Chang returns, and she begins to file through his chains, while Manners leads Denny away to show her the desktop family organizer he invented to send messages between family members via pneumatic tubes. Ulysses interrupts Heatly about to have sex with his daughter Lota (a memory, he soon realizes). Lota, dying of cancer, throws herself into the bog to be reunited with Heatly in death. Ulysses tries to bond with Manners by playing catch with him, but Manners ignores his father. Calypso has been freed by Hyacinth, and Manners answers a ringing phone as Ulysses enters the master bedroom to find Hyacinth.
Ulysses kills Chang and Manners hangs up the phone to remember Denny heading out for a midnight swim. Manners heads upstairs to his bedroom (which the gangsters have restored) and remembers Ulysses praising one of his inventions while Hyacinth notes that she has rearranged the house while Ulysses was away. As Hyacinth smiles and looks on, Manners and Ulysses restore the room to the way it used to be. The gangsters and the rest of the ghosts fade away (even the bullet holes fade) and Manners is left alone with his memories, holding a gun, in the empty house, hand turning a doorknob but not fully, unable or unwilling to leave. | psychedelic, violence, melodrama | train | wikipedia | Expectations are Key. Before viewing, I saw this film referred to as a '30s Gangster homage' or noir-styled 'drama'.
For anyone expecting a throwback film or conventional narrative, Keyhole will confuse and then, probably, disappoint.
In fact, Keyhole is a very abstract take on the memories and emotions harboured inside an old house, which is inhabited by ghosts and other slaves to the past.
And while Keyhole isn't a gripping crime thriller, neither should it be taken purely as an academic statement or challenging art-house experiment.
Like most of Maddin's films, the dark absurdity and creative imagery is almost casually amusing and less pretentious than comparable movies.
For anyone who's intrigued by these elements as much as by the often-mislead depiction of the film in mainstream media should definitely see Keyhole.
Another great Maddin film.
Guy Maddin's new feature is pretty typical for the director.
Me, I'm an enormous fan, have seen almost all of his films more than once and own all of his features except for the one that's unavailable on DVD (and this one).
Keyhole may even be a bit more esoteric than his other films, but certainly not by much.
Jason Patrick (of all people) stars as a probably dead gangster who holes up in his old house along with his gang.
He wants to reconnect with his wife (Isabella Rossellini, who has had her wagon hitched to Maddin for about a decade now), who is locked upstairs and unwilling to come out (Patrick talks to her through the titular hole).
The house is haunted by various ghosts from the past, including frequent Maddin collaborator Louis Negin, playing Rossellini's father, who is chained naked to her bed and often wanders about the house whipping the other ghosts.
Patrick explores the house, trying to find a way to get to his wife, alongside a pretty, young blind girl (Brooke Palsson) who always feels as if she is drowning, and a gagged hostage that the gang has taken (David Wontner).
As Patrick explores, the rest of his gang plans to betray him.
Other recognizable members of the cast include Udo Kier, who plays a doctor, and Kevin McDonald of The Kids in the Hall (Maddin formerly worked with Kid in the Hall Mike McKinney in The Saddest Music in the World, and was honestly a much better fit for the director than McDonald is).
As is common with Maddin's films, he had about fifty weird ideas and combined them into a feature.
That might sound like it could be a mess, but if anyone can handle something like this, it's Maddin.
I also love his dreamy dialogue and sound design.
Gangster and deadbeat dad, Ulysses Pick (Jason Patric), embarks on an unusual journey through his home, in a noir ghost story that draws on Homer's Odyssey.
Guy Maddin is an unusual man, whose styles are interesting and some would say unique.
Keep in mind this is a man who, ten years prior, made "The Heart of the World" (2000) in the style of Russian constructivism.
And it worked.This time around, there is a cheesy, low budget feel with less-than-stellar acting, at least at the beginning.
(The low budget look may be because Maddin shot Keyhole digitally rather than his usual method of shooting on 16mm or Super-8mm.) Things get better as they go, especially once the acting chops of Isabella Rossellini and Udo Kier are brought into the picture.Ebert wrote, "Keyhole plays like a fever dream using the elements of film noir but restlessly rearranging them in an attempt to force sense out of them.
You have the elements lined up against the wall, and in some mercurial way, they slip free and attack you from behind." Wow. Those are some words, Roger.
Not sure exactly what you mean, but mysteriously such a review fits this film nicely..
Does anybody remember the awful student film that showed in the movie "Private Parts"?
People wandering around naked with no real purpose, lots of moaning, and the only way to fully understand what was going on, was a voice-over explaining each scene.
That's this film in a nutshell.
I guarantee the votes are going to drop exponentially until it gets the 2 it deserves.I get the concept, it's like a college Avant Garde, or an attempt at a college Avant Garde film, trying to retell "The Odyssey".
Highbrow critics will swear this is great cinema, but in their attempt to seem above us, they are hitching their star to a wagon without wheels..
I won't say I "like" Guy Maddin in the sense that I am a fan, but for sure his name makes me consider watching a film because while I normally find them difficult to follow or fully appreciate, they usually offer so much that is of interest that they are worth a look.
His style is something quite unique to him and sometimes he is so unique that his target audience can appear to be only himself and if the rest of us like it too then so be it.
I say this because this is sort of the case here and I hope he really likes Keyhole but I would struggle to think of too many people who would really understand it or enjoy it as he would.There are lots of ideas here and lots of style to deliver them.
A gangster and his gang hold up in an old house while the police wait outside; the gang want to know the plan but Ulysses Pick is more concerned with working his way through this house full of ghosts one room at a time.
As an idea it is a good one – a man on a journey through himself by virtue of literally confronting the ghosts in his house.
It appealed to me as an idea because it offered so much of interest in the hands of Maddin (who is known for his surreal imagery and films constructed around real or imagined or perceived pasts).
Sadly it doesn't come off and it ends up feeling like an idea that was probably fully fleshed out in Maddin's head but not in a way that he was able to translate to film.The result is a film that feels clever but all too often does it in a remote "art student" manner where it is happy doing what it wants because it is your fault if you are not smart enough to understand and appreciate all the hidden meaning in the symbolism.
It is a shame because there is a good cast here in Patric, Rossellini and Kier but I wonder do even they really understand what it going on – I hope not, because if they did then they didn't do much to share it with the viewer.A disappointing film then; it offers much in the concept but in the delivery it seems far too closed off and full of randomness with no threads or cues to really help the viewer keep up or go along.
Maddin is usually worth a look but here it isn't the case..
Another bizarre Maddin film.
Gangster Ulysses Pick (Jason Patric) has his men shoot their way into a home surrounded by police.
They go in search for his wife Hyacinth (Isabella Rossellini).
His gang wonders about Ulysses' plans and fight amongst themselves.It's yet another Guy Maddin experimental film.
I wonder if Maddin can ever use his outlandish imagery in a more conventional movie.
Like a lot of his movies, Maddin loses me about halfway through..
I love unusual films, B&W films, cryptic films, film noir, gangster films, David Lynch films, and while this tries to be most of the aforementioned rolled into one, it is just bad beyond words.
I can't believe this film was commissioned.
Dialogue that you wouldn't even find in a cheap b-movie.
Dream sequence logic but not really ever engaging in any meaningful way.
And I normally love movies like this!
I like movies you have to work at to understand, this one makes me not want to even bother.Just atrocious.
Made want to stop watching movies, period.
I have to wait a while and put on some real movies to get the bad taste of this one out of my system.
I considered two stars then I watched a little more and I wished I could give a zero..
While I'm definitely a Maddin fan, make no mistake about that, and I recognize his hat tips to Lynch and Von Trier and Harmony Korine, and I love any movie with Udo Kier in it, clearly this is a take-the-tax-grant and run flick.Meanwhile, I'm going to strip naked and go to the antique mall and make some foggy black and white videos for YouTube and see which government wants to bankroll me for more!
The uninitiated, unless chemically altered, would probably strain to give it a zero.IMDb here is insisting I go on at length in my review.
I will have to do so extensively, or I won't pass muster for my review length.I did think some of the bric-a-brac props in the movie were cool.
A film noir styled erotic ghost story.
Canada 93m, B&W, Colour Director: Guy Maddin; Cast: Jason Patric, Isabella Rossellini, Udo Kier, Kevin McDonaldKeyhole is a dark surreal film noir styled erotic ghost story loosely based on Homer's Odyssey about Ulysses Pick, a gangster whose mob pals shoot their way into his family home.
Upon his arrival, Ulysses is inexplicably accompanied by a stuffed wolverine named "Crispy" and a drowned woman who apparently comes to life.
Nearly incomprehensible, Keyhole offers a glimpse into a dead man's life through nightmarish visuals that are as interesting as they are perplexing (Klaus Ming August 2013)..
But, the film is ultimately just a superficial, crude mix of sounds, images, and odd dialog with no discernible mood or atmosphere to carry it....
Usually I do not go out of my way to give poor reviews; if I don't like a film, normally I just don't bother.But...Since I AM an avid fan of Surreal, Abstract, and vague Art films, I felt that I really should leave some comments.
Seriously, I really LOVE David Lynch, Jean De Cocteau, and even some Jodorowsky, etc.
Well, it quite honestly left me flatter than Chaz Bono.I mean, I really do like way out SUPER weird films, I do.
But in this film, all I see are a bunch of quick, senseless edits, constant repetitive shots of people squawking, and just a TOTAL mishmash of noise and images.
To me, THE key element missing here is that there is NO real atmosphere or mood at all.
When a movie simply doesn't move you or do anything for you, then all you are left with is a feeling that it is completely meaningless and that it has no emotional or entertainment value.
At least that is the way it made me feel after watching it.
It just didn't resonate with me.For example, let's say in 'ERASERHEAD', you have many, MANY long scenes where it seems like nothing is happening and so on the surface it LOOKS like just long, static shots.
and it is a BIG BUT like Mariah Carey's...
But, with this film, you get NONE of that.
But, with this film, you get NONE of that.
YES, there are individual shots that could be viewed as nice set pieces, but the way they are all put together (or rather, NOT put together) ends up having no real impact at all.
Cinematically, atmospherically, or in any other way really...I DO respect the fact, though, that others here apparently really do like the film.
In some way that I do not understand, it resonates with them as an authentic artwork and does indeed DO something for them personally.
I guess whatever it is that others ARE relating to in this film, must be going right over me and I'm just not seeing whatever it is that they see in this movie.
I suppose what you can take from this is that if you are like me and you like your Surrealism / Art Films to be more ponderous and indirect and more heavily laced with a deep moodiness such as David Lynch's 'ERASERHEAD' or 'MULHOLLAND DRIVE' where you appreciate the silences and pauses.
and where there is more of a dark, PALPABLE appeal to the subconscious, then you may not like this film where there is more of a superficial feel, with frenetic editing and imagery, that at least in my lowly opinion, is much more obvious and crude with big, fat, old, naked men lying on the floor with their little wee wee's and fat bellies hanging out and quick close-ups of his lined face, and fast, choppy edits between people's faces and dark rooms, and then back again as they let out these bizarre baying sounds.
With odd comments like 'Now, all the people who are dead, stand over here' HUH...???
Sorry, that is just not my kind of thing...I'm afraid that I must side with others here who just do not like this film; maybe I'm truly missing something, I don't know.
But quite honestly as far as I'm concerned, I think It rather rip my own testicles off then to have to ever, EVERY sit through this movie again (let's hope it doesn't come to that...).
Film noir turned art disaster....
Black and white look of the film 2.
Film noir setting 3.
Forced nudityKeyhole is a dead, boring, dreadful "art" movie that fails to entertain.
Dull to the point of wanting to poke your eyes out, you're left wondering who finances horrendous disasters like this one.
The setting is probably the only redeeming quality of this movie.
Avoid unless you dig the "artsy" type of movies.
And avoid if you don't like the uncalled for nudity from male and female cast that are supposed to build the artistic integrity of this film, and yet come out as WTF(!?) moments in the movie..
Stumbling out of the theater, my friend said in a small voice, "I think that was even stranger than Hourglass Sanatorium".This one follows a cast of characters comprising a family whose given names are evocative of literary figures, ways of being, and pretty objects.
Unsurprisingly, the character Ulysses is on a rambling quest to find something that may not exist at all -- an adumbrate vision of his wife Hyacinth.
Oh, and all he has to do is make it from the first floor of his house to the third.March (crawl, duck, run) behind them while they are sometimes nude, scraping at things, or shaking dice (there's a joke about masturbation in here somewhere), navigating their bilious house that has a ton of locked doors and a mess of floating dust particles, which -- I'm going out on a limb -- are probably metaphor for the thickness of whatever it is that came between them.My favorite thematic preoccupation lies in Maddin's stirring portrayal of the fuzzy line between life and death, with figures floating in and out of the frame (and existence), incorporating themselves into deadly vanishing-vignettes that keep recurring, and, corporeal, positioning themselves in zones of the house and grounds that Maddin somehow conveys to the audience are "dead space"..
I can't decide if I liked this or not - probably not a good sign!.
'Keyhole' is mostly shot in black-and-white...
The basic plot seems to be about a gangster (Jason Patric) searching for his wife (Isabella Rossellini, still beautiful) who is hiding behind a locked door in a haunted house.
For some reason he's dragging along with him a drowned - but talking - young woman and a bound & gagged young man.
Meanwhile various other gangsters and ghosts roam about the place to no great effect.
It's hard to judge the actors' performances because they're placed in such an unreal situation and are acting from such a bizarre script.
Fans of fat old man nudity will love it, unfortunately..
Surreal treat for those who like surrealism..
This film is guaranteed to draw differing opinions as to how good/bad this film is.
This film is very surreal with strange artistic imagery and dreamlike sequences that come as close as you can get to being in a dream yourself.
It follows Ulysses Pick, a career criminal and deadbeat dad as he goes through some deep self exploration sometime in the early 20th century.
After a robbery and shoot out, Ulysses(played by Jason Patric) and his gang decide to hold up in an abandoned old house, but nothing is what it seems as this house hold a lot of forgotten secrets for Ulysses and the ghosts from Ulysses' past haunt him deeply.
The whole film itself is one big dream sequence that is guaranteed to fly over a lot of heads and anger the casual movie watcher while being an absolute treat to those who love artistic horror/thriller films with hidden/multiple meanings and interpretations.
Each scene is carefully woven together to make you think and make you giddy with anticipation of whats going to happen next or what it all means.
Final synopsis:Definitely not for everyone and not a cookie cutter film by any means.
It's a surreal journey into the mind of Ulysses, a man with a lot of regrets and a past that haunts him deeply.
This is the first movie by this director I have ever seen, but he appears to me to be desperately trying to imitate the feel of David Lynch.
It seems derivative and stale.The acting, however, is on the strong side; Patrick is credible as a specter in a doomed state seeking redemption, blind to other things (like kidnapping his own son).
Editing and cinematography were crisp and professional.The movie CLOCKWORK ORANGE or PORK'S both had less penis in it.
I am sure the director was making a statement with constant penis symbols and direct shots thereof, but it comes off as crude and childish. |
tt0343663 | Eros | The Hand
Miss Hua, a 1960s high-end call girl is visited by a shy dressmaker's assistant Zhang, to take her measure. He hears the sounds of sex, as he waits in her living room. He is drawn towards her but there is no meeting ground between the two individuals from completely different classes. She summons him when her client leaves. She tells him, she will supply him with an aid to his memory. He will think about her while designing her clothes, she says.
Equilibrium
Nick Penrose is an advertising executive under enormous pressure at work. He tells his psychiatrist Dr Pearl about a recurring dream of a beautiful naked woman in his apartment, as they discuss the possible reasons why his stress seems to manifest itself in the erotic dream.
The Dangerous Thread of Things
A bored couple, Christopher and Cloe, take a stroll near a resort on a lake on the coast of Tuscany. Visiting a restaurant on the beach, they see a sexy young woman, Linda. Cloe tells him where she lives, inside a crumbling medieval tower. He goes to visit her and they have sex. As Christopher leaves the place, the two women later encounter each other on the beach, both naked. | pornographic | train | wikipedia | Most seem to think that none of it is erotic enough and few "like" the Soderbergh and Antonioni projects.But you, dear viewer, you will know this as three explorations into how the eye creates the seductive impulse.
The Tale Tail And Wong Kar-Wai. Antonioni is not able to direct a 30 min film.
The Dangerous Thread of Things deals with a couple trapped in a plain, tasteless life that are no longer able to observe, to feel, to digest the little, happy, natural elements of their lives.What Antonioni wants to show here is that women are passionate, wild , instinctual.
The ideas are nice, he tried to do something great , but he didn't manage because there was not enough time to construct the characters, to make them mean something so by the end of the film we are left with a feeling of dizziness.On the other hand, i didn't like Soderbergh's segment at all maybe because i didn't understand it or maybe I'm trying to get in deep where there is only the surface.Anyway, Kar-Wai's segment was the best of all three, absolutely wonderful.
The story is rather sad(all Kar Wai's characters are melancholic) but the way he works with the camera and the music perfectly combined with the images proves what a great director he is.
In the order of appearance:"The Hand" by Wong Kar-Wai is a solid piece of film-making, but nothing special.
We've seen these characters before, they are not that interesting, and the story itself veers too far into melodramatic to my liking."Equilibrium" by Soderbergh is a witty, clever little nugget...
and you won't soon forget an unorthodox shrink who indulges in a bit of voyerism on the side while treating his twitchy patient (a great appearance by Robert Downey Jr.)The Whatever It Was Called by Antonioni is so bad, I could not believe my eyes.
"Eros" (2004) is the collection of three short films directed by Michelangelo Antonioni (segment "Il filo pericoloso delle cose"), Steven Soderbergh (segment "Equilibrium") , and Kar Wai Wong (segment "The Hand").
My favorite is "The Hand" a sensual, emotional, powerful and very sad story about a young tailor who put the years of unrequited love for a beautiful call girl in an exquisite dress he created for her.
It is a brilliant work of art from one of the greatest working directors now.Steven Soderbergh's "Equilibrium" is a funny duet between two excellent actors, Alan Arkin as a voyeuristic shrink and Robert Downey Jr. as his patient who has a reoccurring dream about a beautiful woman.Michelangelo Antonioni's segment "Il filo pericoloso delle cose" aka "The Dangerous Thread of Things" has been called the weakest in the trio.
Wong Kar Wai delivers a touching, sad romantic tale of a tailor's apprentice who has a curiosity about a woman who does something erotic with him on a first visit (hence the title of the segment, The Hand, though it's not as pat a term as might be imagined.
It goes to show that Kar-Wai might be the most skilled at making romantic-dramas in China, or at least is the most popular.Steven Soderbergh, likely around the time he directed the slightly off-putting Ocean's Twelve, concocted this sort of comedy of manners, as he says, "so I could have my name on a poster with Antonioni." It stars Robert Downey Jr. and Alan Arkin as a salesman and a psychiatrist respectively, and Downey's character is anxious about his job and, more importantly, about a woman in his dream.
But his physical mannerisms, as Downey goes through his dream to confront himself (filmed in nice black and white, by the way), makes the scene all the more worthwhile.
With the brilliance of the three directors one would expect far more than the film delivers.Wong Kar Wai presents the strongest of the three films in a dark story about a tailor who sublimates his desire for a courtesan (Gong Li) by making clothes for her - a 'servant' who finally reverses his role.
The photography and interweaving of the characters is very beautiful to experience.Steven Soderberg makes a testy little script about an ad man (Robert Downey, Jr) in therapy with a bizarre psychiatrist (Alan Arkin) exploring a recurring sensual dream.
Shot is black and white the actors give it their all but the story is silly and becomes boring with all the distractions Soderberg works into the weak plot.Antonioni attempts to breathe life into the old Italian movies of lover's spats and diversions and comes up with what feels like a script-less little mess of a movie bent solely on see-through blouses and nude cavorting on beaches.As a triptych the film just doesn't become airborne, despite some very high powered, first rate directors.
I saw this movie last night at the Elgin Theatre at the Toronto International Film Festival and people walked out after seeing the Wong Kar Wai and Steven Soderbergh segments.
First, there was Wong Kar Wai's short film, titled "The Hand", starring Gong Li and Chang Chen.
Overall, I'd say this movie was a 7/10 mainly because Wong Kar Wai and Steven Soderbergh pulled the average up..
For fans of Wong Kar-Wai, his segment "The Hands" is a must-see, as it ranks among his best, most fully-realized works.
Soderbergh's piece, titled "Equilibrium", is a tediously self-conscious exercise in cerebral cleverness, typical of his attempts at uncommercial "art" film-making (as opposed to his usual faceless Hollywood products).
It only further proves what a truly cold, soulless filmmaker Soderbergh is that his segment of an anthology film supposedly based around the theme of sex is completely devoid of sensuality of any kind.
Antonioni's closing segment (baring the appropriately pretentious title "The Dangerous Thread of Things") fairs slightly better, but not enough to prevent it from being a sad near self-parody from what was once one of cinema's leading lights.
It is tempting to blame Antonioni's stroke (which rendered him wheelchair-bound and mute in 1985) for his piece's dirty old man sensibility (parts of it approach bad soft-core porn), but even that doesn't excuse the film's sheer almost laughable (if it weren't so tragic) pretentiousness.
I saw this movie at the Toronto Film Festival, on the suggestion of friends who were very excited about Wong Kar Wai's short in particular.
I had never seen anything by that director, but I was interested enough in the concept of the movie (three short films by three directors of different nationality) to go along.The first short, Wong's 'The Hand', is excellent; it is touching and powerful.
I enjoyed this enough to want to see more of the director's work.The second is Steven Soderbergh's 'Equilibrium', and it's the sort of film that I sometimes think the West has forgotten how to make.
This is a shocking combination of bad acting, pointless storytelling, and unnecessary nudity...and this is not just my opinion; by about halfway through, most of the audience was laughing with embarrassment and more than a few were leaving the theatre.So, in conclusion, Eros is a film of contrasts: two excellent pieces of cinema and one piece of garbage.
If you like the work of Wong or Soderbergh, I highly recommend this film.
Eros is a collection of three such films, ostensibly sharing a similar theme.Wong Kar Wai's "The Hand" is the first film, and is a premiere example of what a short film can achieve.
It is by far the best film of the bunch, perhaps even one of the director's finest.Steven Soderbergh's "Equilibrium" is the second film in the trio, and features a few shots of a naked woman and a long and unrelated dialog between Robert Downey Jr and Alan Arkin.
Soderbergh, who's often hit-or-miss, misses big time with this convoluted short.Michelangelo Antonioni's "Dangerous thread" (or however it is properly translated) is quite different from the previous two films.
It actually feels like it is much closer to succeeding than "Equilibrium", if only because it seems to fit comfortably within its time constraints, but the vacuous plot leaves you bored.In the end Eros is a missed opportunity.
I saw this film in Greece where the sequence is: Antonioni, Sodenberg, Kar Wai. The Antonioni film felt a bit indifferent but one has only to pay attention to some details to understand that this is a work of a genius like Antonioni who has great fun.
This isn't bad, its just not the best way to view the two good films of the set.Ultimately I'd say if you're interested in any of the directors give it a shot, or more precisely the first two are worth renting or seeing on cable, while the final film should simply be burned.
The three stories are the views that Michelangelo Antonioni, Steven Soderbergh and Wong Kar-Wai have of eroticism, and in two of them the segments are what one would expect of their creators, confirming the auteurist film theory.
The final section , Wong's "The Hand", based on the tale "The Twilight of the Bottom Dancer" (according to the director in an interview), illustrates the generalized (or maybe "cliched" would be a more appropriate adjective) notions of what the artistic approach to eroticism should be (for example, the tailor introducing his hand in a dress), but Wong and cinematographer Christopher Doyle are remarkable image-makers, and Gong Li and Chang Chen give very good performances, that I guess that for a modern moviegoer this must be the best segment.
The first short The Hand by Wong Kar Wai is in his classic style portrayal of melancholic love and eroticism, easily the best of the three.
3 shorts, 3 directors, 3 stories, 3 cultures, 3 streams of consciousness, 1 theme - loveI guess the story between Wong Kar Wai & Gong Li, although dark and sad, hits the bulls eye.
To make this movie's critic,composed by three shorts,I will make three critics about the three segments.The hand-Directed by Wong Kar Wai-Rating:9/10 I never was a Wong Kar Wai's fan.I think that Happy together is a bad pretentious movie.But his short on this movie,The hand,is simply great.The dialogs and the story are really well and it is the best short of the movie.The short does not focus in much sex scenes.There are only some.The short is more focused to dialogs,to characters and to the story.Equilibrium-Directed by Steven Soderbergh-Rating:6/10 Equilibrium is a fun,but mediocre short.Steven Soderbergh continues with his irregular career.Robert Downey Jr and Alan Arkin made very good performances.Equilibrium is for having a good time and nothing else.Il filo pericoloso delle cose-Directed by Michelangelo Antonioni-Rating:2/10 I always considered Michelangelo Antonioni as a master in movies.Well,I considered him a master until I saw his short in this movie Eros.I cannot believe that Antonioni was behind this short.It is almost all the time sex scenes without a sense.I think that Antonioni is very old for directing something.Antonioni's short was simply pathetic..
But sadly it wasn't any of these things.There were a few redeeming features - the first short was beautiful to watch and the actors were well chosen, the second had some bits of wonderful acting and interesting photography, and...um...for the third, only the location was interesting.In the end, don't believe the "plot summary" on this site, or the description on the DVD.
All three improvise transcendence.The structure of the thing we can attribute to our conventional film culture that always waxes vaguely about the abstract (Antonioni), treats narrative engineering as a subject of dry, academic discourse (Soderbergh), and is generally more comfortable to evaluate memories of beauty and touch (Wong Kar Wai).I am going to write about these last to first, which is also how they resonated with me.The last segment is typical Kar Wai/Doyle fashion, unfolding down the corner from In the Mood for Love; so flowery, arrested breathing, quietly exasperated romance with the musky scents of intimacy in close quarters.
Soderbergh's is cute and funny, but more like a long joke than a film, and is about as "erotic" as watching Seinfeld.
The ADR on his piece is also very poor, and the acting not much better.8/10 for Wai's, 6/10 for Soderbergh's, and 3/10 for Antonioni's.
I just watched the film today, and can't help thinking that Almodovar (who did the linking segments in between the films) would have formed a more perfect EROS trio with WKW and Antonioni.Soderbergh's Equilibrium was the flimsiest and weakest short of the three for me, which was unfortunately compounded by the fact that it was wedged between WKW and Antonioni's contributions.To follow right after the sumptuous, poetic beauty of Doyle's cinematography and WKW's direction only worked to emphasize the lack of richness in the visuals as well as characters of Equilibrium.
Ele Keats in the erotic "dream" sequence in Equilibrium failed to conjure up an authentic sense of eroticism and depth, unlike Gong Li's character Hua, and like the rest of film, seemed flat in comparison.As for Antonioni, in what could very well be his last film, the sense of anticipation by the audience could have also created a lack of patience with the obviousness of Soderbergh's play between dream vs.
reality, and also his mockery of psychologists/the psychoanalytic "talking cure" or therapy process.Like many of his best, Antonioni's short is a deceptively 'simple' film that suggests something deeper: the understanding of love/eros from the perspective of free-spirited women.
In a recent Taiwanese TV interview, WKW commented that the reason for any director in his 90s and not in the best physical capacity to want to still make a film would be to satisfy a desire, a love - perhaps this is precisely the eros in the world of film-making that is ultimately portrayed by these directors in the eponymous production.On the level of ambition and theme, however, Antonioni is still in his element.
His admirers of choice were Wong Kar Wai, Hong Kong's master of mood and unrequited romance ("In the Mood for Love," "Days of Being Wild") and Indie-darling-turned Hollywood-heavyweight Steven Soderbergh ("King of the Hill," "Ocean's 12").When assembling a trilogy film, rule of thumb generally centers the weaker of the three passages while saving the best for last.
Co-scripted by lifelong collaborator Tonino Guerra ("L'Avventura," "Blowup"), "The Dangerous Thread of Things" has been described as a "mental adventure." Carlo di Carlo, curator of Italy's Antonioni museum, says, "Antonioni wonders: is a film born first in response to an intimate need of its author or are the images destined to have a value - ontologically - for what they are?" A brilliant notion (would one expect anything less of the director?), but given the allotted time, were it not for Mr. Carlo's guidance, I never would have been aware of this concept.An American and his Italian wife are so bored with each other that they barely notice the beauty of Antonioni's surrounding landscapes.
A beautiful young girl enters the picture, the plot vanishes and we spend the rest of the time focusing on textures both man-made and of the flesh.Wong Kar Wai's opening salvo is so powerful that it dwarfs everything that follows.
You don't mind, do you?" When it comes to suppressing emotion and establishing mood through style, no one at work today can top Wong Kar Wai.Anyone who saw "In the Mood for Love" knows that these characters don't stand a chance at happiness, but plot is not the point.
Only I discern the infinite passion, and the pain, of finite hearts that yearn." – Robert Browning"There are no sexual relations." – Jacques Lacan "Paint not the thing, but the effect it produces." - Mallarmé "Eros" is comprised of three short films, one by director Wong Kar-Wai, one by director Steven Soderbergh and one by Michelangelo Antonioni.
The meta-story here, though, is of Soderbergh and Wong's love for Antonioni, whom both cite as an influence and inspiration.Unsurprisingly, Antonioni's contribution to "Eros", "The Dangerous Thread of Things", is the most interesting film of the bunch.
Even Antonioni's deathbed works posses an invisible power which few directors can replicate.7.5/10 – This review has focused on Antonioni's instalment, but Wong Kar-Wai's short film is also quite good.
'Eros' brings together three very different filmmakers, who are telling us, each in his own way, stories about love/lust/desire/dreams.The first segment (The Hand) is made by Wong Kar -Wai, with Christopher Doyle as cinematographer.
The apprentice remains attached to her down to the end and puts all his erotic desire in creating a dress that substitutes for him the woman.Let's pass now to the second segment (Equilibrium), created by Steven Soderbergh.
Or the other way around :) As for the third segment (Il filo pericoloso delle cose - The Dangerous Thread of Things), made by Michelangelo Antonioni, it was considered by many reviewers as the weakest part of the movie.
The Hand--I've only seen "In the Mood for Love" and "2046" by Wong Kar-Wai, and this movie fits in well with both of them.
Wong Kar Wai seems particular possessed with the idea of "Eros" as unrequited love...
in all three of these movies exists two characters that love each other but cannot consummate it, in the latter two (2046 and this short film) the female sexually open but not entirely open to the true love of the male.Equilibrium--Steven Soderbergh takes Eros a little psychologically as a man describes a recurring dream to a distracted psychologist.
The two women meet at the end, and are set at stark contrast to the male-driven symbols of eros from the rest of the short and the previous two shorts.All in all, the three films are interesting and at times beautiful, though they are very different from each other.
This is true with me as well--for some reason, I just like Antonioni's film better than the others.
Eros collects three short films by three talented directors.
Each story raises some issues and makes some points about the romantic relationships shared by women and men, but there is only one brief sex scene.The first segment, THE HAND, is an accomplishment in short film-making. |
tt0057579 | The Three Lives of Thomasina | The story takes place in fictional Inveranoch, Scotland in the year 1912. It centres on Andrew MacDhui (Patrick McGoohan) a coldly scientific, atheist veterinarian, his seven-year-old daughter Mary (Karen Dotrice), and her cat Thomasina (voiced by Elspeth March), who narrates the film. (Thomasina was originally called "Thomas" by her adoptive family. She explains that they amended her name "when they, well, got to know me better.")
Mr. MacDhui is a widower. His wife's death destroyed his belief in God, as well as his empathy for others. He has little sympathy for pets, preferring "useful" animals such as hard-working farm beasts and the blind man Tammas' guide dog, Bruce.
One night Thomasina is chased by dogs in the marketplace. She falls from some boxes and sustains an injury. Mary and her friends find Thomasina the following day. Meanwhile, Mr. MacDhui is operating on Bruce (who had been struck by a car). The doctor is interrupted during the surgery by his daughter, begging him to help her cat. Observing that Thomasina's muscles are stiff, he diagnoses her with tetanus. He orders his assistant Willie Bannock (Wilfrid Brambell) to euthanize Thomasina.
Mary is shattered by Thomasina's death, and loses faith in her father, who had promised to save her cat. She withdraws emotionally from Mr. MacDhui and declares her father dead, refusing to speak to or look at him. Meanwhile, Thomasina's soul goes to a feline afterlife where cats who have used all of their nine lives are transformed into Siamese and live with the Egyptian cat goddess Bastet for eternity. But Thomasina has lived only once, and is returned to her body alive but in a coma.
Mary and her playmates Hughie Stirling (Vincent Winter), and Jamie and Geordie McNab (Denis Gilmore and Matthew Garber) and other friends give Thomasina a funeral. They take her out to the glen beyond the town, but are unintentionally frightened away by "Mad Lori" MacGregor (Susan Hampshire), a beautiful kindhearted young woman who lives in the glen and was attracted by the children's singing and bagpipe playing. The children believe she is a witch, in part because of her apparent power to calm and cure animals. Lori brings Thomasina back to her makeshift animal hospital, but although the cat recovers she has no memory of her first life with Mary. Thus begins her second life.
Lori lacks the surgical skill needed to help a wounded badger that she finds in a trap, and asks God for assistance. Soon after, Mr. MacDhui comes to give her a piece of his mind: the children have told the townspeople to boycott his practice and to bring their sick pets to her instead. Discovering the injured animal, he treats the badger's wound as Lori watches in amazement. Lori (and later, Mr. MacDhui) realize that they each have half of what is needed to treat sick animals. He has the science and surgery, and she has the power of love.
During the time, Mary becomes increasingly distraught and distant from her playmates and her father. Not even a new pet brought by Mr. MacDhui will cheer her up.
Meanwhile, Thomasina's memory is slowly returning. She realizes she misses something very important, but she doesn't know what. She remembers the way back home, but doesn't recognize Mary, who chases her into a rainstorm. Thomasina returns to the safety of Lori's cabin in the woods, but Mary contracts pneumonia after Mr. MacDhui finds her lying on the street in the rain.
Mr. MacDhui and Lori start to bond emotionally when their attempt to shut down a travelling circus results in a fight with its gypsy proprietors who had been physically abusing their performing animals. The circus spectators, including Mary's playmates, join in the fight and a fire breaks out. The police ultimately arrest the proprietors for animal cruelty.
Mr. MacDhui prays for the first time in four years that God will somehow cure his daughter. Off in the glen, a lightning bolt (which may be a miracle from God) strikes a tree next to Thomasina and her memory is suddenly restored. Lori comes to the house, as Thomasina does, who is the only one able to save Mary as she has lost the will to live. However the cat sees Mr. MacDhui (who had her killed) and refuses to enter through the window despite Mr. MacDhui's pleading.
At this point, Thomasina realizes that she could get revenge on Mr. MacDhui by not entering, but Lori's love has changed her, and she no longer desires revenge. Mr. MacDhui places Thomasina in Mary's arms, thereby restoring Thomasina to Mary, Mary's life, and Mary's love for her father. Lori's love has changed Mr. MacDhui, and they are soon married, making the perfect veterinary team. Thomasina now begins her third life with all of them together. | allegory, romantic | train | wikipedia | It's superior to the current family movies in a number of reasons; lovely color, the realism of a vet's life, delightful Scots Highlands locations, a fine dramatic structure bolstered by that underrated actor Patrick Macgoohan and by a pretty, startlingly black-eyed starlet named Susan Hampshire (the two represent science and faith, respectively, and they come together with an ease you wish these two opponents would share today).
A family movie in the day when kids were tougher, it was memorably broadcast on Disney's Wonderful World of Color on TV.
Disney films of that period seemed to add particularly interesting adult themes into their films especially if they contained British kids.
Like Pollyanna or The Moonspinners or Mary Poppins, this film is perfectly realized for children and has enough weight and wry humor for parents to feel the production works for many ages.
Superb, sentimental live-action drama from Walt Disney concerns a young Scottish girl's love and devotion to her sickly pet cat, who gets a new lease on life from a "magical" mountain woman whom the townspeople believe is a witch.
Karen Dotrice (best known as Jane from "Mary Poppins") is quite the little thespian here, and her tears and youthful anger are convincing; she's as good a child actress as I have ever seen (Walt must've had a soft spot for wholesome British lasses, Dotrice and Hayley Mills seem sprung from the same boarding school).
Thanks to the terrific acting of Patrick "The Prisoner" McGoohan and the lovely Susan Hampshire, this film is not like other syrupy Disney films like "Pete's Dragon" or "Mary Poppins."Dr. McDui's character, played by McGoohan, is a tense, conflicted, confused man.
A movie with everything from first class acting to a storyline where fantasy meets reality.In this case the Cat...who is also a voiceover...is really the central part of the story.
Patrick McGoohan plays the vet,whose daughter Mary (played by Karen Dotrice)is owned by the Cat. Its definitely a weepie but everyone lives happily ever after as Thomasina returns from an unusual resurrection performed by Susan Hampshire...supposedly a witch!!!.
It is amazing how Disney made a movie that both children and adults can appreciate.
They all seem like real people and not actors which makes this movie work.
The Cat who Played God. In sparkling 1912 Scotland, an orange tabby named "Thomasina" explains how she came to live with little Karen Dotrice (as Mary), her stern veterinarian father Patrick McGoohan (as Andrew McDhui), and housekeeper Jean Anderson (as Mrs. MacKenzie).
The cat amusingly states the family originally named her "Thomas" until they "
got to know me better." At this moment, you know you're going to like this animal.
This extraordinary opening perfectly introduces the cat's personality, and prepares you for its death.The opening theme song, written by folk singer Terry Gilkyson, is purrfectly infectious.The story intensifies when "Thomasina" is crushed under an avalanche of crates, while prowling a fish market.
With her young friends' help, Ms. Dotrice finds the cat, and brings "Thomasina" to her father.
You'd think Mr. McGoohan, a veterinarian, would do everything possible to save his daughter's pet, which he promises to do - but, McGoohan is saving the life of a blind man's seeing eye dog, and orders "Thomasina" put to sleep.
Later, we learn he suffers from guilt regarding his wife's death.McGoohan thinks he can simply replace "Thomasina" with another cat, and cannot understand why Dotrice is taking the death so hard.
Dotrice's friends, Vincent Winter (as Hughie), Denis Gilmore (as Jamie), and "Mary Poppins" co-star Matthew Garber (as Geordie), give "Thomasina" a child-like funeral, which is interrupted by a woman they both admire and fear - spooky Susan Hampshire (as Lori MacGregor), the superstitious town's resident "witch".
When his daughter falls deathly ill, "man of science" McGoohan tries to reconnect with his Christian faith, lamenting, "I've forgotten how to pray." He also begins to connect with Hampshire, which leads to the most unimaginative part of the story.
Still, this is an excellent, underrated film.******** The Three Lives of Thomasina (12/11/63) Don Chaffey ~ Patrick McGoohan, Karen Dotrice, Susan Hampshire, Elspeth March.
Susan Hampshire is beautiful in this movie, in both character and attractiveness.
This movie is available in both VHS and DVD, but definitely buy the DVD for the extra features, plus it will keep it from wearing out when your children or grandchildren want to watch it again.
Mary McDuie (Karen Dotrice) is a young, motherless girl living in Scotland at the turn of the 20th century.
Therefore, her only real solace is her cat Thomasina, a beautiful orange tabby with personality.
On the outskirts of the village lives a lady, Lori (Susan Hampshire) who the children think is a WITCH.
But, when the children take the box with Thomasina to the town's edge, planning to bury her and hold a funeral, the "witch" appears and scares them away.
Dotrice is winning as the young girl who dresses her cat in clothes and takes him on buggy adventures.
McGoohan is also fine as the stern father and Hampshire is sweet and lovely as Lori.
However, cat lovers, Disney fans, and family film friends will welcome this title as an oldie but goodie..
A few days ago I remembered this Disney film and the "witch".
I think Lorie was my role model in all that I have done with animals since I saw this movie when I was a young child..
'The Three Lives of Thomasina' is one of the best live-action Disney works and an excellent drama.
But while the majority of animal movies are mostly about dogs, this one is dedicated mostly to a cat, Thomasina.
To cool down the tense atmosphere of such a depressing story, there are a few characters who are a comic relief: Mary's friends Geordie, Jamie and Hughie.The actors are great and even their Scottish accent is very believable, including those who aren't or weren't Scottish.
Matthew Garber's role is something like a slightly wilder, more carefree and more comical version of "his own" Michael Banks.Lori is a good and beautiful witch.
"The Three Lives of Thomasina" is a very good movie.
No questioning, this is one of Disney's best live-action movies.
Curiously, the movie's title doesn't refer to the traditional nine lives of a cat, it refers only to three of them.
Curiously, the opening scene is made in one of the strangest ways too, but I like the way that's made for being quite unusual.The movie can be considered a family drama above all things, but it also has numerous moments of fun.
There is very little soundtrack (unlike in many - if not most - Disney movies), but the song "Thomasina" is nice.The story is set in Scotland, particularly in the town of Inveranoch.
The pleasant sound of the bagpipes accent the Scottish atmosphere.Our story centers mostly around Andrew MacDhui (a cold and distant veterinarian who doesn't show much feelings for pets), his daughter Mary and Mary's beloved cat Thomasina.
Not only on these characters, but also on Mary's friends Hughie, Jamie and Geordie.Mary's 3 friends make the movie's funniest moments, especially whenever they peek at Lori (the beautiful and kind young woman who cures all injured and sick beings) and runaway from her.
It's hilarious when one of the boys says «She's crazy», a line which sounds even funnier because of the way he says it and especially because of his English with a Scottish or Scottish gaelic accent.This is the first of 3 films which Matthew Garber and Karen Dotrice star together.
In any of the 3 movies with Matthew and Karen, the funniest of the two is always Matthew.Thomasina is a beautiful orange tabby cat.
Elspeth March does a great narration job for Thomasina.Susan Hampshire is great in her role as Lori.
The film was directed by Don Chaffey, the same man who directed "Pete's Dragon".The movie is generally simple, but there is a scene with spectacular special effects for its time: the sequence which Thomasina is going on a fantasy trip to "Cat Heaven" and encounters Bast (the ancient Egyptian Cat Goddess).
Another very well made scene among others is Thomasina's "almost" funeral.The puppy that Mr. MacDhui tries to offer his daughter is really cute and adorable.
The presence of Patrick McGoohan, one of my favorite actors of the modern era, was my motivation for renting out the 1964 Disney picture "The Three Lives of Thomasina," but as it turns out, this charming film has much to offer besides his usual sturdy support.
In this one, McGoohan doesn't play a secret-agent man or gay-smashing king, but rather a widower veterinarian named Andrew MacDhui living in the small town of Inveranoch, Scotland, in 1912, with his young daughter, Mary, and their 4-year-old ginger cat, Thomasina.
Their peaceful domestic life is shattered when MacDhui is forced to put Thomasina to sleep, after the cat contracts tetanus, and Mary becomes walled off and unforgiving.
Fortunately, Thomasina, after a surprisingly FX-laden dream sequence, during which she encounters the Egyptian cat god Bast, does return, and sets off on life #2....
It is almost impossible to speak of this film, even as a middle-aged adult, without using the words "cute" and "charming." If Paul Gallico's 1957 source novel, "Thomasina," which I have not read, is half as appealing as this adaptation, it must be very likable indeed.
Besides a sweet and compelling story, the film offers sterling support by a raft of fine British, Irish and Scottish character actors, such as Laurence Naismith, Wilfrid Brambell (who will always be Paul's very clean grandfather to me!) and Finlay Currie.
Beautiful Susan Hampshire stands out as Lori MacGregor, the nature girl "witch" with a superempathic way with animals, and the child actors are all wonderful, especially newcomer Karen Dotrice as Mary.
It isn't my absolute favourite of the live-action Disney movies, but it is one of the more poignant ones and one of the most undervalued too.
Patrick McGoohan is superb, and Finlay Currie and Jean Anderson give fine supporting performances but it is delightful Karen Dotrice and her adorable feline companion who steal the show.
A Scottish tale by Paul Gallico features an orange tabby who is the beloved cat of a little girl (KAREN DOTRICE from "Mary Poppins").
The feline is mistakenly believed by the girl and her friends (including MATTHEW GARBER, who played her brother in the "Poppins" film), to be dead.
When a nearby "witch" recovers the cat (who has been given a funeral by the children), she discovers that it still has a pulse and gives it shelter.So begins the tale, which eventually reunites the "witch," the children, and the young village doctor (PATRICK McGOOHAN) who has been unjustly accused by his little daughter to have caused the cat's death.
SUSAN HAMPSHIRE is lovely and appealing as the good "witch" who has a way with animals.
Very heartwarming movie about a family that's brought together through their cat's mysterious death and reappearance.
THE THREE LIVES OF THOMASINA, in my opinion, is a very heartwarming movie about a family that's brought together through their cat's mysterious death and reappearance.
I thought that Andrew (Patrick McGoohan) was a little cold-hearted, but Lori (Susan Hampshire) was a very sweet kid.
In conclusion, I highly recommend this movie to all you cat lovers or Disney fans who have not seen it..
A film with a lovely story that appeals to both adults and children.
There are few cat films of note and Disney's "Thomasina" can take its place as one of the best in content and performance.
Juvenile actress Karen Dotrice as Mary McDhui is superb with her co-worker Matthew Garber turning in an excellent performance as her playmate.
(Dotrice and Garber would one day appear as the Banks siblings in Disney's masterpiece "Mary Poppins.") A word of warning!
Many film viewers today are sensitive to the treatment animals receive during production and sadly "Thomasina" is marred with the evident abuse its performing feline star receives: the poor cat is soaked with water for several rainy scenes and in the dream sequence she appears to have been dropped from a height, twisting and turning to regain her balance.
Additionally, the cat was likely anesthetized for the funeral scene (anesthetization during film production is forbidden by today's ASPCA) and there are other scenes in which the viewer may wonder not only about the cat's treatment during production but the treatment of other animals as well.
A fine film in content and performance but some viewers will have issues with the treatment of the cat during production..
While "The Three Lives of Thomasina" wasn't an outright flop at the box office, at the same time it was not the moneymaker that Walt Disney obviously hoped it would be, and it's largely been forgotten over the years.
While the movie at first glance seems aimed at women and young girls, there's a lot that men and young boys will find appealing as well, such as the movie's lessons on being kind to animals and showing love to your fellow man.The movie is not perfect.
Had this excess fat been trimmed off and the movie more focused on the young girl, her father, and the cat, we might have had a minor classic here.
The Three Lives of ThomasinaAnother classic Disney story of a smart stray cat named Thomasina who dies and comes back to life, living with a so-called "witch" on her farm in the middle of a desolate wooded area--until the little girl Thomasina used to belong to finds out the cat is still alive and tries to get her back.I have a fuzzy old tape of this movie buried somewhere in my stash of recorded videos.
Treacly in the tradition of Walt's live-character movies.
There's a glaring 3rd-act plot-hole when the witch's house catches fire by lightening (Thomasina gets out alright but what about the other animals?
"The Three Lives of Thomasina" is a Disney movie, so you know what that means.
How do ya like that: in one movie, he lived in Scotland; in the other, he invaded it!
The only other cast member whom I recognized was Wilfrid Brambell, better known as Paul's grandfather in "A Hard Day's Night".I know that it's a little weird that in a review of a movie about a magical cat, I mentioned "Braveheart", "Three Days of the Condor", "Dr. Strangelove", "A Fistful of Dollars", "Zorba the Greek", the Beatles and Stephen King, but that's just the kind of person that I am..
It's not cheery as with Karen Dotrice's next film Mary Poppins.
There are far too many soppy moments in this film for kids, and even some adults, to handle.Things bound to get people too emotional is the death of a cute cat (although she comes back to life) and after that death, the rejection of so many cute, adorable puppies and kittens looking for a home only to be rejected by a miserable girl.That aside, it's also a very boring film.
(Spoiler) I remember seeing this as a little girl and how it made me cry when Thomasina runs back through the rain and jumps back through the window to Mary.
I have had cats all of my life and this movie truly captures the love one has for their pet and the anguish one feels over the loss of it.It's a little distracting to watch this film and Mary Poppins too close together since the main two children are the same in both films, but they are also wonderfully cast ...
Into the mix, we get a "witch" who ends up enchanting the father and making him see that love is still possible -- not only with her, but also between him and his daughter.
Looking at the publicity you might think this was a film about a cat.
This error is a bit of a worry given that the father of the family is a veterinarian, Andrew MacDhui (pronounced Macdooee), played by Patrick McGoohan.MacDhui is a young man of science.
They break open the isolation of an eccentric young woman, Lori MacGregor (Susan Hampshire) by taking their various injured animal friends for her to look after, she having an instinctive way of healing that has led to her being labelled a witch.Gradually the forces of Rationality and Empathy are brought together as MacDhui and MacGregor seek help, one from the other.
He eventually calls on her assistance to reach out to his daughter who becomes so emotionally withdrawn that she then physically sickens, nearing death.The cat, who has been a peripheral character makes a symbolic choice at the climax of the film.
In the final scene MacDhui has to persuade the cat to enter the window of the dying daughters bedroom.
His love for his daughter is enough to convince the cat he has learned his lesson and she trusts him enough to jump into his arms.
I'm not much of a sucker for a happy ending, because they often feel so contrived, but this is a wonderful movie for kids and adults, especially all those who love animals.
As a 7-year-old I was excited to see a movie where the girl was the hero who had adventures.
The movie was The Three Lives of Thomasina.
It turned out that Thomasina was a cat belonging to a little girl.
Some of the scenes are beautifully shot, as far as a children's/cat movie goes, this one is pretty interesting with a fun plot and great supporting child actors.
Then there's the Witch, who has shut herself from civilization, probably after her parents' tragic death, and lives on faith and only makes friends with animals.
The cat Thomasina, who when science failed to rescue her was brought back to life on a strictly homeopathic/spiritual term.
In this particular movie, none of the humans were "waken up", in the end they still sit around the table living what seems to be a wonderful life unconsciously, they are perhaps less conscious than the cat, less human even. |
tt0054594 | The Absent Minded Professor | Professor Brainard (Fred MacMurray) (pronounced BRAY-nard) is an absent-minded professor of physical chemistry at Medfield College who invents a substance that gains energy when it strikes a hard surface. This discovery follows some blackboard scribbling in which he reverses a sign in the equation for enthalpy to energy plus pressure times volume. Brainard names his discovery Flubber, which is a portmanteau of "flying rubber." In the excitement of his discovery, he misses his own wedding to Betsy Carlisle (Nancy Olson), not for the first time, but his third. Subplots include another professor wooing the disappointed Miss Carlisle, Biff Hawk's (Tommy Kirk) ineligibility for basketball due to failing Brainard's class, Alonzo Hawk's (Keenan Wynn) schemes to gain wealth by means of Flubber, the school's financial difficulties and debt to Mr. Hawk, and Brainard's attempts to interest the government and military in uses for Flubber. Shelby Ashton (Elliott Reid), who was interested in Betsy, is given his revenge by the Professor, who keeps on jumping on the top of Shelby's car, until it crashes into a police car, where he is given a field sobriety test.
Looking for backers, he bounces his Flubber ball for an audience, but his investment pitch proves so long-winded that most of the crowd has left before they notice that the ball bounced higher on its second bounce than on its first. For a more successful demonstration, he makes his Model T fly by bombarding Flubber with radioactive particles. Other adventures and misadventures result as Flubber is used on the bottoms of basketball players' shoes (in a crucial game) giving them tremendous jumping ability; Brainard (at a school dance) making him an accomplished dancer, and the scheming businessman Alonzo Hawk, who switches cars on the professor, with a car containing a squirrel and pigeons. Hawk then must be tackled by a full football team to bring him down after Brainard tricks him into testing Flubber on the bottom of his shoes. The Professor retrieves the old Model T from the warehouse, and Hawk is arrested for having a gun in his possession, when the car crashes into a police car. Eventually, Brainard shows his discovery to the government, after being scared by a missile in flight, and also wins back Miss Carlisle, culminating in a wedding at last. | romantic, fantasy | train | wikipedia | The Absentminded Professor was the second film that Fred MacMurray in his second career rebirth with Walt Disney as the midwife.
He scored an enormous success in The Shaggy Dog and Disney films together with his My Three Sons TV series established MacMurray as the quintessential family father figure which would endure for the rest of his life.I do remember seeing this in the theater back as a youngster and back then the younger ones in the crowd were looking at Tommy Kirk who was at the height of his Disney popularity.
Nevertheless MacMurray gives a delightful performance as science professor Ned Brainerd who's accidentally invented a variation on rubber which has a great deal more bounce to it.He's so wrapped up in his experiment that he's even forgetting his wedding day to Nancy Olson, AGAIN.
Other than helping his college win a basketball game with a team that they are way overmatched against, he's not quite decided what use this stuff he calls flubber is good for.
But wealthy Keenan Wynn sure wants to get his hands on it.Funniest sequence in the film is Keenan Wynn after MacMurray and Olson trick him into wearing flubberized shoes is seeing bounce slowly into the stratosphere before a quick thinking Tommy Kirk devises a way to counteract his flubberized dad.The AbsentMinded Professor was so popular with audiences that Disney did another version with almost the entire same cast in Son of Flubber.That one was almost as funny, but this still has a lot of laughs even after almost fifty years..
Small coincidence, because the movie was also directed by Robert Stevenson.So, if you are looking for a film that will not offend, and offer a few chuckles and will captivate your child's attention, check out The Absent Minded Professor.Also, IMHO, do not wast time with the Flubber remake.CheersC.
The Absent Minded ProfessorClassic family from from Walt Disney that stars Fred MacMurray in the title role as a rather forgetful and absent minded professor who invents a strange putty substance that drives him and his close contacts bonkers.
The movie is much more inspired, likable and family-friendly (not to mention funnier and more charming) than the remake starring Robin Williams, which was written by John Hughes long after his career had fallen downwards.
This is probably one of the best live action films Disney has ever released.
Fred MacMurray once again proved how great a comedic actor he was and this film is just a confirmation of it.
However, the real scene stealer in this film is Keenan Wynne as old man Hawk.
That scene alone is what makes this film a classic comedy..
The Absent-Minded Professor was a typical Disney classic that I watched when I was younger.
In short, this film is about a professor who creates an anti-gravity substance known as 'flubber'.
Of course, someone is trying to kidnap this idea, and it's up to some children to save the day.I am not sure what children today would think of this film, but I did find it enjoyable, and I would have seen it in the mid-1980s.
Watch This Fun, Screwball Romp - but ONLY If You Are Not Jaded and Have Lost Sight of What Simple Fun Is. I think it is time this movie is reviewed by its positive qualities and not just centered on how utterly sophisticated the reviewer would like to be remembered by the readers of IMDB.com.First of all, let me say there is nothing wrong with "hokum" or old American values or screwball comedies or old Disney movies.
This movie was fun to watch and funny in enough places to warrant a watch by any self-respecting human being with a warm sense of humor.Second of all, The Absent-Minded Professor elicited a wonderful collection of chuckles from me.
But, the record stands that I did laugh, and with some old-fashioned "glee", I might add.Third of all, I believe comedies are sometimes taken too seriously: As if we were supposed to come away with some vastly profound elucidation from the experience.
Unlike some critics, I thought Fred MacMurray was perfect in the title role, and the supporting cast was great.
And though the Robin Williams remake gave it the new age CGI, the black and white gives the movie such a good feel.
The re-make was done in 1997 with the movie, "Flubber."Fred MacMurray, Nancy Olson, Keenan Wynn, Tommy Kirk.....wow, there are some familiar names from the '50s and '60s Olson had lost her youthful looks from "Sunset Boulevard," but that had been a decade earlier.
MacMurray didn't look a whole lot different from his 1944 film noir classic of "Double Indemnity," proving once again how much better men age than women.Kids of today would still laugh at this film, although they have dead spots in here which are not prevalent in modern-day films..
...and one of the best by Disney.You can't see this film and not enjoy the time of you life.It's clever, funny, and inventive.Please forget Robin Williams' version.That was a waste of celluloid.I'm a professor and was just thinking about the "absent-minded " effect yesterday.Or was I??
Fred MacMurray had a wonderful career with leading roles in all types of films.
Toward the end of his career, he made some family films for Walt Disney and starred in TV series.
And, he still did an occasional other film - drama, Western, comedy or other."The Absent-Minded Professor" is his second Disney family movie, after the successful 1959 "The Shaggy Dog."This film was an even bigger box office success.
It's a fun family film for kids of all ages.
A basketball game with the Medfield College team bouncing to the rafters and leaping onto backboards will leave one wondering how Disney filmed those scenes.
Besides MacMurray, Keenan Wynn, Nancy Olson, Leon Ames and Elliott Reid add some comedy.The movie received three Academy Award nominations, for camera work, art and set work and special effects.
Yet he was a consummate actor in any genre, and one of the best entertainers for several hit comedy films during Hollywood's golden age.All of MacMurray's films continue to please audiences well into the 21st century.
This film is a good one for family time to laugh and smile together.
i won't say this a great movie,but i will say it sure beats the dreadful 1997 remake called Flubber starring Robin Williams.that movie was tedious,to say the least.this movie,at least,was somewhat entertaining,if not all that funny.there are a couple of mildly amusing moments.there is a lot of overacting,which i have found quite typical of Disney movies of that era(1950's through 70's)but that was probably funny back then.Fred MacMurray plays the main character,professor Brainard,a chemistry professor who discovers a new compound that should revolutionize the world.of course,he's so busy working on his experiments,he neglects everything else in his life.MacMurray is very appealing and likable,as he is in any of his movies.my vote for The Absent Minded Professor is a 5/10.
I think a film that can be shared from generation to generation like that qualifies it as a classic.I never saw the original release but saw it as a kid on its re-release to theaters around 1975.
AMP did this 7 years before "Chitty Chitty Bang Bang" came out in 1968.Fred McMurray is extremely adept as his portrayal of the clichéd absent-minded professor.
I'm impressed at his range of acting talent - as in his classic film noir "Double Indemnity" to this lighthearted comedy.
I also think Keenan Wynn is very good as loan shark Alonzo Hawk.While my kids enjoyed this when they were small, they would probably consider it "lame" now as teenagers.
Could Oscar Werner or Marcello Mastroianni possibly compare with Fred MacMurray, with his toupee, pancaked face, wacky gleam in his eye as the, uh, nutty professor of Medfield College who discovers Flubber??
Could the flying Jesus in "Vita" measure up to Nancy Olson and Fred spooning amid the clouds in the Flubberized Model T?
I prefer the sexual tension between Fred, Nancy, and Elliot Reid.And Flubber will finally be put to good use for the benefit of all the civilized nations of the worlds.I love this movie.
In general, the film does look very nice indeed and the special effects are fun and interesting especially with Flubber and the car.
The soundtrack is infectious too, while not consistently hilarious The Absent Minded Professor is always very amusing, with some funny scripting and especially the classic scene at the basketball game.
MacMurray plays Ned Brainerd, a collegiate professor who devises an invention, "Flubber" (flying rubber) which is super-bouncy and allows his car to defy gravity.
A rich alumni, Alonzo Hawk (Keenan Wynn) wishes to get his hands on the invention and the millions of dollars it is guaranteed to garner, so he uses under-handed methods to try to wrest control of Ned's spectacular discovery.
Their is good humor throughout this movie, particularly when Hawk's desires become known to Ned and Ned uses "Flubber" to make Hawk bounce out-of-control.
This film is one of the Disney Company's first comedies and one can only wish that their later one's are half-as-funny as this early venture.
Small town chemistry professor, known for his forgetful, befuddled nature yet something of a closet science-genius as well, accidentally creates a rubbery substance in his garage laboratory which generates its own energy (flying rubber--or, as Fred MacMurray keeps reminding us, Flubber).
Box-office hit most likely squeaked by on its special effects; those not in the mood for leaping, bouncing slapstick can amuse themselves by counting the number of times the editor cuts to MacMurray's dog for quizzical reactions.
I was worried that The Absent-Minded Professor wouldn't hold up after all these years, but it's still fun to watch and it kept my kids entertained, as well.
Just Silly Disney Fun. Fred MacMurray plays the vacuous title character who ignores everything in life when it comes to a new discovery.
Cheerful, brainless nonsense is the order of the day, with generous helpings of good old American domestic values.Medfield College is a pleasant small-town campus peopled with pleasant clean-cut students and staff, and conspicuous among the latter is Ned Brainard, the Absent-Minded Professor.
Just as nutty scientists are supposed to do, he builds a labyrinth of bubbling tubes and flasks in his own garage - and this, too, blows up.The eccentric professor (played solidly and reliably by Fred MacMurray) discovers a marvellous anti-gravity gunge which he christens flying rubber, or 'flubber'.
His son Biff has been excluded from the College basketball team because of bad grades (having been flunked in chemistry class by Prof Brainard), and without this star player, the Medfield team is being trounced by Rutland College at half-time.
The eccentric professor saves the day by ironing flubber onto the soles of the Medfield players' gym shoes, and the home team bounces to victory.The scheming Alonzo Hawk steals the professor's flying car and replaces it with an ordinary Model T.
Shot in monochrome using simple sets, the film relies throughout on 'bouncing' jokes, as various characters discover the properties of gravity-defying flubber.
Brainard gets his car, Hawk is rescued from an uncontrollable flubber-bounce when he is tackled by the college football team, and the absent-minded professor flies his car to Washington to place his invention at Uncle Sam's disposal.Mildly enjoyable tosh as it is, the film somehow lacks gusto.
Robert Stevenson directed this Disney comedy that stars Fred MacMurray as Medfield College professor Brainard, an absent-minded man who can't even remember his own wedding, who invents a new substance that is a kind of flying rubber he names Flubber, which he uses on his Model T car or on the shoes of the basketball team to make them jump higher.
Only crooked businessman Alonzo Hawk(played by Keenan Wynn) has faith in the discovery, but of course he wants to steal it for himself, and tries to enlist his son Biff(played by Tommy Kirk) to help him.
Silly film has some funny scenes but is just too lightweight and the comedy too broad to succeed.
I saw "Flubber", starring Robin Williams, more than once in the late 90's, I guess when it was new to the video format, but never knew it was a remake until I saw it again last year, probably for the first time since late last decade, and wasn't all that impressed (not sure exactly what I thought of it before).
Over a year later, I've finally seen the original, "The AbsentMinded Professor", a live action Disney flick released in 1961, starring Fred MacMurray.
I wasn't absolutely blown away by it, nor was I expecting to be, but I was expecting it to be better than its 1997 remake, with more laughs, and I think my moderate expectations were basically met.Ned Brainard is an absent-minded physical chemistry professor at Medfield College.
A couple explosions early in the film, plus the main character playing tricks with his flying Model-T, getting his foe in trouble with the police one night, and some of the other things done with the Flubber, to be good comical moments, some more than others.
I guess it hasn't aged as well as many other movies from around the same time or before, and probably can't please as many people today as it could upon its original release in the early 60's, during its box office success.
"Flubber" obviously has more modern aspects than "The AbsentMinded Professor", but had potential to be so much better than it turned out to be, especially with Robin Williams in the lead role, and its predecessor remains superior.
A professor Brainard (Fred MacMurray) discovers a substance he calls flubber.
The flubber was the only halfway interesting about the movie (I mean the actual substance).
Ned Brainard (Fred MacMurray) is an accident-prone professor in Medfield College of Technology.
Alonzo Hawk figures out Brainard's secret and looking to make a bundle off of Flubber.
However, Brainard wants to give his discovery over to the government.This black and white Disney film is fun magic for the first hour.
It doesn't feel like the right fit for a fun family movie.
The Absent-Minded Professor was the 1961 Disney classic about a nerdy college professor, delightfully played by Fred MacMurray, who invents an anti-gravity substance that comes to be known as "flubber", which he uses to make his automobile airborne and help his college's basketball team finally w in a few games, while keeping a corrupt local businessman (Keenan Wynn) from stealing the substance for itself.After playing an adulterous slimeball the previous year in The Apartment, MacMurray proved that he could play a nice guy too and pretty much carved out an entire new career for himself, which included the TV series MY THREE SONS and a few more Disney comedies.
A stupid but enjoyable comedy from Disney, with MacMurray well cast in the title role.
Good old movie; now we know what Flubber actually is!!!!!.
"The Absent Minded Professor" is about, well, see the title!!!!!
He makes this flying rubber stuff known as "Flubber," and it can do many things from bounce off walls to making automobiles fly in the sky!!!!!This was seen in two versions: the colorized version, which I recall played on the Old Disney Channel so many times, and the B&W version, the version that I had seen first.
The villainous character of Alonzo Hawk got his first screen appearance in this breezy Disney comedy that had audiences howling over the fictitious invention of "flubber", a rubbery substance that can make basketball players jump to heights unimaginable, cars fly over the Capitol building and bring villainous bankers to new heights of comeuppance.
Keenan Wynn appeared as Hawk in three Disney movies (and various variations of his character with different names), and here, he's doing the bouncy-bouncy on his front lawn in a way that attracts an entire neighborhood, even hot dog vendors.
It's all because of the research of the wacky professor played by Fred MacMurray, finishing up his latest invention (flubber) and forgetting all about his marriage to college secretary Nancy Olsen.
MacMurray wants to make sure that flubber remains under the protection of the United States, so this keeps Hawk determined to remain one step ahead of him, first by stealing MacMurray's flying model T, then by using nefarious methods and paid bullies to try and get it back before MacMurray gets to Washington D.C.A cast of familiar character actors as well as young Tommy Kirk (as Wynn's bumbling son) fill out the ensemble here which includes a cameo by Ed Wynn (Keenan's father) as the fire chief trying vainly to get his (off-screen) son to stop bouncing.
MacMurray, then a popular TV dad on "My Three Sons", found himself a new career with this and probably saved himself from becoming a has-been, but unfortunately, outside of film fanatics, isn't as well remembered today...that is, until people realize the variety of his work.
I saw this on AMC and the guy presenting it said The Absent Minded Professor is Disney's second live action film.
Anyway, the special effects are dated (if you can actually call them special effects) but the scenes with the Professor's car lifting into the air and flying off are somewhat magically; especially in black and white.
He ends up inventing a substance with exponential potential energy and uses it to make a flying car, help basketball players win a game and help him win back the heart of his soon to be bride.
Fred MacMurray and Flubber.
I remember seeing this movie all the time when I was a little kid.
Professor Ned Brainerd (Fred MacMurray) is a professor at Medfield College, who is known for (among other things) constantly missing his wedding to the school president's secretary Betsy Carlisle (Nancy Olson).
It's a very entertaining film, and the Hawk character would go on to appear in 2 other Disney films, Herbie Rides Again and Son of Flubber.
The acting for the most part is good and MacMurray is really fun to watch here. |
tt0100519 | Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead | The play concerns the misadventures and musings of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, two minor characters from William Shakespeare's Hamlet who are childhood friends of the prince, focusing on their actions with the events of Hamlet as background. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead is structured as the inverse of Hamlet; the title characters are the leads, not supporting players, and Hamlet himself has only a small part. The duo appears on stage here when they are off-stage in Shakespeare's play, with the exception of a few short scenes in which the dramatic events of both plays coincide. In Hamlet, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are used by the King in an attempt to discover Hamlet's motives and to plot against him. Hamlet, however, mocks them derisively and outwits them, so that they, rather than he, are executed in the end. Thus, from Rosencrantz's and Guildenstern's perspective, the action in Hamlet is largely nonsensical and comical.
After the two characters witness a performance of The Murder of Gonzago—the story within a story in the play Hamlet—they find themselves on a boat taking Prince Hamlet to England with the troupe that staged the performance. They are intended to give the English king a message telling him to kill Hamlet. Instead, Hamlet discovers this and switches the letter for another, telling the king to kill Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. During the voyage, the two are ambushed by pirates and lose their prisoner, Hamlet, before resigning themselves to their fate and presumably dying thereafter. | boring, stupid, cult, clever, absurd, humor, psychedelic | train | wikipedia | Shakespeare didn't provide any detailed character development of either Rosencrantz or Guildenstern, and as such, they are left confused as to the purpose of their own existence.The film also looks at the concept of a predetermined destiny.
This clever screenplay by Tom Stoppard challenges the viewer to listen and watch closely as the Shakespeare tragedy Hamlet is turned on its ear via taking the perspective of the oblivious rhetorics, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern.
This last point is comically illustrated as one of the pair (they don't know who is who) keeps `stumbling' on great ideas, which then vanish.The play (Stoppard's first) seems to have been his one excellent work, followed by the mundane.
Okay, so you may want to brush up on your knowledge of "Hamlet" before viewing "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead", Tom Stoppard's big screen adaptation of his own classic play.
based on tom stoppard's play of the same name (stoppard also directs the film), "rosencrantz and guildenstern are dead" delves into the tragicomic lives of minor characters everywhere, on-stage and off.
The dialogue is constant and highly entertaining, the meshing of Stoppard's modern day speech of the original parts of the story and Shakespeare's original Hamlet practically seamless and masterfully worked.
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, minor characters in Hamlet wander into the events of the play on call for their dialogue, and in between try to figure out their existence.
Tim Roth, Gary Oldman and Richard Dreyfuss star Tom Stoppard claims that the idea behind his hit play 'Rosencrantz And Guildenstern Are Dead' was suggested to him by his agent: What happens to two small parts in Shakespeare's 'Hamlet' when they're off stage?
In this case, the characters are lost in midst of a play we all know what it is about, so, the mood is more tongue-in-cheek: the feel is much more Kafkaesque this time, when the invisible strings lead these characters to their demises, and also, it's incredible fun and witty.As a film, the only issue I can think of is sometimes the action moves rather slowly, but I think that was the idea: a surreal and dream like state, in which the characters are constantly in doubt.
Roth, Oldman and Dreyfus are brilliant in their roles, and A+ performance.Perfect score for one of my favorite movies of all time.10/10.
Rather than read Shakespeare's original she prepared for the exam by watching Laurence Olivier's film version, which was playing at her local cinema, several times.
Unfortunately, she failed to realise that Olivier had used an abridged version of the text so was quite unable to answer a question about Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, who do not appear in the film.I mention this anecdote because Tom Stoppard's play "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead" revolves around the idea of taking these two minor characters, so minor that Olivier could afford to omit them altogether, and making them his protagonists.
Another minor figure, the Player King, plays an important role, but some of Shakespeare's major characters, such as Hamlet himself, Gertrude, Claudius and Polonius, become minor ones in Stoppard's play.
Stoppard's idea was to use Rosencrantz and Guildenstern as examples of the "little men" of history, playing a minor role on the fringe of great events while failing to comprehend their significance, and thereby to raise questions about the nature of reality and of human existence.I saw Stoppard's play in the theatre during my university days and was enthralled by it.
The plot parallels that of "Hamlet" itself, but with the action seen from a different viewpoint, and includes lengthy scenes in which Rosencrantz and Guildenstern speculate on what is going on around them or try to pass the time (by, for example, playing Questions) while waiting for their brief moment in the spotlight.
Gary Oldman as Rosencrantz and Tim Roth as Guildenstern both try hard to overcome the difficulties caused by the cinematic medium; I don't think they succeed, but they do enough to suggest they could have been very good in a stage production.The film rights to the play were originally bought by MGM in 1968, only a year after its first theatrical production.
As such, it is nothing less than a delightfully ingenious decision on writer/director Tom Stoppard's part to re- examine Hamlet from the perspective of the two characters who seldom play any part in it, and in between question their purpose, their reason for being there, what they are attempting to accomplish and their inability to remember anything before being brought into the story.
Gary Oldman and Tim Roth are perfectly cast as the consistently bewildered titular duo, and their quirky chemistry and impeccable comedic timing makes for some of the most enjoyable back and forth routines in recent memory (the verbal tennis match is an abiding classic, but is only a fraction of the comedic brilliance the two muster up) - an absurdist Abbot and Costello if you will, with Oldman's loopy Rosencrantz making a ideal foil for Roth's curt straight man Guildenstern.
I am not going to run you through the entire movie, as that has been done several times on here already, but I would like to clear up a few misunderstandings and harsh words that I have read in previous comments.First and foremost, I have not seen or read the play (although I am looking forward to it) and I was perfectly able to understand all of the so-called "high-brow" concepts like fate, time, freewill, self-awareness, and the light peppering of existential musings (my favorite of which is the "...well at least I'm not dead." speech).
But once you realize that the lead player is fully self-aware, has been through these scenarios (the play "Hamlet") several times with a full consciousness and memory of the events (demonstrated rather obviously by his full knowledge of future events, the play that his troupe rehearses in front of R&G wich is an exact copy of "Hamlet", etc.) it makes for a wonderful metaphor demonstrating what has happened to the original play (Hamlet) now that some of its more flat characters are starting to think outside the script, so to speak, and become a bit more round.Well, I could go on forever about this masterpiece, and maybe I will at a later date, but for now I just wanted you know that this film is anything but simple.
I plan to find more such characters from Oldman - certainly one of the most sublime and delightful performances of all time!Funny note: If "The Lion King" is childishly derivative of "Hamlet", "The Lion King 1½" is a total f*cking rip-off of "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead".Also - "R & G Are Dead" is frequently compared to Beckett's "Waiting For Godot" (which should never be filmed!) as dealing equally with man's insubstantial grasp of his fate and the routines/shtick that passes the time before death.
I don't like Shakespeare and I only watched this by accident, I flicked on to the opening scene with the coin toss and was hooked.This has great dialogue with lots of wit and charm and the idea of the characters being confused by the very fact that they are confused is great to watch.I was relieved that they use modern English during all the scenes that aren't from Hamlet and they don't restrict themselves to the same style or time.Oldman is superb a the dimmer of the two and the physics jokes were especially surprising and well done.
Both leads display excellent comic timing.This is an idea I wouldn't have expected to work but with a excellent cast and great writing it is a really enjoyable film, there are a lot of big laughs but even better than that is the fact that you are kept continuously amused by small things..
Tom Stoppard's "Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead" is a brilliant existential twist on a classic story (Shakespeare's "Hamlet") and classic storytelling.
It's the struggle of all stage-to-screen adaptations, but where others have succeeded in shedding new light through that transition, Stoppard's re- imagining of his own work lacks a visual edge, perhaps explain why he never took up the director's chair again.The story follows "Hamlet" characters Rosencrantz (Gary Oldman) and Guildenstern (Tim Roth), two remarkably unimportant characters from the play who are part of the tragedy's final body count for no reason other than being at the wrong place at the wrong time.
Stoppard uses these examples and a fitting opening bit about the probability of a coin flip to suggest the conflict between randomness and order in life and nature.Also significant is the group of traveling tragedians led by Richard Dreyfuss, who end up being the ones to put on the play that Hamlet uses to catch his Uncle Claudius realizing his sin.
But nothing about the way he films this story enhances the existential dialogue between characters as well as between film and audience.Having never seen the play, "Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead" was an enjoyable, thought-provoking film experience, but I would imagine having already been exposed to its meta-exploratory ingenuity, those coming to the film with previous exposure might not feel anything more fulfilling than simply seeing it in a three-dimensional world.~Steven CVisit my site at http://moviemusereviews.blogspot.com.
"R and G" is one of Tom Stoppard's greatest plays, and the movie is a fun and great adaptation.
Like others have said on this forum this movie seems to be saying to itself over and over again, "My goodness, look how _clever_ I am!" While the dialogue is, indeed, clever it's hard for me to imagine even the two most foppish Shakespearian characters conceivable acting the way R & G did in this film.
It is inspired literature that translates into a beautiful story.With an exemplary supporting cast of Medieval players led by American actor Richard Dreyfuss and a ridiculously talented group of actors as the "real" Hamlet characters, this story plays with the English language as though the audience is intelligent and following the leads to their inevitable end.
It is a shame that the interweaving with the Hamlet narrative doesn't work better because the original scenes have a delicious playful tone to them in regards language and the nature of minor characters; I found these specific scenes to be fun and engaging and only wished the film could have maintained this energy and approach.A big part of these scenes working is down to the delivery and both Oldman and Roth are really good not only with the fast pace of the dialogue but with the "out of it" attitude and sense of detached bewilderment that they need to carry for the majority.
It is telling that their scenes are by far the strongest and the supporting cast are not as good in Glen, Roth, Sumpter etc, although I did enjoy Dreyfuss' turn in it.An interesting movie with some great dialogue driven scenes that gives the viewer a lot of fun with language and character.
Rosencrantz (Gary Oldman) and Guildenstern (Tim Roth) are two minor characters in William Shakespeare's play Hamlet.
The two are really peripheral to the main action of the play, and none of the major characters pays them much attention.Tom Stoppard, who is an absolute genius in his mastery of language, turns the play on its head and puts Rosencrantz and Guildenstern at the center of the plot, with Hamlet, the King and Queen, Ophelia, and all the rest at the periphery.
Ros and Guil, represent us, the everyday people, and their bumbling journey is both humorous and witty.Stoppard deliberately highlights the function of the stage play as a place to investigate the human condition, with hilarious dialogue such as when Ros asks what it would feel like being a 'spectator.' The film does a great job of merging "hamlet" and "Ros and Guil are Dead" scenes together and Gary Oldman and his costars are terrific.
Tom Stoppard's beautifully twisted sense of humour, which led "Shakespeare in Love" to several Oscars, including "Best Movie", is in top form in this play-turned-movie, which essentially put him on the map.Gary Oldman & Tim Roth are appropriately vapid & confused as their lives take on a surrealistic quality behind the scenes of "Hamlet".
When the play's action resumes, all seems to be right with the world, yet when the primary characters exit to continue the rest of the play, all reason flies out the window.The rest of the "minor" characters are convincing enough, & whenever onscreen, Richard Dreyfuss keeps things moving along at breakneck pace (no pun intended).This movie is not quite as audience friendly as "Shakespeare in Love", but anyone with a reasonable sense of intelligence & humour (as well as a working knowledge of "Hamlet") should be able to follow along fairly easily..
Surreal yet profound, FUNNY as all get-out (little visual gags run the duration, just little things that Gary Oldman is doing that aren't in the play-- he discovers all sorts of scientific principles while also looking overwhelmingly sexy and confused)-- not to mention beautifully acted, gorgeously filmed, with exceptional art direction and costuming.
What surprised me most, as a long-time fan of Stoppard's writing, is that the rest of the film lived up to, or surpassed, the original play script!!!
Gary Oldman and Tim Roth, two great actors, are great in this funny, interesting and very intelligent movie.It's about Rosencrantz and Guildenstern who are traveling around in a bizarre world, full of mysteries and mind-bending unrealities, all while their philosophical discussions about different scientifical issues continues.It's a great script, great performances and a dazzling movie that any developed movie-mind has to like!It's hard to describe this masterpiece so I have one advice for you and that is to go see it!.
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are very underdeveloped characters in Hamlet, and the freedom to come up with a lot of new traits for them is both a convenience and a burden, as you would want to honour Shakespeare's work, but also add new layers to the two that has never been seen before, once again, I think it did so quite well.
Humorous and very well acted, Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead is worth the watch for anyone looking for a good comedy, and to any fans of Hamlet.
Two minor characters (Tim Roth and Gary Oldman) from the play "Hamlet" stumble around unaware of their scripted lives and unable to deviate from them.Hamlet has been told time and time again, in countless films, television adaptations, theater performances.
Gary Oldman and Tim Roth do a great job as the title characters and Richard Dreyfuss is at his (very different) best as the leader of the players.
In what has to be one of the cleverest, most unusual movies of all time, two characters from "Hamlet" wander into the play and try to figure out what to do.
These guys are clearly having a great time with the material, and the movie affirms Gary Oldman, Tim Roth and Richard Dreyfuss as some of the greatest actors of our time.
I should admit that I've never seen any version of "Hamlet" the whole way through - except a really terrible German TV version that appeared on "Mystery Science Theater 3000" - so I don't actually know the characters' roles in that play, but I still enjoyed this movie 100%.
Tom Stoppard is a brilliant master of the word in the film version of his play, "Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead." Using the techniques of absurd and traditional theater, it is a play within a play within a play, the format of Hamlet transformed in the actions of the two minor characters, who are mere walk on parts, now central to all actions and seen through their eyes.
Gary Oldman and Tim Roth are mad-funny individually and together, at times reminiscent of Laurel and Hardy or even Abbot and Costello.The play-within-a-play device (used in "Hamlet") can be confusing, but the game of questions (played during tennis) and the play between theater and reality in "Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead" can be hard to wrap your head around.
Both the play and film "Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead" (written and directed by the famous playwright Tom Stoppard) retell what is perhaps THE most famous play ("Hamlet") by THE most famous playwright (Shakespeare).
Gary Oldman and Tim Roth (Rosencrantz and Guildenstern in the movie) began their careers in the theater.
this film does take a bit more work than most but it is well worth the effort.gary oldman and tim roth have never and likely will never (although they are both brilliant so they may well outdue themselves here) be better.
The writing was the best part of the film, as it felt like an extended series of in-jokes for the viewer, who would only understand the movie if they had read the play, Hamlet.
It was a brilliant idea: to give two minor characters from Shakespeare's 'Hamlet' a life independent of the play, but Tom Stoppard's debut as a film director presents a near-textbook example of how not to adapt a work of theatre for the screen.
Other than the actor who plays Hamlet (mediocre - at best), I thought the rest of the cast was excellent, the story was intriguing, and the interaction between Oldman, Roth, and Dreyfuss was the stuff of good comedy.
Gary Oldman, Tim Roth, and Richard Dreyfuss have great comic timing, and it's a joy to watch them.
This is one incredible movie and you don't have to know a thing about Shakespeare or Hamlet to enjoy the wordplay between Gary Oldman and Tim Roth, the two title characters.
While the casting isn't as good as Branagh's Hamlet, 90% of the movie centers around Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, played by Roth and Oldman, who both do excellent jobs.
In the play Hamlet, I didn't like Rosencrantz and Guildenstern.
I would recommend reading the play, or at least know the story line before watching the movie.
While not as good as the play, ROSENCRANTZ AND GUILDENSTERN ARE DEAD still ranks as one of the fifty best films I have seen. |
tt0034622 | Crossroads | Lucy (Britney Spears), Kit (Zoë Saldana), and Mimi (Taryn Manning) are three friends who live in a small Georgia town. While as young children, they bury a "wish box" and vow to dig it up on the night of their high school graduation, also pledging to stay best friends forever. However, as they grow up, their friendship fades due to their different approaches of high school: Lucy becomes the introverted valedictorian, Kit becomes the most popular girl in school, and Mimi is an outcast from a trailer park and facing teenage pregnancy. On the night of their graduation, they keep their promise and get together to open the "wish box". As they start talking again, they remember their old wishes while burying the box: Mimi wanted to travel to California, Lucy wanted to find the mother she cannot remember, and Kit wanted to get married. Mimi brings up the topic of going to Los Angeles for a record contract audition. Kit and Lucy try to convince Mimi to not go all the way to Los Angeles due to the fact that she's pregnant and anything dangerous can happen. However the next morning they decide to go together but each doing something separate; Mimi going to the audition, Kit visiting her fiancé and Lucy to see her mother in Tucson, Arizona.
They set out on the road with little money in a yellow 1973 Buick Skylark convertible with a guy named Ben (Anson Mount). Lucy, however, leaves without the permission of her overbearing father Pete (Dan Aykroyd), who wakes up the next day to find his daughter is gone. Shortly into their journey, the car breaks down. They realise that they don't have enough money between them for the travel or the repair costs. Mimi then suggests that she sing karaoke at a local bar, where good singers are tipped well by the customers. While at the bar, the girls dress up and go the stage to perform. However, when the song starts Mimi develops stage fright, being unable to sing. Seeing that they needed the money, Lucy takes her place, and quickly becomes a hit with the crowd. They make enough money to fix the car and continue on their way.
Shortly after the group checks into a motel, Kit tells the girls that she heard a rumor about Ben, commenting that he had recently been released from jail, after killing someone. The girls then spend most of the journey feeling uneasy around him, until they confront him. Ben reveals that he was in jail for driving his step-sister across state borders without parental consent, after his father was abusing her. Having established that Ben was not the assassin they imagined him to be, Lucy and Ben grow closer. The girls talk properly to each other for the first time since they were kids. Lucy reveals that her mother left her and her father when she was a child, but she is convinced her mother wants to find her, but is too afraid. Kit, who was overweight as a child, has an overbearing mother who sent her to "fat camp" but now cannot stand that her daughter is more beautiful than her. Mimi reveals that the baby's father was not her boyfriend, but a guy who raped her after she got drunk at a party.
After they arrive in Arizona, Lucy finally meets her mother Caroline after eighteen years; however, Caroline is not happy to see Lucy. She reveals that she has remarried, and that she now has two sons ages seven and ten. She reveals to Lucy that she was an unintended pregnancy and that she wants nothing to do with her, and Lucy leaves the house heartbroken. Promptly arriving at the motel, Ben comforts her. The following day, Lucy rejoins the others and goes on to Los Angeles. When they arrive, Kit brings Mimi along to surprise her fiance, Dylan. While alone in the hotel, Lucy gives her virginity to Ben and they fall in love with each other. When Kit and Mimi arrive to Dylan's place, it is revealed that he is cheating on Kit after they see another girl in his apartment. Already upset, Kit suddenly realizes that it was Dylan who raped Mimi and got her pregnant, and she punches him. Scared, Mimi runs away, and falls down the stairs. Consequently, she loses her baby. Because of this, Lucy decides to call her father to take her and the girls back home. However her father is still putting pressure on Lucy to do what he wants. After the entire journey she realizes that everything she's done has been to please her father instead of herself. Lucy tells her father to let her go and she runs after Ben, they embrace and kiss each other. She and the girls decide to stay with Ben and go to the audition. They receive a standing ovation after their performance of Lucy's poem; I'm Not a Girl, Not Yet a Woman."This time we didn't make any wishes for the future... We said goodbye to our past. Now, none of us have any idea where life's gonna take us. 'Cause what we have is now, and right now... we have Each Other." | melodrama | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0045679 | The Desert Rats | During mid-April 1941 in North Africa, German Field Marshal Erwin Rommel (James Mason) and his Afrika Korps have driven the British Army into headlong retreat toward Egypt and the vital Suez Canal. Standing in Rommel's way is Tobruk, a constant threat to his supply lines. The 9th Australian Division are charged with holding the port for two months, at which time they are to be relieved.
The defending Allied general (Robert Douglas) chooses British Captain "Tammy" MacRoberts (Richard Burton), an experienced field officer, to take command of a company of newly arrived, untried Australian troops. The no-nonsense MacRoberts is disliked by the undisciplined Australians. He is surprised to see in their ranks his former schoolmaster, Tom Bartlett (Robert Newton). Bartlett, an alcoholic, later explains that after being dismissed from his job in Britain due to his drinking, he went to Australia and joined the army while intoxicated. MacRoberts offers to transfer him to a safer billet, but Bartlett turns him down.
Because of the desperate situation, the inexperienced troops are sent directly into the front line. The men dig foxholes and prepare for Rommel's certain attack. The Allied general masses his artillery where he guesses the Germans will strike. His gamble pays off. Under cover of a sandstorm, they attack exactly where the general predicted and head directly at MacRoberts' men. In the fierce battle, Captain Currie is wounded. Lieutenant Harry Carstairs (Charles Tingwell) abandons his vital post to go to his aid, in vain. After the Germans are beaten back, an infuriated MacRoberts vows to have Carstairs court-martialed for disobeying orders and leaving a dangerous hole in the line, but Bartlett persuades MacRoberts to retract his request.
MacRoberts receives a field promotion to major, then a temporary one to lieutenant colonel after the general elevates him to command of his battalion of Australians. The general then decides to erode the besiegers' confidence by sending out small commando raids every night. MacRoberts' patrols do their part in exacting a toll on the enemy.
One day, the general worries about reports of German heavy artillery being moved up, indicating an attack is imminent. The suspected location of the artillery's ammunition dump is too far away to be attacked by the usual nighttime raid, so MacRoberts proposes using trucks abandoned by the Italians to drive there in disguise and blow it up. MacRoberts leads 54 picked men in three trucks. The attack is a success, but Carstairs is killed and MacRoberts is wounded and captured. While he is being attended to, he meets Rommel, who has been shot by a strafing Spitfire. Although he is respectful to the field marshal, MacRoberts defiantly points out that Tobruk is a thorn in his side. Rommel is bemused by his brashness and orders that he be treated well.
Later, as the prisoners are being transported, their trucks are attacked by RAF fighter aircraft. In the confusion, MacRoberts and Sergeant "Blue" Smith (Chips Rafferty) get away. After an exhausting walk through the desert, they reach friendly lines. The Australians have now held on for eight months.
In November the general tells his officers that a relief column led by General Claude Auchinleck is headed for Tobruk. However, they need to take control of a key hill that overlooks the road that Auchinleck must use. The general asks MacRoberts to take his best company and hold the position for three days. On the morning of the ninth day, fearing that the men can take no more, MacRoberts orders a retreat, though Bartlett begs him to ask the men to hang on. To MacRoberts' surprise, the men refuse to leave. Bartlett overcomes his self-professed cowardice by manning the forward observation post, where survival is measured in hours. Just after the Germans bombard the hill, the Australians hear bagpipes announcing the arrival of Auchinleck's troops. After a hard-fought 242 days, the Allies have relieved Tobruk. | violence | train | wikipedia | Before Australia and New Zealand were threatened with attack on the home front, they sent as they did in the First World War, an expeditionary force to help Great Britain protect the Suez Canal, the lifeline of the British Empire.
When not focusing on the battle sequences, The Desert Rats is about the relationship between Burton and Newton.
Tingwell never made another American film, but Rafferty came back a few times and his presence makes every film he's in just a bit better.You might recognize Michael Rennie's voice doing the offscreen narration for The Desert Rats.
Through the fire and hell of battling the Desert Fox and his war-hardened troops MacRoberts by lifting their spirits and their morale eventually melds his men into a fighting fit group of warriors.
I also liked the side story of the young captain who is surprised to have under his command a favourite old school master, Bartlett played by Robert Newton.
I recommend this b & w film to all war movie buffs of this English made genre but if you're looking for 'Saving Private Ryan' perhaps you should give it a miss..
An excellent look at the British war effort against the Germans and Italians in North Africa.
That is is based loosely on real events and in many cases ANZAC and British troops did hold back Rommel's attacks many times only enhances the story.
One of the most realistic and best of the fifties war movies with excellent direction by Robert Wise.
With the British in full retreat, nothing stood in Rommel's way but the tiny garrison of Empire troops cut off in the fortress won of Tobruk.Meantime, Germans dropping leaflets captioning : Surrender!
. The picture is the story of Tobruk and the men who made up its garrison, of the fight they made against the pick of Hitler's troops and of the nickname they won with blood and bore with pride: ¨The Deser Rats¨.
British headquarter Cairo's ordered to take up defensive positions for two months ,reunited the officers(Robert Douglas, Torin Thatcher, among others) deal the Tobruk 's defense : the positions are the following, the first line of defense ,using the old Italian perimeter, the second line by Colonel White's supporting artillery and the inner fortification.
The British plan of defense is based chiefly on the belief of a Bilzkrieg by Rommel(a splendid James Mason reprise his role from ¨The Desert fox¨).
The General assigns to McRoberts, an infantry captain with battle experience, twice decorated, he must put into the line.The crusty captain( a stiff but sensitive acting by Richard Burton) takes a charge of an Australian division formed by valiant soldiers and a kind-hearted schoolmaster alcoholic(sensible performance by Robert Newton steal the show as drunk turned reluctant soldier) fighting a desperate rearguard action against overwhelming German forces.This reconstruction of a phase in the battle of Tobruk(deeds also filmed by Arthur Hiller in ¨Tobruk¨ with Rock Hudson) is correctly based on true events, though excessive importance for the Aussies.
Occupied by Italy 1911, Tobruk was taken by Britain in Operation Battleaxe 1941.It was captured by Field Marshal Erwin Rommel June 1942 after the retreat of the main British force to Egypt, and this precipitated General Sir Claude Auchinleck's replacement by General Bernard Montgomery as British commander.
While the other reviewers may criticize its historical accuracy, as someone who grew up hearing war stories from American and Canadian WWI and WWII veterans, it does capture the feeling of a period without going overboard on heroics or far-fetched plot twists..
In 1941, during the World War II, Field Marshal Erwin von Rommel (James Mason) tries to conquer the city of Tobruk in Libya and the British battalion defends this location to avoid Rommel to reach the Suez Canal.
'Tammy' MacRoberts (Richard Burton) leads a limited number of inexperienced Australian troops in the defense of Tobruk, and uses raids during the night against Rommel forces to keep the balance between the strong German army and the reduced British-Australian forces, and MacRoberts' troops are called "The Desert Rats".
"The Desert Rats" is a very realistic war movie, presenting strategies, battles, action scenes and a great duel between James Mason and Richard Burton.
I am not sure whether Robert Wise used footage of some real battle scenes along the film, since the realism in the black and white photography is amazing and sometimes it looks like a documentary.
The North Africa Campaign, the Siege of Tobruk and the Desert Rats all have an important place in the British and Australian Psyche during and after the Second World War, and it took less then 10 years after the war for a film about the Siege to be made.In 1941 British and Australian troops had control of the fortress town of Tobruk in Libya.
The British high command order the Australian General Leslie Morshead to hold Tobruk for 2 months to disrupt the German supply lines.
The main focus of the film is on a British officer, 'Tammy' MacRoberts who is given command of a fresh batch of Australian troops, including his former school master.
He has to train his troops to get them ready for the battle and first the bitter war.The acting isn't that good, the Australian accents were awful and it would have been easier if their casted Australian actors.
However Rommel did call the army the rats of Tobruk.Personally I would like to see a new film about the war in North Africa because their are many interesting stories and battles, from the Battle of El-Alamein, the story of Rommel and Montgomery, Operation Touch, the Birth of the SAS, etc...
The Desert Rats is an unpretentious war film that tells a good story with economy.
The heroics come without drum-rolls.The most fascinating part of this film is to watch both the marvelous Robert Newton and the under-rated James Mason give Richard Burton acting lessons.Burton tends to chew the scenery when he snarls, "Good-morning," as though he were the youngest in a large family, doing anything for attention.Newton counters Burton's unnecessary histrionics with a beautifully modulated realization of-himself in disguise as Prof.
Of course he practiced playing this brilliant German General in the better-known film, The Desert Fox.Burton comes across as pure ham in The Desert Rats, but there IS one scene he has where he is honest and effective.
Desert Rats is a 'good old stiff upper lip' yarn with angry young man, Richard Burton, putting in a blinder.
The factual about the Germans using Thompson sub machine guns is only partially true....While the Germans did not outfit their troops with the extremely popular gun of American origin....it is an indisputable fact that throughout the war in all theaters....and especially in a hotly contested battle ...which the first "battle of Tobruk" certainly was....captured enemy weapons were frequently used as is evidenced even within the film when the "Rats" turned the Germans guns on them....by the way in one case it was clearly an "army surplus" 50 caliber heavy machine gun also American made.....but these little nits and picks do little to detract from the overall flow of the movie..
There are more than a few inaccuracies in this movie, starting off with the fact that 'The Desert Rats' was - and is - the nickname of the British 7th Armoured Division, and comes from their mascot, the jerboa.
I wouldn't try to comment on the technical points of equipment, but, on the strategic side, the producers did a better job with their research than many other WWII movie makers.The garrison of Tobruk at the start of the siege in April 1941 consisted of 9th Australian Division (the 'Rats of Tobruk', not the 'Desert Rats'), 18th Australian Brigade and a British Army Tank regiment (equipped with infantry tanks).
This force of around 100,000 men was all the High Command would allow him for most of the campaign, because of the supply problems.So, at the start of the siege, the allies were heavily outnumbered, just as the movie shows.
By October, the Australians had been on reduced rations for six months, and at the insistence of the Australian government they were gradually replaced by British and Free Polish troops.The film is also accurate in the depiction of the final engagement of the siege, with 2/13th holding El Duda, just east of Tobruk.
Of course, the main reason he was not able to attack again before the Crusader offensive was the German invasion of Russia on 22 June, putting Africa a distant last on the priority list for supplies and reinforcements.Rommel did finally take Tobruk in his Gazala offensive of May/June 1942, at which time it was held by inexperienced South African troops.
It can also be called cousin to THE DESERT FOX, also with James Mason as Rommel, a very similar film with a broader and longer(time element) story.
TOBRUK in particular has always had a spectacular explosive ending, indeed one of the largest in cinema history in my opinion.Given the comparison, THE DESERT RATS is more interesting film, certainly the more realistic.
The Desert Rats is a fairly standard 1950's World War II picture.
As the British and Anzac forces had to repel Rommel's forces, wave after wave over the course of eight months, using every trick in the book to make sure that the German forces were unable to reach the Suez canal.Robert Wise does a good job of shooting exciting action scenes that were better then a-lot of films at the time.
As a pure action film it does a good job of showing the toll war can have upon soldiers.
In "The Desert Rats" he is the young officer leading his men into battle or more specifically, into the battle for Tobruk and he really is very good and as war films go, this is a tight and exciting picture, (it clocks in at under 90 minutes).
Robert Wise was the director and you can tell this movie was directed by a great editor; there isn't a wasted moment in the whole film and the action scenes are brilliantly handled.
James Mason once again appears as Rommel and there's a fine supporting performance from Robert Newton as Burton's old schoolmaster, now a private in his command..
I don't know much about the Second World War in Northern Africa but Rommel was also known as the desert fox.
Oh, Richard Burton looks good in a uniform, his face a little sweaty and his cap tilted on his brow, conflicted about giving an order to his troops.
Mostly, it's about the strategy Richard Burton, his superiors, and his troops employ in order to stay alive in the middle of the desert before reinforcements can help them.
It was things like this – a bit of lateral thinking to give us a feeling for the protagonist's plight – that Robert Wise was really good at.The post-war period had seen the rise of the UK film industry, and unsurprisingly the best British stars were being poached for Hollywood productions.
The end is semi real with the armored relief coming through but unseen only after taking heavy casualties and to top it off the besieged port of Tobruk is captured later in the campaign by Rommel and his Afrika Korp after another lesson in mobile warfare.
The Desert Rats is directed by Robert Wise and written by Richard Murphy.
It stars Richard Burton, Robert Newton, Robert Douglas, Torin Thatcher, Chips Rafferty and James Mason.
So here we have the battle of Tobruk orchestrated by the astute Robert Wise, the plot is simple, but the characterisations are most certainly not, with lead men Burton and Newton terrific.This important part of the war is given mature treatment, with the battle sequences realistically staged and the tactical nous of allied force leaders rightly given credence.
While elsewhere it should be noted that this is, perhaps inevitably, not an accurate history lesson, so students of Tobruk don't be basing your thesis on this telling.Still, a good quality war pic for sure.
Robert Newton, on the other hand, is simply wonderful in his role, and James Mason is marvelous as Rommel (though he is barely in the movie.)
Its a drame the rest , then they go on spy missions and blow up a ammunitions factory which is boring , germans talk german without subtitles ,the last stand on the hill is boring too , they said they are taking heavy casualties but dont show us any battle , we only see them tired , pretty silly how nice Rommel (James Mason) was to MacRoberts (Richard Burton) , BORING
The Desert Rats is a very enjoyable WWII film dealing with a portion of the war that may seem alien to those in America.
The Desert Rats is the story of the Allies last stand in Northern Africa at Tobruk.
MacRoberts (Richard Burton) and his band of green Aussie replacements to stop the advance of Hitler's army.When you read comments about war movies, you always read complaints about historical accuracy.
The battle scene between the dug-in Aussie's and Rommel's tanks is as exciting and well filmed as I've seen in a war movie.
On top of that, Robert Newton is in his company, and Newton was Burton's old schoolmaster, now turned into a semi-coward.Tobruk at the time was a crummy seaport surrounded by the Afrika Corps.
Who am I to argue?COMMENT: Although Mason again essays the role of Rommel, he makes only a few brief appearances and plays the character differently from his study in The Desert Fox. Half the time he speaks German with an English accent, and the other half English with a German accent!
What is more, he comes closer to the conventional Hollywood portrait of the Nazi officer, playing Wagner in his tent and exchanging "Ve will conquer zee vorld!" dialogue with Richard Burton's sassy British POW.Of course, these changes are not directly attributable to Mason, but are the work of the scriptwriter and the director, who could not have anticipated that The Desert Fox and Desert Rats would be re-issued as a double bill.
Richard Burton and Robert Newton are ingeniously worked into the cast, Robert Douglas makes an acceptable C.O. and there are some dinky-di Aussies on hand including Chips Rafferty, Charles Tingwell and Michael Pate (most of whose part, he tells me, landed on the cutting-room floor).The action scenes are excitingly staged, but on the whole the film is a mite disappointing.
Richard Burton was excellent as the hard-nosed Captain in the English army working along with a platoon of Australians in this 1953 film.
The Burton character takes him under his wing and heeds his advice not to bring a fellow soldier up on charges for insubordination when the latter went on to save lives.In one raid Burton is captured by the Germans and gets to meet Field Marshal Rommel, always well played by James Mason.
Burton's escape and return to his men was rushed through and the ending of successfully holding off the Germans at Tobruk was also hurried..
Solid enough desert war picture with a good cast to be enjoyed.
THE DESERT RATS is something of a follow-up to THE DESERT FOX, which also starred James Mason as Erwin Rommel and covered some of the North African campaign.
However the emphasis of this film is very much on the Allied forces, particularly an Australian platoon who baulk at their new captain, the Scottish Tammy MacRoberts.First off, the title is a misnomer; this isn't about the 'desert rats' but rather about the siege of Tobruk and the dedicated men who fought back against the encircling Nazi siege.
The desert-set action is quite familiar from other war films (and there are a LOT of desert-themed war films in existence) but what makes this one work is a fast pace and some good supporting cast members.Mason doesn't have a big role to play in this film although he does get to share a strong scene with Burton.
***SPOILERS***Excellent portrayal of the 242 day siege of Tobruk with Richard Burton as British Captain Tommy MacRoberts holding the line against wave after wave of attacking German and Italian assaults on the Lybian port city of Tobruk.
There's again James Mason as German General Irwin Rommel leading the charge against the port city that he needs to supply his troops for his planned capture of Egypt and it's Suez Canal that can knock Great Britain out of the war.With almost 90% of the troops under his command being Australians the British Captain MacRoberts needs to win their respect before their willing to risk their lives for him.
One of those Aussies is MacRoberts former school teacher Tom Bartlett, Robert Newton, who's now a helpless drunk but wants MacRoberts to put him on the front lines to both overcome his drinking problem as well as get his courage back.Ordered by the nameless general in charge-Leslie Morshead-in the films closing credited played by Robert Douglas to hold Tobruk at all costs and promoted to Let-Coronal MacRoberts is almost killed and eventually captured by the Germans and gets to have a chat with the German General Rommel about how helpless his situation is.
Back to the British lines Let-Col. MacRoberts now waits for the final attack by German/Italian forces on "Fortress Tobruk" knowing that if he and his men, who he has now gained their respect,can't repel their advance Britain and its both colonies as well as Commonwealth is kaput!P.S The British and Australian troops do hold off Rommels assaults on Tobruk and eventually were relieved on November 27, 1941 in "Operation Crusader" lead by British General Auchinleck-Known as the "Auk"-after suffering some 6,000-Mostly Australian- casualties in the 242 day siege.
A fictional account of a British officer in command of ANZAC Austrialian troops defending the North Africa city of Tobruk from Rommel's Afrika Korps in WW2.*Special Stars- Richard Burton, Robert Newton, James Mason, Torin Thacter, Robert Douglas, Charles Tingwell and Chips Rafferty.
Early film role for Richard Burton.
James Mason played Rommel again in a 20th century Fox film two years before in 'Desert Fox'. |
tt0129712 | Saber Rider and the Star Sheriffs | The series is set in the distant future. Humans have spread beyond living on Earth and have colonized planets across the universe, creating a New Frontier of man. In order to protect these new settlers and maintain law and order in the New Frontier, Earth's Cavalry Command was created. Cavalry Command is a military organization that maintains an army and fleet of ships to protect the New Frontier and the residents of the planets within it known as Settlers. Within Cavalry Command is a unit of special operatives known as Star Sheriffs that function as the organization's field agents, investigating any crimes and plots that threaten the security of the New Frontier.
The main foe of Cavalry Command and the Star Sheriffs is a race of non-human creatures known as Vapor Beings (also sometimes called Outriders) that have jumped into our dimension in order to conquer it. They attack the Settlers, destroy settlements, and kidnap humans in order to mine various metals or crystals from the soil of various planets.
Outriders are superior to humans in battle technology. They control a legion of gigantic robots with weapons greatly superior to the weapons and defenses of the space-going fleets of Cavalry Command. In response to the Outriders' threat, Cavalry Command develops a prototype spaceship known as the "Ramrod Equalizer Unit" (or simply just Ramrod) that has the ability to transform from a spaceship into a powerful robot that can fight the Outriders on equal terms. | flashback | train | wikipedia | Man, how I used to love this series!!!.
A few hours ago me and some friends of mine had a talk about the cartoons we were watching when we were kids...
And Saber Rider was one of those everyone agreed was really AWESOME!!
Here in Greece, this series used to be EXTREMELY popular when I was a kid back in the late 80's - early 90's (like most things back then, it took a couple of years for it to make it here).One of the things I remember most distinctly is the theme..
Man, especially when the narrator tells the summary of the episode and there is that guitar solo on the background...
Fantastic!
One of our friends even remembered certain plots, such as the one with Jessy Blue and the covalt cannon (those who remember, know exactly how much that trouble that guy brought to our heroes)!Anyway, to all anime fans out there I recommend this with all my heart.
Surely, those giant-robot elements aren't very original (but served quite well for the times of giant-robot comparisons back in the age of innocence :p) however you're really going to enjoy it a lot.
Pick a few episodes up, especially if you can from the later seasons and take a journey to the worlds of the New Frontier....
Totally awesome!.
this is one of the series that i loved the most as a kid.
and i'm really surprised that there is only one comment on it so far even though this on par with classics like Captain Future and Bravestar.
if u get the chance to see this on tv or anywhere else then TAKE IT!
it's action-packed and the story never lets you down!
a definite fav!the theme song is pretty cool and memorable as well.
Voltron vs Saber Rider and the Star Sheriffs.
I do not agree with you man !
I think that this animated series were super fun for me when I saw it for the first time.
I saw it even before Voltron.
Yes it was always the same but at least was fun to watch and not that annoying as Voltron.
In Voltron we had the same thing every episode, but here at least there's more action and every attack is not concentrated on the planet Earth.The mixed characters were great and the English accent of Saber Rider was great idea.The cartoon was made for kids but even now I very much enjoy it, but it's hard to find.
I think that Saber Rider is better in every way then Voltron!.
Saber Rider was an amazing, albeit obscure television cartoon show when I was a kid - I remember watching it when I was 9 years old or so, and I wish I could find it to this day just for the nostalgia alone.It was unlike any other action cartoon show of the day, and they actually managed to throw in "real" violence via a twist to the story line, and get away with it.I don't know much of the show's production history, but judging from the art and animation it looks as if it was anime inspired, perhaps an embryo in the slow but steady culture shift, the infusion of anime and western culture's fascination with it.But I prattle on.If you can find it, get it, watch it..
Different and amazing, if you take the time to scratch the surface..
I was one of the lucky people who became interested in this show while it was still on the air.
At first glance, it may look like just another giant robot show, and a silly one at that with cowboys and the like, but if you look closely, there is more to this show.
Great Action, amazing soundtrack, character depth, and a solid series plot.World Event Productions (http://www.wep.com/) have finally released some episodes of the show on DVD (I just ordered my copy) and I wanted to share that with others.
Its worth checking out if you've never seen the show, and those of you who are already fans, this is a great chance to relive the memories, and maybe even convince WEP to release the complete series on DVD..
One of the few anime dubs I love..
Yes, there were some severe "alterations" during the English adaptation of this short anime series, but nothing so serious to detract from the action sequences and the good/evil rivalry.
The story itself became quite intriguing as the series progressed, and the action sequences became more varied and extravagant as the budget increased after its first season (1984) in Japan.
I especially enjoyed the music and themes, however I will be the first to admit it's no Macross.
Mind you, I'd choose Saber over watching Robotech any day.
;-)Only 3 video tapes were ever released to market (by Fries Home Video), with 2 episodes each, and all from early in the first season.
Sadly, if you didn't develop a fondness for it during the late 1980's syndication, you may never know the real adventures that took place out in the New Frontier..
Forgot About This, Glad I Stumbled On To It. This show was aired by STN or some other Pakistani network way in the past, I should to adore this, I mean I really, really loved it.
It was just amazing.
It was just amazing.
The ship, the characters, everything was perfect.
I would sing the theme song and I can easily recall few key episode scenes.I think this was one of the best cartoons I ever saw when I was kid.
The action was amazing, the robots and the whole cowboy look was grand.
Not to mention the story.I am on a quest to find this series again.
I will re-watch all the episodes, it's part of my childhood that I want to relive.
I have been watching some recent anime and cartoons but nothing comes close to this.
I can still feel the excitement that I had when I was a kit, just be listening to the theme song.Highly recommended!
www.totseans.com.
"Voltron Meets the Wild West" Good but Repetitive just like Voltron..
This cartoon/anime was a weird one.
It had futuristic robots, weapons, and vehicles in a wild west setting.
The Star Sheriffs was also a strange blend of characters types.
Saber was the leader spoke with a british accent and carried a sword instead of a gun.
Colt was the typical cowboy type complete with accent and layed back attitude (and his own theme song).
April was the female member who was skilled with computers, and Fire-Ball was the race car driver who had a quick temper.
The Sheriffs main enemies were called Vipers and they came from another dimension.
When the Vipers got shot they didn't die, they were transported back to their dimension.
That was something I didn't like about this cartoon/anime.
The Vipers should die when they get shot and to allow them to keep coming back again is pretty lame especially for an anime cartoon.At the climax of each episode the Star Sheriffs would pilot a Giant robot named Ram-Rod and would do battle with a giant enemy of some sort.
This cartoon is very similar to Voltron and is almost as repetitive.
If you liked Voltron, you'll like this one.
If you can find it that is, I've never seen this cartoon repeated on TV since it came off in the late eighties.Lets get one thing straight, Saber Rider is NOT in Robotech's League, not even close.
Robotech raised the bar for cartoons when it came out in 1985.
I have yet to see a cartoon/anime series that EXCEEDS it terms of character and plot depth and development..
Colonizing space, the Wild West way.
CONTAINS SPOILERS!
Adapted from the original Star Musketeer Bismark created by Pierrot in 1984, Saber Rider and the Star Sheriffs got a new identity in the U.S. The invading (and mortal) Deathcula aliens turned into Outriders (beings from another dimension, that were vaporizing and returning back to their dimension once deadly wounded).Even with severe censorship over any death, drinking or sex scene, the show still managed to keep its Wild West feeling.
While in the original show people colonized Jupiter's satellite Ganymede and everything happens there (that is why we keep seeing a Jupiter-like planet in the background), the US version turned the Solar System into the New Frontier, populated with exotic planets, with names like Pecos, New Wichita or Alamo.
World Events Production did some extra episodes to cement the American script, but exactly those are the ones that really turn the story into a child fantasy (indians, buffaloes and space highlanders), instead of the more realistic Japanese episodes.
The leader of the team is the Scott, Saber Rider, unlike the Japanese version leader - Shinji Hikari (turned into Fireball in the US).Even the grand finale has something unexpected that comes out of the final battle between the humans and the outriders (I'll let you discover it yourselves).
While the US version shows the battle is for planet Alamo and its moon, in the Japanese version, the outriders are destroying our Moon and challenge for Earth!
So no, this is not your typical big robot Japanese show.
Worth watching. |
tt0072235 | Sweet Movie | One narrative follows Miss Monde 1984/Miss Canada, who wins a contest of the "most virgin"; her prize is the marriage to a milk industry tycoon. However, following his degrading puritanical introduction to intercourse, she vents her intention to leave to her mother-in-law who, at that point, nearly has her killed. The family bodyguard takes her away, further humiliates her, and finally packs her in a trunk bound for Paris. She finds herself on the Eiffel Tower, where she absently meets and has intercourse with a Latin singer, El Macho. The sexual act is interrupted by touring nuns who frighten the lovers into penis captivus. In her post-coital shocked state, she is adopted into an artist community led by Otto Muehl, where she finds affectionate care. The commune practices some liberating sessions, where a member, with the assistance of the others, goes through a (re)birth experience, cries, urinates and defecates like a baby, while the others are cleaning and pampering him. Later she is seen acting for an obscene advertisement, in which she is naked, covered in liquid chocolate.
The second narrative involves a woman, Anna Planeta piloting a candy-filled boat in the canals of Amsterdam, the Netherlands, with a large papier-mache head of Karl Marx on the prow. She picks up the hitchhiking sailor Potemkin, though she warns him that if he falls in love, she will kill him. He ignores her many suggestions for him to leave and their relationship evolves. Eventually, in the state of love making, she stabs him to death in their nidus of sugar. She also seduces children into her world of sweets and revolution. She is eventually apprehended and arrested by the police who lay down plastic sacks containing the children's bodies on the side of the canal, implying they too have been killed by Planeta. The film ends with the children, unseen by the others, being reborn from their plastic cocoons. | avant garde, murder, cult, violence, absurd, psychedelic, satire, philosophical, romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0053182 | Porgy and Bess | Place: Catfish Row, a fictitious black tenement (once, a mansion of the aristocracy) on the waterfront of Charleston, South Carolina.
Time: The "recent past" (c. 1930).
=== Act 1 ===
Scene 1: Catfish Row, a summer evening
The opera begins with a short introduction which segues into an evening in Catfish Row. Jasbo Brown entertains the community with his piano playing. Clara, a young mother, sings a lullaby to her baby ("Summertime") as the working men prepare for a game of craps ("Roll them Bones"). One of the players, Robbins, scorns his wife Serena's demands that he not play, retorting that on a Saturday night, a man has the right to play. Clara's husband, the fisherman Jake, tries his own lullaby ("A Woman is a Sometime Thing") with little effect. Little by little, other characters in the opera enter Catfish Row, among them Mingo, another fisherman, and Jim, a stevedore who, tired of his job, decides to give it up and join Jake and the other fishermen. Porgy, a disabled beggar, enters on his goat cart to organize the game. Peter, an elderly "honey man" returns, singing his vendor's call. Crown, a strong and brutal stevedore, storms in with his woman, Bess, and buys cheap whiskey and some "Happy Dust" off the local dope peddler, Sportin' Life. Bess is shunned by the women of the community, especially the pious Serena and the matriarchal cookshop owner Maria, but Porgy softly defends her. The game begins. One by one, the players get crapped out, leaving only Robbins and Crown, who has become extremely drunk. When Robbins wins, Crown attempts to prevent him from taking his winnings. A brawl ensues, which ends when Crown stabs Robbins with a cotton hook, killing him. Crown runs, telling Bess to fend for herself but that he will be back for her when the heat dies down. Sportin' Life gives her a dose of happy dust and offers to take her with him when he goes to New York, but she rejects him. He flees, and Bess begins to pound on doors, but is rejected by all of the residents of Catfish Row, with the exception of Porgy, who lets her in.
Scene 2: Serena's Room, the following night
The mourners sing a spiritual to Robbins ("Gone, Gone, Gone"). To raise money for his burial, a saucer is placed on his chest for the mourners' donations ("Overflow"). Bess enters with Porgy and attempts to donate to the burial fund, but Serena rejects her money until Bess explains that she is now living with Porgy. A white detective enters and coldly tells Serena that she must bury her husband the next day, or his body will be given to medical students (for dissection). He suddenly accuses Peter of Robbins's murder. Peter denies his guilt and says Crown was the murderer. The Detective orders Peter to be arrested as a material witness, whom he will force to testify against Crown. Serena laments her loss in "My Man's Gone Now". The undertaker enters. The saucer holds only fifteen dollars of the needed twenty-five, but he agrees to bury Robbins as long as Serena promises to pay him back. Bess, who has been sitting in silence slightly apart from the rest of those gathered, suddenly begins to sing a gospel song and the chorus joyfully join in, welcoming her into the community. ("Oh, the Train is at de Station")
=== Act 2 ===
Scene 1: Catfish Row, a month later, in the morning
Jake and the other fishermen prepare for work ("It take a long pull to get there"). Clara asks Jake not to go because it is time for the annual storms, but he tells her that they desperately need the money. This causes Porgy to sing from his window about his new, happy-go-lucky outlook on life. ("I got plenty o' nuttin"). Sportin' Life waltzes around selling "happy dust", but soon incurs the wrath of Maria, who threatens him. ("I hates yo' struttin' style"). A fraudulent lawyer, Frazier, arrives and farcically divorces Bess from Crown. When he discovers Bess and Crown were not married, he raises his price from a dollar to a dollar and a half. Archdale, a white lawyer, enters and informs Porgy that Peter will soon be released. The bad omen of a buzzard flies over Catfish Row and Porgy demands that it leave now that he finally has found happiness. ("Buzzard keep on flyin' over".)
As the rest of Catfish Row prepares for the church picnic on nearby Kittiwah Island, Sportin' Life again offers to take Bess to New York with him; she refuses. He attempts to give her some "happy dust" despite her claims that she's given up drugs, but Porgy grabs his arm and scares him off. Sportin' Life leaves, reminding Bess as he goes that her men friends come and go, but he will be there all along. Bess and Porgy are now left alone, and express their love for each other ("Bess, You Is My Woman Now"). The chorus re-enters in high spirits as they prepare to leave for the picnic ("Oh, I can't sit down"). Bess is invited to the picnic by Maria, but she demurs as Porgy cannot come (due to his disability, he cannot get on the boat), but Maria insists. Bess leaves Porgy behind as they go off to the picnic. Porgy watches the boat leave ("I got plenty o' nuttin" reprise).
Scene 2: Kittiwah Island, that evening
The chorus enjoys themselves at the picnic ("I ain't got no shame"). Sportin' Life presents the chorus his cynical views on the Bible ("It Ain't Necessarily So"), causing Serena to chastise them ("Shame on all you sinners!"). Everyone gets ready to leave. As Bess, who has lagged behind, tries to follow them, Crown emerges from the bushes. He reminds her that Porgy is "temporary" and laughs off her claims that she has been living decently now. Bess wants to leave Crown forever and attempts to make him forget about her ("Oh, what you want wid Bess?") but Crown refuses to give her up. He grabs her and will not let her go to the boat, which leaves without her, and then forcefully kisses her. He laughs at his conquest as her resistance begins to fail, and commands her to get into the woods, where his intentions are only too clear.
Scene 3: Catfish Row, a week later, just before dawn
A week later, Jake leaves to go fishing with his crew, one of whom observes that it looks as if a storm is coming in. Peter, still unsure of his crime, returns from prison. Meanwhile, Bess is lying in Porgy's room delirious with fever, which she has had ever since returning from Kittiwah Island. Serena prays to remove Bess's affliction ("Oh, Doctor Jesus"), and promises Porgy that Bess will be well by five o'clock. As the day passes, a strawberry woman, Peter (the Honey Man) and a crab man each pass by with their wares ("Vendors' Trio"). As the clock chimes five, Bess recovers from her fever. Porgy tells Bess that he knows she has been with Crown, and she admits that Crown has promised to return for her. Porgy tells her she is free to go if she wants to, and she tells him that although she wants to stay, she is afraid of Crown's hold on her. Porgy asks her what would happen if there was no Crown, and Bess tells Porgy she loves him and begs him to protect her, and he promises that she will never have to be afraid again ("I Loves You, Porgy").
Clara watches the water, fearful for Jake. Maria tries to allay her fears, but suddenly the hurricane bell begins to ring.
Scene 4: Serena's Room, dawn of the next day
The residents of Catfish Row are all gathered in Serena's room for shelter from the hurricane. They drown out the sound of the storm with prayers and hymns ("Oh, Doctor Jesus") while Sportin' Life mocks their assumption that the storm is a signal of Judgment Day. Clara desperately sings her lullaby ("Summertime" [reprise]). A knock is heard at the door, and the chorus believes it to be Death ("Oh there's somebody knocking at the door"). Crown enters dramatically, having swum from Kittiwah Island, seeking Bess. He shows no fear of God, claiming that after the long struggle from Kittiwah, God and he are friends. The chorus tries to drown out his blaspheming with more prayer, and he taunts them by singing a vulgar song. ("A red-headed woman"). Suddenly, Clara sees Jake's boat float past the window, upside-down, and she runs out to try to save him, handing her baby to Bess. Bess asks that one of the men go out with her, and Crown taunts Porgy, who cannot go. Crown goes himself, yelling out as he leaves "Alright, Big Friend! We're on for another Bout!" The chorus continue to pray as the storm rises.
=== Act 3 ===
Scene 1: Catfish Row, the next night
A group of women mourn Clara, Jake, and all of those who have been killed in the storm ("Clara, Clara, don't you be downhearted"). When they begin to mourn for Crown as well, Sportin' Life laughs at them and is told off by Maria. He insinuates that Crown may not be dead, and observes that when a woman has a man, maybe she's got him for keeps, but if she has two men, then it's highly likely she'll end up with none. Bess is heard singing Clara's lullaby to her baby, whom she is now taking care of. ("Summertime" [reprise]). Once Catfish Row is dark, Crown stealthily enters to claim Bess, but is confronted by Porgy. A fight ensues which ends when Porgy kills Crown. Porgy exclaims to Bess, "You've got a man now. You've got Porgy!"
Scene 2: Catfish Row, the next afternoon
The detective enters and talks with Serena and her friends about the murders of Crown and Robbins. They deny knowledge of Crown's murder, frustrating the detective. Needing a witness for the coroner's inquest, he next questions an apprehensive Porgy. Once Porgy admits to knowing Crown, he is ordered to come and identify Crown's body. Sportin' Life tells Porgy that corpses bleed in the presence of their murderers, and the detective will use this to hang Porgy. Porgy refuses to identify the body, but is dragged off anyway. Bess is distraught, and Sportin' Life puts his plan into action. He tells her that Porgy will be locked up for a long time, and points out that he is the only one still here. He offers her happy dust, and though she refuses, he forces it on her. After she takes a whiff, he paints a seductive picture of her life with him in New York ("There's a boat dat's leavin' soon for New York"). She regains her strength and rushes inside, slamming the door on his face, but he leaves a packet of happy dust on her doorstep, and settles down to wait.
Scene 3: Catfish Row, a week later
On a beautiful morning, Porgy is released from jail, where he has been arrested for contempt of court after refusing to look at Crown's body. He returns to Catfish Row much richer after playing craps with his cellmates. He gives gifts to the residents, and pulls out a beautiful red dress for Bess. He does not understand why everyone seems so uneasy at his return. He sees Clara's baby is now with Serena and realizes something is wrong. He asks where Bess is. Maria and Serena tell him that Bess has run off with Sportin' Life to New York ("Oh Bess, Oh Where's my Bess?"). Porgy calls for his goat cart, and resolves to leave Catfish Row to find her. He prays for strength, and begins his journey. ("Oh, Lawd, I'm on my way") | romantic, murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0055035 | Junglee | Chandrashekhar/Shekhar (Shammi Kapoor) belongs to an aristocratic family, run by Shekhar's domineering mother (Lalita Pawar). He completes his education in London and comes back to run his business. In his family people shouldn't talk more than needed and laughter is completely prohibited. Shekhar follows all those rules strictly from heart but his younger sister Mala (Shashikala) is not like him. She laughs and roams freely and even falls in love with Jeevan (Anoop Kumar), who works in her brother's company.
When her mother finds out that Mala is in love with a common man, she asks her son to take her away to some distant place and make her forget this man. Shekhar agrees and takes Mala to Kashmir. There he meets charming and lively Rajkumari (Saira Banu), daughter of a local doctor and gets attracted to her. But he remembers his mother's expectations that he should marry a girl from aristocratic family and maintains distance with Rajkumari.
But one day they both get struck in a snow storm for two days which gives him enough time to grow close with her. In that time he understands that what is important in life and becomes a carefree man. Meanwhile, Mala, who was actually pregnant before they came to Kashmir, gives birth to a son. Rajkumari and her father maintains the secret from everyone and from her brother. They come back to their home and his mother gets shocked by seeing the carefree and changed Shekhar. He even tells her about his love but she mistakes that name of Rajkumari for real princess. When she comes to know that she is not princess, she decides against the marriage. But after some drama, she too comes to know that real value of people lies in their hearts not in titles, she accepts Rajkumari as her daughter-in-law. It gets revealed that Mala secretly married Jeevan an year ago and their son was legitimate. Everyone accepts Jeevan into their home and laughter comes back to their home. | romantic | train | wikipedia | An excellent example of the Bollywood genre.
This film possess all the qualities of the classic Bollywood film as it has developed since the 1950s.
It has romantic love triumphing over social convention and the caste system; the stifling oppressive family with a dominant matriarch: the scheming, grasping enemy, seeking to thwart the lovers;the battle of good versus evil at the end, with good triumphant (of course).In addition, the film has splendid musical scenes with lavish settings and dance routines at various points.
Settings are suitably escapist, ranging from the lavish house of the rich family, to Kashmiri summer countryside, snow-covered slopes, and an isolated wooden hut in a raging storm.
Certainly, there is no danger of urban or rural social reality entering this story.The acting also shows some of the special qualities of Bollywood, with wildly exaggerated, stylised performances especially from the male and female leads.
The editing and production values are clear, (jump cutting, rapid blurred pans, unrealistic acrobatic fights, etc) I highly recommend this film, quite an early example of a colour feature from Bollywood It is entertaining.
and once the viewer becomes accustomed to the genre it is highly enjoyable..
One of The Most Meomrable Films From The 1960's..
Who can forget "Yahoo Chahe Koi Mujhe
", when Shammi Kapoor slides down the snowy hill in the beautiful Kashmir with the beautiful Saira Banu?
And then the dance with the dancing sensation, Helen, in "Ayaya Karume Kya Suku Suku?" And finally the romantic songs, "Ehsaan Tera Hoga
" by both the late Mohd Rafi and the nightingale of India, Lata Mangeshkar?
This film was Saira Banu's first film and it was opposite the then top actor, Shammi Kapoor, who is known as "Elvis Presley" of Hindi cinema, now more famously called "Bollywood." Born into a family who has extremely strong and perhaps even draconian rules, which also includes no one allowed to laugh in the household, fall in love or even go out led by the old time favourite, dreaded mother, played by Lalita Pawar, who heads the family and Chandra Shekhar (Shammi Kapoor) as her son, who, even those working for him, consider him and call him "Junglee." But there is his sister, Shashikala, who is totally the opposite of him and the mother.
She laughs and likes to go out and meet her boyfriend, who, happens to be a clerk in Chandra Shekhar's firm.
Naturally the mother suspects that her daughter is up to something and sends her packing with the brother on a holiday to Kashmir.
Here there some very hilarious scenes with Chandra Shekhar and Raj (Saira Banu) whenever they meet.
But then the fate takes a turn and the god of love firs an arrow and love starts to blossom and Chandra Shekhar realises what he has missed all his life and the sister is absolutely shocked and cannot believe that it is her brother behaving in the way he now is.With the combination of the late Mohd Rafi, Shammi Kapoor and Shankar Jaikeshen as the composers, one knew at the time, that the music and the songs had to be good.
In one scene, Raj, the character played by Saira Banu, calls Chandra Shekhar a "Bunder," monkey and in true sense of the word, it can be said that his expressions, until romance starts to blossom, are that of the monkey.
Related to Naseem Banu, an old time favourite actress, Saira Banu is perfect in this role.Shashikala, who later played roles similar to that of being an evil mother in law or sister in law, who falls in love with a clerk, in her brother's company, is perhaps a flamboyant here as she is totally the opposite of her brother and her mother.
The part of her lover is played by the late Ashok Kumar's (Dadamoni's) brother, Anoop Kumar, who is good in supporting Shammi Kapoor in this film.Finally the rock of the family, Lalita Pawar, who controls everything in terms of rules of the house.
She is just perfect as an authoritarian character, who is stubborn and will do whatever she can to ensure that her late husband's rules are carried on.This movie, for those who watched it when first released 47 years ago, will take down memory lane, which has some of the most memorable songs by Mohd Rafi, Lata Mangeshkar and is supported by good, excellent comedy and scenery of Kashmir as well romance..
Juglee = Comedy + Best Songs ....
Junglee Was Directed By Subodh Mukherjee ...The Same Director Who Had Directed Munimji,Paying Guest & Love Marriage ...With Dev Anand In Lead...All Were Successful Movies...So Better Was Expected...The Writer Is Again Subodh...The Script Is Very Attractive ...Screenplay Is Better..The Story Revolves Around A Rich Dictator & A Poor Girl..How They Fall For Each Other & Consequences ...The Plot Is Similar To King Uncle Which Was Made In Early 90's With Jackie Shroff & Shah Rukh Khan.Dev Anand Was In But Due To Some Issues ...He Was Replaced With Shammi Kapoor...And Everyone Knows How Shammi Kapoor Was In The Movie No Explanation Needed ...He Was Outstanding...Especially The Comic Scenes...It Was Saira Banu Debut Movie But Her Acting Was Compliment To Shammi Kapoor...
Lalita Pawar Who Use To Be Mother In Most Of The Movies In Those Days...Was A Strict Mother..With Discipline & Set Of Rules...Shashikala Was Fine...Music Of The Movie Is The Strongest Part Of The Movie ...Music Was Given By The Very Best Shankar Jaikishan...Every Song Is A Masterpiece ...The Numbers Like Ehsaan Tera Hoga Mujhpar By Rafi, Karoon Main Kya Suku Suku By Rafi With Shammi Kapoor With Helen Was A Treat ...And The Most Unique Composition " Yahooo Chahe Koi Mujhe Junglee Kahe" Was The Best Of The Lot...There Was Nothing Wrong About The Movie...But The Plot Would Have Been Better...Overall A Excellent Entertainer ...Watch It If You Want To See The Best Of Shammi Kapoor On Screen..
Excellent movie!!!.
Who ever gave this move less than 10/10, is an idiot.
It's arguably the best movie of all time.Shammi Kapoor is from an upper class family that has this tradition of not laughing because they believe laughing makes people careless and common, among other things.
That is the premise, even if you don't think that sounds funny; check it out before passing on it.Shammi Kapoor is hilarious.
He plays two completely different, but equally funny characters.
Very well thought out and put together, in all aspects.
And every actor did an excellent job.
The songs are really nice too, to say the least..
Excellent!.
If you like older films like me, don't listen to the other reviews.This is a fantastic film, for its time and even today, it will beat any new film in SONGS, STORY, ACTING and THE best actors of all time.
No kidding, the songs are just absolutely beautiful and brilliant!
I'm sorry if you don't understand Hindi and have to rely on the captions, they do NOT do the film justice, but thats okay, it's still a #1, first class film.Any questions?
No, Okay.
Watch it, enjoy it, and pass it on!
KKadd a line add a line |
tt3336428 | The Dead Reckoning | Leaving a church, Father Logan, a well known ex-paratrooper padre, is approached by Captain "Rip" Murdock (Humphrey Bogart). Murdock needs to tell someone what has happened to him in the past few days in case his enemies get to him. A flashback follows.
Just after World War II, paratroopers and close friends Captain Murdock and Sergeant Johnny Drake (William Prince) are mysteriously ordered to travel from Paris to Washington, D.C. When Drake learns that he is to be awarded the Medal of Honor (and Murdock the Distinguished Service Cross), he disappears before newspaper photographers can take his picture. Murdock goes AWOL, follows the clues and tracks his friend to Gulf City in the southern United States, where he learns Drake is dead – his burned corpse is recovered from a car crash.
Murdock finds out that Drake joined the Army under an assumed name to avoid a murder charge. He was accused of killing a rich old man named Chandler because he was in love with his beautiful young wife Coral (Lizabeth Scott). Murdock goes to a nightclub to question Louis Ord (George Chandler), a witness in the murder trial. Ord reveals that Drake had given him a letter for Murdock. Murdock also meets Coral and Martinelli (Morris Carnovsky), the club owner, there. Seeing Coral losing heavily at roulette, Murdock not only recoups her losses at craps, he wins her $16,000. For some reason, however, she is uncomfortable with the situation. When they go to collect the money in Martinelli's private office, Murdock accepts a drink; it is drugged. When he wakes up the next morning, he finds Ord's dead body planted in his hotel room. He manages to hide the corpse before police Lieutenant Kincaid (Charles Cane), responding to an anonymous tip, shows up to search his room.
Murdock teams up with Coral. Suspecting that Martinelli had Ord killed in order to get the letter, Murdock breaks into his office, only to find the safe already open. Just before he is knocked unconscious by an unseen assailant, he smells jasmine, the same aroma as Coral's perfume. When Murdock awakens, Martinelli has him roughed up by his thug, Krause (Marvin Miller), to try to find out what is in the coded letter. However, Murdock manages to trick his captors and escape. The flashback ends, and Murdock slips away.
Now suspicious of Coral, he goes to her apartment to confront her. She claims to be innocent, but finally admits that she shot her husband in self-defense. She went to Martinelli for advice and gave him the murder weapon to dispose of, but he has been blackmailing her ever since. In love with her himself, Murdock agrees to leave town with her, but insists on retrieving the incriminating weapon first, despite Coral's objections. He threatens Martinelli with a gun, eliciting some startling revelations. The club owner reveals that Coral is his wife. He killed Chandler (having learned the man had lied about having only six months to live) and framed Drake so that Coral could inherit the estate. Murdock gets what he came for and forces Martinelli to precede him out of the building. As he opens the door, Martinelli is shot and killed.
Murdock jumps into the waiting car and drives off with Coral. As they are speeding away, he accuses her of having just tried to kill him. When she shoots him, the car crashes. He survives, but she suffers fatal injuries. In the hospital, Murdock comforts her in her final moments. | revenge | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0043885 | Only the Valiant | Gregory Peck, in a role he considered a low-point of his career, plays Captain Richard Lance, a by-the-book West Point graduate who is not very popular with the men under his command.
Following the American Civil War, peace is maintained in the New Mexico Territory by Fort Invicible, a fortification set up outside a mountain pass that blocks marauding bands of Apache. The Apache are able to eventually take the fort by cutting off its water supply, then assaulting the fort when its garrison is at its weakest and killing all the defenders.
Captain Lance arrives with a patrol soon after the battle and captures Tucsos, the charismatic leader of the Apache. Lance's scout advises the captain to kill Tucsos, but Lance will not shoot a prisoner.
Back at the headquarters of the 5th Cavalry, the invalid commanding officer orders Lance to assign an officer to command an escort to take Tucsos to a larger post. Lance decides to lead the patrol, but at the last minute, the colonel says he needs Lance at his fort in case of Apache attack and to assign a popular officer, Lieutenant Holloway, to lead the small group of men escorting Tucsos. The Apache free Tucsos and Lieutenant Holloway ends up dead. The men at the fort blame Captain Lance, unaware of the colonel's order. They believe that his decision to assign Lieutenant Holloway to the dangerous mission was for a personal reason (both officers were vying for the affection of the same woman). The woman believes it too, and bitterly breaks up with him.
Lance's standing with the soldiers at the fort only gets worse when he assembles a group of misfit cavalrymen to hold off rampaging Indians at the ruins of Fort Invincible, which is considered a suicide mission. | romantic | train | wikipedia | This film, released in 1951, has the usual elements typical of the westerns released during the 50's; the cavalry needing to protect the territory from a murderous band of Indians, an officer determined to see that task through, and the men with him with various character flaws that he has to merge together into a cohesive unit.
One major difference for this film, "Only the Valiant", is that it attempts to play out the usual storyline, but at the same time, deliver the message that duty is a paramount concern to be shared by all, even if they don't accept that charge.Gregory Peck embodies the tight-lipped captain of the troop that has to prevent the Indians from breaking out into the territory.
The cast includes western stalwarts such as Ward Bond, Gig Young, Neville Brand, Lon Chaney, Jr., and Warner Anderson.
And an interesting script which contains elements of Beau Geste, The Lost Patrol, The Dirty Dozen and David and Bathsheba which Peck had starred in.Peck and Gig Young are rivals for Barbara Payton and Peck is ordered to send Young on a patrol to take hostile Apache chief Michael Ansara to a better staffed army fort.
Young gets killed and Ansara escapes and the old Uriah the Hittite story starts circulating at Peck's post.Later he gets an assignment to man an abandoned fort that sits across a narrow mountain pass that the Apaches can't even charge through on horseback.
He takes a select group of army misfits, some of whom would like to kill him worse than the Apaches.Even with Ward Bond as an alcoholic corporal, any resemblance between these soldiers and those John Ford cavalry pictures is coincidental.
A hard-nosed by-the- book, Cavalry officer, Captain Richard Lance, captures a leader of the Indian enemy after a massacre at a fort.
This means the leader has escaped, and Lance must now lead a second patrol--and he picks the men the fort can most spare, a company of problems-- to defend the advance fort that had been wiped out and save the command from another attack by stopping up the bottleneck pass in that sector.
Other in the large cast of this film which really shows life at a cavalry outpost looking like an army establishment of heterogeneous and quarreling types includes War Bond powerful as a hard-drinking sergeant, Neville Brand and Steve Brodie as troublemakers, Warner Anderson and Lon Chaney Jr. as psychological troublemakers and Gig Young, Art Baker, Herbert Heyes as fellow officers with Nana Bryant as the Colonel's wife.
Even Barbara Payton as the love interest gets by in a difficult role; Michael Ansara is the captured war chief, and Jeff Corey plays the Fort's scout.
The music by Franz Waxman is good, the production qualities admirable; the argument about what would happen if Lance takes the war chief in happens to be true; other than this unsolvable mistake by the central character, this is is great western.
...I saw this movie when it first came out in France, in my hometown, 54 years ago, I was nine, and today I still remember each black and white frame, especially the black ones, because it was so tense, scary, those sneaking attacks through that dark pass in the mountain, the two soldiers, prisoners forced to fight each other by their captors, the last battle with the uncovering of the wagon with the Gatling in it firing away, the last fight between Peck and the chief, and the Happy End which let me take back my breath.
Picking the men who despise him the most, and the ones he feels have major character flaws, Lance and the handful of soldiers must hold the fort from Apache attack until reinforcements arrive.
Gregory Peck, Ward Bond, Gig Young, Lon Chaney Jr, Neville Brand & Warner Anderson each contribute greatly to make this a dramatic and involving picture.
One special sequence sees Lance (Peck at his straight laced best) assassinate each soldier's character; one is a bully, another a deserter, a drunk, a black heart, a coward and on he goes, and it's here where the film really kicks on to be a crackerjack character driven piece.
The violence is pretty strong as well, director Gordon Douglas is not shy to put blood on the bones of the writing, and I dare you not to feel a rush of adrenaline as the Apache's start to screech prior to their wave of attacks.From watching these intriguing characters in a wonderfully tight situation, to the blood pumping Gatling Gun finale, this picture scores high on many entertaining levels.
Gregory Peck as captain Lance who gave Fort Invincible his name ¡ .
Richard Lance (Peck) is a honorable cavalry officer to roust renegade troopers and a tribe of Indians Apaches .
Lance is wrongfully framed by his girlfriend (Barbara Payton) and underlings of killing lieutenant Holloway (Gig Young) massacred along with a patrol by Indians .
The angry Apaches (led by Michael Ansara, usual in Indian roles) are out on a rampage of killing , seeking vengeance against the white intruders, and with the aim for eliminate them.This is an acceptable , conventional tale with action galore about a hard-bitten officer who goes to hell and back while assembling a detail of misfit cavalrymen to hold-off rampaging Indians and later on regaining the respect of his soldiers and his sweetheart .
Gregory Peck and a top-notch all-secondary-star-cast as Ward Bond, Steve Brodie , Warner Anderson , Neville Brand , Jeff Corey and Lon Chaney Jr as the Arab ; all of them shine in this gripping story about a surrounded garrison .
However the product is entertaining and has an interesting plot.In order to gain some time, Cpt. Lance (Gregory Peck) is sent to defend a small abandoned fort located right in the opening of a small passage between the mountains through which the Apaches will have to ride in their way to attack the army's main position.
He has been accused by his girl of sending his friend Lt. Holloway (Gig Young) in a sure-death mission just to get rid of romantic competition; Peck is innocent of course, but he doesn't feel he has to explain (sort of a character like the one he played some years later in "The Big Country").Lance chooses his men for the mission among the worst in the regiment and those he knows have personal feelings against him.
He occupies the fort and waits for the Apaches to come while watching his back at he same time.The picture, totally unpretentious, was shot in black and white by director Gordon Douglas and you could say this was a correct decision for it adds to the grey and dark atmosphere that reigns in the fort.
Michael Ansara is the Indian chief.But what really demerits the film are some indoor settings representing the rocky passage and the fort itself that look clearly fake and cheap.
The point is that producers didn't want to spend much money on this film and it shows.However it turns out to be a rather enjoyable army against Indians western and its worth one look at least..
Made a couple of years after Ford's 'Fort Apache' (1948), in some ways Douglas' violent film is reminiscent of that earlier work.
Gregory Peck's straight-backed Captain Lance, the unpopular stickler for honour and adherent to all the fine print of duty, recalls Ford's military martinet Lieutenant Colonel Thursday (Fonda).
Like the narrow pass through which the Apaches must move to attack the fort, Lance works within a narrow confine of responsibility and honour which can be dangerously constricting.Interestingly, for a film ostensibly full of action, much significance attaches itself exactly to the opposite.
Peck chooses for this mission soldiers which he considers to be the scum of the earth and the actors that play these soldiers, Ward Bond, Lon Chaney Jr., Neville Brand among others, are excellent.
The acting ranges from decent to very good; I am not a huge Gregory Peck fan(I sometimes find him dull) but he does a good job as the ruthless and tight-lipped martinet officer, and Barbara Payton is luminous and pretty as Cathy.
I think this is made worse by the fact that the film stars Gregory Peck and he went on to make MANY better westerns.
This one just seems pretty pedestrian.The movie is a combination of a B-style western about the cavalry and THE DIRTY DOZEN, as Peck is in charge of a small detail of misfit soldiers who are trying to stem off a major Indian attack.
The problem is that despite SOME similarities to THE DIRTY DOZEN, the writing just isn't that good at times and the reasoning why Peck took this group of degenerates on the mission seems really stupid--I mean putting the safety of everyone back home in the hands of people who only cared about saving their sorry butts.
After he'd starred in two excellent and mature Westerns like "Yellow Sky" and "The Gunfighter," 20th Century Fox put Gregory Peck into this cliche-ridden, badly mounted, and poorly directed cavalry picture.
Lifelessly acted, indifferently directed it begs audience disinterest.Despised by his fellow troopers who feel he indirectly caused the death of another popular officer Captain Lance (Peck) leads a rag tag platoon of soldiers into an outpost in order to blunt a warring tribe from spreading throughout the territory.
Director Gordon Douglas who would make better westerns (Rio Conchos, Yellowstone Kelly, Charge at Feather River) direction is detached as he does little to develop his band of malcontents (Neville Brand, Ward Bond, Lon Chaney Jr, Jeff Corey) who give a surly show and tell and wait for the arrows to fly.Peck looks dull and lost , lacking the frontier leadership Wayne or Cooper might present on the western plains.
A terrible movie, about as amateurish as they come, something you might have seen on TV in the late fifties early sixties, terrible script, some great/good actors Peck, Bond, Brand, Young and a few others with no decent lines nor character development and some lousy actors that should never have gotten lines.
If you find cowboys and Indians fights riveting, you might like the rest of the movie better than I did, but for a good Gregory Peck western, I'll watch The Big Country..
Now Tucsos is free it is only a matter of days before he attacks; in order to protect the fort Lance volunteers to take a small group of men back to Invincible to keep the Apaches pinned down as they try to come through a narrow pass that is the only way through the mountains.
The men he selects to go with him aren't the best in the fort; they are the worst; they weren't selected because he thought they had hidden courage but because they would be the least missed when the Apaches broke through and attacked the main fort!This western isn't a classic but it is entertaining.
Rather than the wide open expanses of the open plains the action mostly takes place within the confines of the wrecked fort and in the narrow pass the men seek to block; this gives the film a rather claustrophobic feel.
Gregory Peck puts in a solid performance as the by-the-book Captain Lance and the rest of the cast are entertaining; especially Ward Bond who played the drunken Cpl. Gilchrist.
I would suggest that Only the Valiant is one of the most original and intriguing and in some ways weird movies that Peck ever did; daring , surprising and one of his few best westerns (--no, no, of course, not a western really, but a military chronicle, which sometimes is better--).
You say'that sounds intriguing, or interesting'and it surpasses your expectations.All in all, the script shows a level of maturity unusual for the westernsand it somehow reminded me, obliquely, of ULZANA; it's also straight nononsense suspense.Peck looked dashing as a young and tough, somewhat gloomy and stoic officer; and there are many unexpected toucheslike the blonde babe kissing and flirting with the one she's decided not to marry, perhaps a feeling of hers for justice and retribution
.Even genrewise, ONLY
is so much more than a military taleit is as well an action drama, a suspense movie, a commando/ action thrillerthe weirdest combo imaginable; a bunch of soldiers in a special mission to counteract and stop a possible Native's attack
--the insane decision not to take all the available troops to the place where those Natives could be stoppedbut only a handful of people
--and this plot never takes a crap routeas most would and did
.
Given the mission the character has been assigned, and the "men" with which to do it, those characteristics are essential.Without being a spoiler, think of this film as an early, grittier example of The Dirty Dozen genre.
Contains spoilers'Only the Valiant' is an example of the 'cavalry film', that sub-genre of the Western that tells the story of the conflict between the US Army and the native Indians of the American West during the second half of the nineteenth century.
Lance is already unpopular with the men under his command, and becomes even more hated when a popular subordinate, Lieutenant Holloway, is killed while leading a dangerous mission to escort Tuscos, a captured Apache chief, to prison.
In fact, Lance wanted to undertake the mission himself and was prevented from doing so by a direct order from his commanding officer, but he never explains this to the men.
Lance volunteers to lead a small detachment of men to hold another fort, Fort Invincible, abandoned after being damaged in an earlier Apache raid.
Fort Invincible commands a strategic pass through the mountains; Lance believes that if he and his men can hold it for a few days, this will gain enough time to allow a relieving force to reach Fort Winston.
Even before the Holloway incident, Lance seems to have had the knack of making enemies and alienating people, and all of these men have good reason to hate both him and one another.The aim of the filmmakers was presumably to produce a 'character-driven' film in which a motley collection of men learn to work together, the idea being that the tale of how a bunch of misfits learn to work and fight together is more interesting than a similar story told about a well-disciplined and motivated crack unit.
It therefore follows that Lance would want the best possible men under his command in Fort Invincible, not the worst.
Gregory Peck plays hard line by the books Captain Richard Lance whom certain soldiers resent to the point of wanting to see him dead.A fort called "Invincible" placed at the entrance to an Apache encampment, has been wiped out by Tuscos (Michael Ansara) and his band.
Cathy thinks that Lance assigned Holloway to his fate out of spite as do the troopers.Lance offers to take a small group to the abandoned Fort Invincible to block the canyon opening through which the Apaches will mount their attack, until a relief column arrives.
He chooses Sgt. Murdock (Neville Brand), Cpl. Timothy Gilchrist (Ward Bond), Trooper Kebussyan (Lon Chaney), Trooper Ruteledge (Warner Anderson) a former officer, Trooper Onstat (Steve Brodie) a former rebel and deserter whom Murdock despises, Trooper Saxton (Terry Kilborn) a trumpeter, Joe Harmony (Jeff Corey) a scout and a sickly lieutenant who ultimately rides for help.As the group gets thinned out they recognize that Lance being a good soldier is their best chance for survival.
Then the Apaches attack the fort and...................................................................................Peck as always, is great as the duty first Captain keeping a painful secret within.
Barbara Payton seemed to be in every movie made by William Cagney productions, Gig Young's part was all too brief and Michael Ansara makes a fearsome enemy.I found that the premise of the Apache encampment being in a secluded valley with only a narrow passage from which to mount their attacks, a little hard to believe.
SYNOPSIS: Cavalry captain leads a small group of misfits to hold back an impending Indian attack through a narrow mountain pass.
Peck is always at his best in less sympathetic parts and here he has a field day as a martinet captain in conflict with the likes of Neville Brand's bitter, bullying sergeant, Ward Bond's guzzling corporal whose surface charm so quickly turns to murderous hate, Lon Chaney's vengeful strongman, Terry Kilburn's cowardly bugler and Steve Brodie's victimised Southerner.
Influenced by John Ford's "The Lost Patrol", and a precursor to Robert Aldrich's "The Dirty Dozen", Gordon Douglas' "Only The Valiant" sees a group of US soldiers attempting to defend Fort Invincible from Apache Indians.
"Valiant" was released in 1951, sandwiched between "Broken Arrow" and "Broken Lance", two of the first major westerns to portray Native American Indians sympathetically.3/10 – Worth one viewing..
Actor Michael Ansara, who later played the chief villain in "Guns of the Magnificent Seven," is extremely effective in a small role as the hated Indian leader Tucsos."Only the Valiant" opens with over-voice narration by Army Scout Joe Harmony.
Captain Richard Lance (Gregory Peck of "12 O'Clock High") and his men boil in on horseback and capture Tucsos (Michael Ansara), and Joe Harmony (Jeff Corey of "True Grit") wants to shoot him on the spot.
Lance requests to take 6 or 7 men of his choosing to man Fort Invincible and prevent Tucsos from assembling a war party.
As it is -- this being 1951 -- the plot resembles a movie left over from World War II, only using Indians as the fanatic villains, rather than the Japanese.Gregory Peck picks out six or seven of the least desirable troopers in the small fort to man a deserted outpost guarding a pass through which the Apache must move before they can attack.
Peck himself was railroaded into this but even so he was too good an actor and too much a pro to give anything less than his best and the support is at least interesting; Lon Chaney Jnr, Jeff Corey, Gig Young, Neville Brand, Ward Bond, Steve Brodie, all essentially wasted as was all-around director Gordon Douglas. |
tt0041162 | Batman and Robin | In Gotham, one year after the defeat of Two-Face and the Riddler in the previous film, Batman and Robin attempt to thwart Mr. Freeze from robbing diamonds, but he steals one and flees. In South America, Pamela Isley is working under Dr. Jason Woodrue, experimenting with the Venom drug. She witnesses Woodrue use the formula to turn the violent, but diminutive, convicted serial murderer Antonio Diego into a hulking monstrosity dubbed "Bane". Woodrue and Isley argue over the use of the drug and Woodrue kills her by overturning a shelf of various toxins. She transforms into the beautiful and seductive Poison Ivy before killing Woodrue with her poisonous kiss. She finds that Wayne Enterprises funded Woodrue, thus she takes Bane with her to Gotham City. Meanwhile, Alfred Pennyworth's niece, Barbara Wilson, makes a surprise visit and is invited by Bruce Wayne to stay at Wayne Manor until she goes back to school.
Wayne Enterprises presents a new telescope at a press conference interrupted by Isley. She proposes a project that could help the environment, but Bruce declines her offer, as it would kill millions of people. That night, a charity event is held by Wayne Enterprises with special guests, Batman and Robin, and she decides to use her abilities to seduce them. Freeze crashes the party and steals a diamond from the event. However, he is captured and sent to a chamber prison in Arkham Asylum, but escapes with the help of Ivy and Bane. Batman and Robin begin to have crime fighting relationship problems because of Ivy's seductive ability with Robin. Ivy is then able to contact Robin once more, she kisses him but fails to kill him due to Robin wearing rubber lips. Robin and later on Batman become trapped, but are rescued by Batgirl, who shows up and defeats Ivy, and reveals that she is Barbara Wilson and knows the location of the Batcave.
Batman, Robin and Batgirl decide to go after Freeze together. By the time they get to the lab where Freeze and Bane are, Gotham is completely frozen. Batgirl and Ivy fight each other as Robin is attacked by Bane. Robin eventually defeats Bane when he and Batgirl kick apart his venom tubes stopping the flow of venom to his body, Bane collapses before transforming back to his original diminutive size of Antonio Diego and is left helpless on the ground. Meanwhile Batman and Freeze begin to fight each other, with Batman defeating Freeze. Batgirl and Robin manage to unfreeze Gotham; and Batman shows Freeze a recording of Ivy during her fight with Batgirl. Freeze learns that Ivy has betrayed him over the death of his wife. Ivy blamed Batman for Nora's death, but she informs Batgirl that it was her idea. Freeze is angered by the betrayal and is informed by Batman that his wife is not dead; she is restored in cryogenic slumber and has been moved to Arkham waiting for him to finish his research. Batman proceeds to ask Freeze for the cure Freeze has created for the first stage of MacGregor's Syndrome, the disease that Freeze's wife is suffering from, for a friend (Alfred) who is dying. Freeze atones for his misunderstanding by giving him medicine he had developed. Ivy is shown imprisoned in Arkham and Freeze walks in. Alfred is eventually healed and everyone agrees to let Barbara stay at Wayne Manor. | good versus evil, suspenseful, violence | train | wikipedia | Just as before the United States got into the War, the villains country could be implied, but not specifically stated.The second Batman chapter-play did follow all of the above mentioned, using a large number of common underworld types and a secret leader of unknown origin and identity (until the end), who was bent on, what else, world domination.The cast and production team changed as Columbia had Sam Katzman produce it.
The best known of these would probably be the EAST SIDE KIDS series, one branch of the DEAD END Family Tree.This was the second serial for a comic character;but it was not the first time that it was done.
But unlike these others, which may have had one or two changes in cast, the 1949 Batman film cleaned house, leaving no one from the original.Veteran Robert Lowery, who referred to himself as "the King of the B's", was a good choice for Bruce Wayne/Batman.
He possessed the build and obvious athleticism to bring a certain authenticity to the role.John Duncan* had been around doing juvenile roles for several years (including the previously mentioned EAST SIDE KIDS series), and now had matured some, giving him both the youthful appearance and the gymnast-like musculature that Robin would have.Additionally, we have all characters and elements taken directly from the comics feature.
News Photographer,Vicki Vale (Jane Adams), Alfred the Butler(Eric Wilton) and Police Commissioner James Gordon(Lyle Talbot) were all characters out of the comic book adventures.
They reprised the Bat Cave from the '43 version and added The Bat Signal(the bat emblemed searchlight,Batman summoner of Gotham City's sky), albeit in a sort of vest pocket size.Like many serials, they did employ a hooded mystery man villain as the "brains" heavy you know, unknown but having several on screen suspects to keep the audience guessing for 15 chapters.This was okay, or at least adequate, but begs the question: Why not use one of the great colorful villains from the comics pages?
The Batman TV of 2 decades later did so, making the series so memorable.As for THE NEW ADVENTURES of BATMAN and ROBIN, it ranks far above most serials of its Post World War II period.
As well as common crooks and masked super villains, it confronted the Super Nova Explosion of Technological Advancement, a phenomenon of which we still have a lot of apprehension.NOTE* John Duncan, now a man in his 80's, still makes appearances a various Film Fan conventions around the country.
The reason is, that I saw this serial for the first time as an 8 year old matinée movie goer in Florida during it's first release.It was much different then, and I'm not convinced that in spite of the advancements in production values and special effects that it was any more fun or magical to be a movie kid today as it was in the 50's.
OK, folks, let's get real, don't watch this if you are looking for high-tech special effects, brilliant dialogue, women (there's only one and she's a main character, Vicki Vale...who is always "getting in trouble", with Batman having to save her!), a Batmobile or any Bat-gadget!
(Don't scoff, all you baby boomers....cartoon makers of the 1970s did the same thing...with the same bad dialogue and bad acting...witness "Superfriends", (which I also liked!), they just did it for Television!) I started watching this serial having never seen it...only saw a little of it in the special features of the 1966 Batman movie DVD.
The costume is silly...looks like Bruce Wayne's grandmother sewed it together...Robin's costume isn't much better....there is no Batmobile, (although Batman and Robin do ride around in a Mercury convertible, and even change costumes in it..hmmmm..homo erotica?
A super-villain..namely "The Wizard", whom the episodes lead you to think is an old, wheelchair bound scientist, who, when he sits in a chair that looks like it was stolen from the state penitentiary's execution room, regains the use ofhis legs...and puts on a black costume, shrouding his entire body, and, using a stolen bit of technology he created, can remotely control all motor vehicles...but not only that, he can make them explode as well, and the pies de resistance....he can make himself INVISIBLE!!
If you're a die-hard Batman fan, you should like this, unless you get upset by movies not following the comic's story lines!
When I was a small boy of 7, I saw a few Batman and Robin chapters at the local theater because my parents took me along as they wanted to see the feature and this serial happened to be playing.
I thought that Robert Lowery was a very good Batman as he was a big man with a determined voice and John Duncan was fine as he as not treated like a comic sidekick.
I wish some younger kids shows of today had the guts to try something like that, and reinvent the classic stories.I especially remember the submarine going to the hidden lair of the villain.And also Batman and Robin riding around in the standard convertible.
Wow this movie is great and quite exciting.The costumes looks funny and many jokes about Batman started probably out of this.Furthermore a great movie even for younger Batman fans like me.Personally Batman is my favourite hero because he is just a normal bloke with nice gadgets,some muscle and a brain.The action is superb and storyline for me gets an A.Great plot and fighting too.Just don't mention the Batmobile but alas any comicbook fan will tell you that the Batmobile appeared much later detective comics # 27.
In 1949, six years after the original Batman Movie Serial was released, Columbia Pictures, released the the long awaited sequel, "Batman and Robin".
Having to wait a WHOLE WEEK to find out how Batman or Robin escaped from their impending fate...be it a bomb or approaching steam train, was exquisite torture!In hindsight, this serial probably WAS the inspiration behind the 1960's Adam West/Burt Ward revival.
If you want a good evening of entertainment and good fun watch the New Adventures of Batman and Robin..
Plus, Robert Lowery, who plays Batman here, looks strikingly similar to Adam West, his costume looks similar, as does Robin (Johnny Duncan) and his costume, Alfred (Eric Wilton), Commissioner Gordon (Lyle Talbot), the Bruce Wayne house set, the Batcave set, and so on.
It makes you realize that the Adam West television series arrived at its tenor by just slightly exaggerating this serial enough so that it would become a tongue-in-cheek spoof.So how do you know if you'll like Batman and Robin if you haven't seen it?
If you've seen the Adam West television show, imagine it toned down just a tad, film it in black & white, and set it in the late 1940s--Batman even drives a big, old late 40s gas guzzler instead of the Batmobile.
Now it's just humorous, especially how The Wizard can "tune" the remote control machine into any object of his desire by arbitrarily tweaking a couple big rotary knobs.In order to stretch out the serial, which is just the one story (maybe that's normal for serials--I don't know, this is the first one I've seen so far) into 15 episodes, most of which are around 16 minutes in length, minus the minute or two recap of the previous episode's cliffhanger at the beginning, The Wizard has to run into a lot of technical glitches, almost have his henchman caught a few times, and they keep trying to dispose of Batman and Robin in different ways--each time saying, "Now they're really out of our hair for good!"--This is said about ten times.
The bulk of each episode consists of material like this, plus the obligatory, frequently hilarious fight scenes.That might not sound completely attractive, but the absurdity of the scenarios and the absurdity of the "repetitions" make Batman and Robin very entertaining.
Although I don't know the extent to which Batman and Robin was actually an influence on Lucas, it's interesting to note at least some minor resemblances to Star Wars, including the fact that The Wizard has Darth Vader qualities, some episodes have names like "The Wizard Strikes Back", and the musical cue when the episode title card appears sounds suspiciously similar to John Williams score when the episode title cards appear in the Star Wars films.
Batman and Robin battle The Wizard.This feels more like the 1966 Batman TV series than the previous 1943 serial did.
The ten elements that make this just so good: Batman, Bruce, Robin, Dick, The Wizard, the fights, the high energy stock music that just keeps going for the whole serial, the remote control machine that gets a "fix" on things (a pre-Time Tunnel?), the 1940s cars that race around country roads and the very straight tone of the show.Don't confuse this with the lesser 1943 "Batman" serial, this 1949 serial is totally different and 100 times better!
Some of my reasons for liking 49 Bat are too private to put on-line, but to me, they don't come better than 49 Bat. I have seen all the modern dark takes on Batman (often without Robin!) and they don't compare to this harmless cliff-hanger serial.I like 1940s movies and/or serials but I don't spend a lot of time on them, this B&R serial is the only 1940s production I often return to with repeat DVD viewings.
It's the old story of the hooded mad scientist villain trying to take over the world by employing some secret destructive ray.Robert Lowery and Johnny Duncan play Batman and Robin respectively in this outing.
The best that can be said about Duncan's "acting" is that I hope he didn't quit his regular job before undertaking this role.The rest of the cast is good though, led by Lyle Talbot as Commissioner Gordon and many of Columbia's stock company of villains in assorted roles.The identity of the Wizard is skillfully kept in doubt until the end of the last chapter.
The worst things are about this serial are Batman and Robin's masks, which are indeed atrocious.
My experience watching it, however, was that by the end of the 2nd chapter I had gotten used to them, as well as Robert Lowry's gut, and they no longer distracted me from enjoying this better-than-average-late-period Columbia serial.Overall, Robert Lowry and Johnny Duncan make pretty good heroes.
There is a neat part where Batman is standing right up straight to a thug and lets the thug punch him in the face, but Batman doesn't even flinch, simply saying, 'that hurt,' and then slugging and knocking out the thug.Johnny Duncan has a receding hairline and looks about 30, but he has a build like a college wrestler and is credible as Robin, despite some ridiculous fight choreography for the character: Robin does a lot of really goofy stuff in fight scenes, like riding a thug's back, and getting on all fours to trip a running thug.
I just hope Burt Ward appreciated the fight choreographers 20th Century Fox provided him for the TV series.Fortunately, Batman fares much better in the fight scenes, and there are no special Bat-weapons here, just good-old-fashioned fisticuffs, which is appropriate for a serial.
Crooks refer to our hero as 'The Batman,' and generally refer to Robin as 'Batman's pal' as though they are too polite to state what they suspect the true nature of the relationship to be.This serial introduced the character Vicki Vale, who is probably the most annoying female character ever to appear in Batman comics.
Nonetheless, Miss Vale does play an important role in the story, and so we can tolerate her presence.The villain, the Wizard, is a better-than-average serial villain, but not as good as Ming the Merciless or Lyle Talbot's Lex Luthor.
The plot moves along and there is some fun business as Batman employs some low tech deception to protect his secret identity, and other nifty stuff.Overall, the plausibility factor here is average to good for serials, and certainly much better than it would be by early 1950's.
In an interview, Johnny "Duncan" Robin said that in one scene he and Batman had to run from the car to the house and that Lowery was doubled over out of camera range because his girdle was too tight!
Duncan himself looks more like a motorcycle hood than a boy wonder-- in fact he's more like a guy in his thirties waiting for Lowery to kick off so he can wear the big cape.Driving a Batmobile that looks like it rolled off Honest Al's Used Car lot at below sticker price-- the Dynamic Duo don't put a lot of effort into hiding the fact that it's Bruce Wayne's car they're driving-- in fact it's noted by several characters throughout the serial.The acting is wooden-- the sets are cheap-- the dialogue is horrendous and if there was even a script they were following I'm sure it read along the lines of "Batman says something here" because it certainly seems like they're making it up as it goes along.Batman's Utility belt is made out of thin fabric with no apparent pouches to hold his gadgets-- in one scene when Batman needs a full size blow torch the producers just tuck one in as the scene starts-- never to be seen again.
Not that it matters much to the motorist who has probably died from exposure trying to hoof his way back to Gotham City.There is a tired subplot with Lois Lane clone Vicki Vale who is convinced Bruce Wayne is Batman-- she must have noticed the Batmobile parked outside of Bruce's house-- or maybe she saw Batman and Robin running up the walk in the clearly densely populated suburban neighborhood.Everything about this serial is bad-- and all but the youngest in the audience will want to hurl toast at the screen.
IF you're looking for bad cinema you could not hit a better mark-- if you want entertainment, try the Burton Batman films, the Adam West Batman TV Series or the earlier Lewis Wilson Batman serial..
15 CHAPTERS (COLUMBIA SERIAL) Sequel to 1943's (Adventures of )Batman, Robert Lowery looks a bit more convincing than paunchy Lewis Wilson.
The best moment in the series comes when Vicki Vale pulls up behind Bruce Wayne's car (the Batmobile does not exist in this version) and Batman and Robin pop out.
Granting the budget and time constraints of serial production, BATMAN AND ROBIN nonetheless earns a place near the bottom of any "cliffhanger" list, utterly lacking the style, imagination, and atmosphere of its 1943 predecessor, BATMAN.The producer, Sam Katzman, was known as "King of the Quickies" and, like his director, Spencer Bennett, seemed more concerned with speed and efficiency than with generating excitement.
(Unfortunately, this team also produced the two Superman serials, starring Kirk Alyn, with their tacky flying animation, canned music, and dull supporting players.) The opening of each chapter offers a taste of things to come: thoroughly inane titles ("Robin Rescues Batman," "Batman vs Wizard"), mechanical music droning on, and our two heroes stumbling toward the camera looking all around, either confused or having trouble seeing through their cheap Halloween masks.
They capture more of the authentic mood of the comic book than all 15 chapters of BATMAN AND ROBIN combined.Now for the good news -- this is not the 1997 version!.
There is a sway of personalities between Batman and Bruce Wayne and for Robin and Dick Grayson which this film has the right look on.
Possible Spoilers.I can only recall having seen two 40's era movie serials, CAPTAIN MARVEL-1941 (CM) and BATMAN & ROBIN-1949 (BM&R) and so can only base my opinions on serials made during this time based on these two films.
In each episode Batman & Robin would track down the masked villan known as the Wizard.
It is obvious to all that have seen both Bruce Wayne & Dick Grayson and Batman & Robin that they are are the same persons.
So if your a fan of old serials or Batman & Robin this would probably be worth watching.
BATMAN AND ROBIN is a 15-instalment cliffhanger serial from 1949 that follows the intrepid duo as they battle against a masked villain called The Wizard and his plans to destroy the world.
Robin seems to be on tranquilizers, and looks more like Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer than the Boy Wonder.
Including consulting with Commissioner Gordon as Bruce and Dick, in a manner indistinguishable from their consultations as Batman and Robin, except that they spend a lot of time saying things like "Batman asked us to give you this, " rather than just wearing the damn costumes.
Jane Adams plays a very forgettable Vicki Vale, and Eric Wilton plays an Alfred who looks very much like the TV show's Alan Napier, but has little to do except wear a spare Batman costume when required to, much like a few episodes of the TV series.The villain is a masked mystery man called the Wizard who has some outlandish scientific devices.
Presumably, the plot is a mystery to figure out who the Wizard is, but the detective work leaves a lot to be desired.The costumes and budget are worse than the 1943 serial, with Batman's cowl looking like a Halloween devil mask, but it is cool to see that huge bat across Batman's shirt a la "Batman Year One".
The only advantage either serials' Robin costume has over the TV series is the longer (and in John Duncan's case, dark - presumably green) cape vs.
Ward's elf shoes.There is no Batmobile, as both Bruce and Batman drive the same plain gray Mercury convertible, and the Bat-Signal appears to be the size of a portable TV set.The serial has some good moments, and you can really see how the TV series was a camped up version of it, but its just not nearly as fun or entertaining as the 1943 serial..
So Bad it's GOOD, BATMAN AND ROBIN rates a solid 7 for sheer Entertainment Value.. |
tt0044868 | Magical Maestro | Mysto the Magician appeals to a snobbish opera singer, the Great Poochini (a pun on opera composer Giacomo Puccini), to let him perform an opening act at the show that night. Mysto's tricks primarily come from his magic wand, which can summon flowers and rabbits. After Mysto dances and asks him if he gets the job, Poochini emphatically says "NO!" as he kicks Mysto out the door into the alley.
While on the ground, upsetter Mysto plays with his magic wand, but soon realizes he can pass it off as a conductor's baton, being further inspired by seeing himself in place of the conductor in a promotional poster outside the door and plans to get revenge on Poochini. Later, as the performance is starting he freezes the conductor, steals his tuxedo, nose and hair, then takes his place in front of the orchestra to conduct the Great Poochini, who is unaware of the imposter in front of him.
During the performance, in which Poochini (performed by the Colombian baritone Carlos Julio Ramírez) sings Largo al factotum from Gioacchino Rossini's The Barber of Seville, Mysto unleashes a variety of tricks with his wand. He begins tamely by summoning rabbits and flowers, then turning Poochini into a ballet dancer, Indian, tennis player, prisoner rock-breaker and football player. Mysto's revenge gets more brutal as he throws a cymbal on Poochini's head, turning him Chinese (see below), then transforming him into a country singer and sings, Oh My Darling, Clementine. After levitating Poochini to the ceiling and slamming him down to the stage, Mysto turns him into a square dance caller. Poochini actually continues his performance for a good 20 seconds after this without interruption, except for the "hair gag". Poochini is then transformed into a Shirley Temple–esque child (who sings "A-Tisket, A-Tasket" before the balloon blows up and pops), then a Carmen Miranda–type singer (with two rabbits accompanying him on guitar) after an irritated audience member hurls an armload of fruit onto Poochini's head where it piles up like Miranda's headdress. The same guy later sprays black ink on Poochini turning him into Bill Kenny from the Ink Spots, then he throws an anvil on him, crushing him into a shorter height and deepening his voice as well. After a rabbit hoses off Poochini's face and another rabbit works his arm like an automobile jack to get him back up to full height, the fun continues as he is transformed into a Hawaiian singer with two rabbits for harmony. Reaching the end of the number, Mysto's plan is finally revealed to Poochini as his wig falls off. Mysto quickly puts the wig back on, but it's too late. Now set for revenge of his own, Poochini furiously grabs the hairpiece and puts it on while Mysto tries to flee, but Poochini, having also grabbed the magic wand, stops the magician by using the wand on him as placing Mysto to the stage and unleashes the same gimmicks on the hapless magician at high speed. A red curtain with the words "The End" then falls on the magician and the rabbits (at the end of the Hawaiian singer shtick). | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0295318 | Home Alone | The McCallister family is preparing to spend Christmas in Paris, gathering at Peter and Kate's home outside of Chicago on the night before their departure. Peter and Kate's youngest son, eight-year-old Kevin, is being ridiculed by his siblings and cousins. A fight with his older brother, Buzz, results in Kevin getting sent to the third floor of the house for punishment, where he wishes that his family would disappear. During the night, heavy winds cause damage to power lines, which causes a temporary power outage and resets the alarm clocks, causing the entire family to oversleep. In the confusion and rush to get to the airport, Kevin is accidentally left behind.
Kevin wakes up to find the house empty and, thinking his wish has come true, is overjoyed with his new-found freedom. However, Kevin soon becomes frightened by his next door neighbor, "Old Man" Marley, who is rumored to have murdered his family with a snow shovel in 1958; as well as the "Wet Bandits", Harry and Marv, a pair of burglars who have been breaking into other vacant houses in the neighborhood and have targeted the McCallisters' house. Kevin tricks the pair into thinking his entire family is home, forcing them to put their plans on hold.
Kate discovers mid-flight that Kevin is missing and, upon arrival in Paris, the family discovers that all flights for the next two days are booked. Peter and the rest of the family go to his brother Rob's apartment in the city while Kate manages to get a flight back to the United States only to get as far as Scranton, Pennsylvania. She attempts to book a flight to Chicago but again, everything is booked. Unable to accept this, Kate is overheard by Gus Polinski, the lead member of a traveling polka band, who offers to let her travel with them to Chicago on their way to Milwaukee in a moving van, which she graciously accepts.
Meanwhile, Harry and Marv realize that Kevin is home alone, and on Christmas Eve, Kevin overhears them discussing plans to break into his house that night. Kevin goes to church and watches a choir perform. He meets Old Man Marley, who sits with Kevin and they briefly speak; he learns that Marley is actually a nice man and that the rumors about him are false. He tells Kevin he is watching the choir because his granddaughter is singing, but he never gets to see her because he and his son are estranged and have not been on speaking terms for some time; Kevin suggests that he try to reconcile with his son.
Kevin returns home and rigs the house with numerous booby traps. Harry and Marv break in, springing the traps and suffering various injuries. While the duo pursues Kevin around the house, he calls the police and flees the house, luring the duo into a neighboring vacant home. Harry and Marv manage to catch him and discuss how they will get their revenge, but Marley sneaks in and knocks them unconscious with his snow shovel before they can do anything to Kevin. The police arrive and arrest Harry and Marv, having identified all the houses they burglarized due to the latter's habit of flooding them.
On Christmas Day, Kevin is disappointed to find that his family is still gone. He then hears Kate enter the house and call for him; they reconcile and are soon joined by the rest of the McCallisters, who waited in Paris until they could get a direct flight to Chicago. Kevin keeps silent about his encounter with Harry and Marv, although Peter finds Harry's missing gold tooth. Kevin then observes Marley reuniting with his son and his family. Marley notices Kevin and the pair wave to each other before Marley and his family go inside his house. Buzz suddenly calls out, "Kevin, what did you do to my room?!" at which point Kevin runs off. | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | Cute and fun little game. In the wake of the success of Home Alone, this fun little game came to be. Focusing on what is arguably the most entertaining scene in the film(or the only entertaining one, as some cynics will undoubtedly say; I should know, I used to be one), this pits you against Harry and Marv, in the role of Kevin. The plot is simple; you have one hour(I'm not sure if that's "real time", the clock seems to move faster than that), not unlike the film(if I remember correctly?), to set up traps all over the house, before Harry and Marv start breaking in... by which time, you had better be prepared. If you find yourself ready before the clock is at 9 pm, there is a function that allows you(by pressing N on your keyboard) to fast-forward until they come. The first half of the game-play consists of you running around the house, picking up things(mostly household items, like in the movie) by pressing F1, placing them as traps in select areas, scattered around the house, by walking and/or jumping up to where it should be placed(clearly indicated, both from afar and when you're close enough to place it, there's no missing it) and pressing F3. You can carry three items at a time, F2 cycles through them. There are just shy of thirty traps to be set(I believe the exact number is 27), and two wild-cards; the BB gun and the tarantula. The aforementioned is required to execute certain traps(most just work by Harry or Marv walking into them) and is good for one hit(it takes ten hits for both burglars to go down, give up) dealt to each of the thieves(you can shoot them more than once, but that will only give them slight pause, giving you a second or less of more running time), both achieved by firing it, the key for which you set during setup(to be able to use it, just make sure you have it in your inventory when the clock runs out). The last-mentioned is not an actual trap... you can set it, but don't expect it to stay still. Or get you hits. It will only give pause, though more than shots from the BB gun(after the first one). The second part of the game-play, once the clock reaches 9(either by itself or through the player using the feature to jump in time) has you running around the house, now with the ability to fire the BB gun(if you picked it up and kept it), with the traps set(meaning that you, yourself can also walk into them, ruining them) and with Harry and Marv breaking into the house. Now, the clock counts up, and you are now to lure both burglars into enough traps each to secure they take the hits, and the high-score will then rank you based on damage they received(the highest being a hundred, each hit counting, yep, you guessed it, ten points) and the time it took you(hence the clock). All the ordinary(the ones that don't need shooting at) traps work the same way; there is an animation(some have more intricate and detailed ones than others) as Harry or Marv walk into them, they are stopped in their advancing for the while the animation takes(never more than a second or two), the trap is disabled(one use per each... no one said it was going to be easy!) and the counter at the top of the screen adds 1 hit to the scoreboard for that character. The thieves have different speeds of walking... the closer they are to you, and the angrier they are(meaning, the more of a beating they've taken, trying to get you), the faster they walk. You can usually get them to slow down by simply running away... they can't "see" much more than one room in front of them. Be wary, though... the one way you can lose in the game is getting caught by one of them, so stay on your guard. Whether or not they've seen you, and how fast they're moving can be seen at the top two corners of the screen... the first by whether or not the color of the text(red if they have, blue if they haven't; this text also helps you find doors and passageways) indicating which room they're in(only by name, though, so you may want to run around the house a couple of times and note the different rooms and their names and make sure you know them, since the McCallisters have what isn't much less of a mansion for you to go wild in), and the second is indicated by the animation(running or walking) of them in their respective upper corners. The animation will also show when they run into traps out of your field of view(which is only the room you're currently in) and when they give up. Speaking of the animation, it's fair for a game of this time. The graphics go for a somewhat satisfying level of detail and they do the job; you're never really confused as to what you just picked up or how a trap worked. The game-play is fairly entertaining, if somewhat limited. For such a simple game, the re-playability is pretty good; not only is there the motivation of trying to top the high-score, there is the unpredictability of where the burglars turn up, and how they move. Also, with the many places you can set up the traps, not many people will play the exact same way(plus, that allows you to change around the way you play, yourself, trying new things). The moment the second part of the game starts, where you lure Harry and Marv towards the traps, you get a counter that displays how many traps there are... of course, it doesn't say where any of them are, so you'd better be keeping an eye on where the two of them are, which traps they walk into. I recommend this to fans of puzzle-action games. 7/10. Even less entertaining than the movie for me.. Remember the days when you could rent a whole boat load of games for only a buck? Yeah, those were the days, I always enjoyed the days my parents let me rent five or more games. That way you could rent some reliable favorites and take some risks going outside the box. I rented this game and it was an outside of the box one. I did not like the movie, so I am not sure why I thought I would like the game. Perhaps I thought it would be fun setting traps and avoiding the two burglars. Well it isn't. The game is basically the house, basement of house and tree house. The two burglars pursue you relentlessly, but not to fear you have traps! Well, not very good ones as all they are, are squares with pictures on them representing what they are and I guess you have to use your imagination on what they do. All they do in this game is momentarily stun the two crooks. I applaud the game for keeping the game like the movie and only having the two villains and not adding all the typical enemies found in video games of the era. One could easily see them adding rats and spiders here and I think they actually did that with the super Nintendo version of the game. However, there just is not enough to do in this thing to make it a true video game. I have played flash games that were more involved than this one. At least it was only a dollar to rent, this one is not the type of game you would want to own. |
tt0023814 | The Bitter Tea of General Yen | In the late 1920s in Shanghai during the Chinese Civil War, as throngs of refugees flee the rainswept city, a couple of elderly missionaries welcomes guests to their home for the wedding of Dr. Robert Strike (Gavin Gordon), a fellow missionary, and Megan Davis (Barbara Stanwyck), his childhood sweetheart whom he has not seen in three years. Some of the missionaries have a cynical view of the Chinese people they have come to save. Shortly after Megan arrives, her fiancé Bob rushes in and postpones the wedding so he can rescue a group of orphans who are in danger from the spreading civil war. Megan insists on accompanying him on his mission.
On the way they stop at the headquarters of General Yen (Nils Asther), a powerful Chinese warlord who controls the Shanghai region. While Megan waits in the car, Bob pleads with the general for a safe passage pass so he can save the orphans. Contemptuous of Bob's missionary zeal, General Yen gives him a worthless paper that describes Bob's foolishness. Bob and Megan reach St. Andrews orphanage safely, but the pass only makes the soldiers laugh and steal their car when they try to leave with the children. The missionaries and children eventually reach the train station, but in the chaos, Bob and Megan are both knocked unconscious and are separated.
Sometime later, Megan regains consciousness in the private troop train of General Yen, attended by his concubine, Mah-Li (Toshia Mori). When they arrive at the general's summer palace, they are greeted by a man named Jones (Walter Connolly), Yen's American financial advisor, who tells him that he has succeeded in raising six million dollars, hidden in a nearby boxcar, for General Yen's war chest. Megan is shocked by the brutality of the executions conducted outside her window. Fascinated and attracted by the young beautiful missionary, the general has his men move the executions out of earshot and assures her that he will send her back to Shanghai as soon as it is safe.
One evening, Megan drifts off to sleep and has an unsettling erotic dream about the general who comes to her rescue and kisses her passionately. Soon after, she accepts the general's invitation to dinner. While they are dining, the general learns that his concubine Mah-Li has betrayed him with Captain Li (Richard Loo), one of his soldiers. Later, after General Yen arrests Mah-Li for being a spy, Megan tries to intervene, appealing to his better nature. The general challenges her to prove her Christian ideals by forfeiting her own life if Mah-Li proves unfaithful again. Megan naively accepts and ends up unwittingly helping Mah-Li betray the general by passing information to his enemies about the location of his hidden fortune.
With the information provided by Mah-Li, the general's enemies steal his fortune, leaving him financially ruined and deserted by his soldiers and servants. General Yen is unable to take Megan's life—it is too precious to him. When she leaves his room in tears, he prepares a cup of poisoned tea for himself. Megan returns, dressed in the fine Chinese garments he gave her. She waits on him in the gentle manner of a concubine. When she says she could never leave him, he only smiles, then drinks the poisoned tea.
Sometime later, Megan and Jones are on a boat headed back to Shanghai. While discussing the beauty and tragedy of the general's life, Jones comforts Megan by saying that one day she will be with him again in another life. | cruelty, murder | train | wikipedia | Frank Capra made a sort of "little" film in 1933, little in that it starred then up-and-coming Barbara Stanwyck (the future iconic star of Double Indemnity and The Furies had only been in a few films before) and that it dealt with a topic that was very touchy to attempt for in 1933; only Griffith before had tried to deal with some kind of interracial bonding and/or sexual tension between white and Chinese people on screen, at least to my knowledge.
This has excellent dialog and a potent message about trying to make a difference, to make some sort of change where things are, perhaps in simplification (hey, it's Capra), about the same as they've been for 2,000 years.It's a message that infers some tendencies to prejudices on both sides, of the white well-educated woman who sees to do good wherever she can and the stalwart General who will try to impress and act cordial around the lady but mostly because he wants to have his way- which may be with her.
The story itself sounds kind of typical, probably because by today's standards it is: Megan Davis has just come to China to do missionary work but is caught in the midst of a bad civil war going on, and after a tumultuous battle she gets caught up in in the streets and is knocked out is taken into the 'care' of General Yen (Nils Asther, no, not Chinese apparently but does so good a job as to not notice *too* much).
I'm not sure if the latter gave quite a great performance, but for what she's given she elevates it into a stern-faced but kind-hearted portrayal of a woman caught in an untenable situation, and Asther gives as good as he can by bypassing the obvious pit-fall of stereotyping by making Yen a very human figure.
Somehow Capra is able to garner very good work from them with a story that, in the wrong hands, could become the most ham-fisted thing on the planet.Luckily not only is Capra uncompromising in dealing with the issues at hand both upfront and underlying in terms of race and ethnicity and just the clashing of cultures, but in technical terms with the bits of battle scenes (the shoot-out late in the film at the train station is breathtaking for 1933 and pretty good for today), and it shows a director so confident in his craft that he could be ready for better things.
It is a 1933 Frank Capra film, about a love affair between a Christian missionary's fiancée and an educated Chinese warlord, a film which broke the taboo against depicting inter-racial relationships just prior to the introduction of the reactionary Hayes code in Hollywood.As a work of film craftsmanship and artistry it is just breath-taking - starting with the initial scenes of chaos in the midst of a bombing raid where Megan Davis (Barbara Stanwyk) makes her first impression on General Yen through a small act of kindness.
Nils Asther's performance as Yen is, at this point, heartbreaking.It has been commented that several Chinese in the Christian household at the beginning of the film appear in shadow and are depicted as sinister.
A young missionary finds herself swept into a world of Oriental intrigue & power, after being rescued' by a Chinese warlord.With THE BITTER TEA OF GENERAL YEN, Columbia Pictures & director Frank Capra created a small cinematic gem.
Capra's favorite actress, the dramatic flames she lights are an intriguing counterpoint to the repressed emotions of Asther's Yen.Loud, brash Walter Connolly, as the General's financial advisor, makes a good contrast to Asther; his plainspoken character often gives voice to what the others are thinking.
A young Richard Loo is her secret lover.Movie mavens will recognize Clara Blandick in the role of the feisty missionary hostess at the beginning of the film & Willie Fung as the rebel train engineer, both uncredited.*****************************While meant to be funny and introduce the plot, the opening scenes are a bit unfair to Western missionaries in China, portraying them as rather fatuous, repressed & gossipy.
That today the Underground Church' in China numbers many millions of Christian believers stands as a witness to the faithfulness of these good people.The era of the Chinese warlord - such as General Yen in the film - was brief but colorful and extremely violent.
The film was early Stanwyck but she was as good as ever and, coupled with Asther, they worked magic.The picture has been reviewed about 50 times now and everyone recaps the plot.
Well, it shouldn't surprise me since this film was banned in England for many years (reportedly for its miscegenation subject, a delicate matter for the British Empire in those years).This fantastic tale of a Chinese Warlord's (Nils Asther) infatuation with an American Woman (Stanwyck), who's engaged to a missionary, is charged with sensuality, erotic imagery and sexual tension (by early 1930s standards) between the two leading players.Asther gives an intense, credible portrayal and is simply mesmerizing as the Warlord, in spite of the fact that he was actually Swedish.
Toshia Mori is deliciously evil as Asther's double-crossing mistress.This film demonstrates that the Occidentals, at least up to that time, still did not fully appreciate and understand Oriental Cultures, dismissing its people as cruel and savage.Beautiful sets and décors..
A year before his major breakthrough film It Happened One Night director Frank Capra made this romantic tragedy that is filled with provocative topic and outstanding set design sensually photographed by master cinematographer Joseph Walker.Megan Davis (Barbara Stanwyck) arrives in China in the middle of a civil war to marry her missionary husband Dr. Robert Strike and then work alongside him.
Only Jones (Walter Connolly) the arms dealer is grounded in reality to the dire situation that faces them.Director Capra ably provides scenes of both chaos ( refugee evacuations, night battles ) and tranquility in the idyllic setting of Yen's compound palace where the General sets about seducing Megan with delicate charm while firing squads outside in the courtyard dispatch his enemy.
Capra also finds time to get some satiric shots in at Western superiority and hypocrisy but it is the sexual tension between the leads that is at the center of Yen.Megan's ambiguity is excellently conveyed by Stanwyck's actions and immature responses to the different world she finds herself.
I hope modern Scandanavians don't feel too humiliated by Nils Asther playing a Chinaman though (& v.v.) As a non practising Christian I didn't take offence at the criticism levelled at Christianity's manifold moral ambiguities - but enough of all that!A wonderful film to sink into every few years not only for the story but also the gleaming photography, the visual composition of the scene near the end where Yen is brewing the tea of the title is so achingly beautiful that it brings the tears to my eyes as I think about it!
Years ago I tried watching it off part-way through the film because I thought that the casting of Nils Asther as "General Yen" was ridiculous and rather insensitive since he looks about as Chinese as Nipsy Russell.
It certainly was a pretty film to look at and lovely cinematography sure helped as well.Second, while the movie has some silly stereotypes, in a way it is also very modern compared to other pictures of the day.
It dares to consider the possibility of interracial love (something banned when the new Production Code was put in place the following year) and despite initially come off as a demon, General Yen was quite decent and civilized in his own manner.
While trying to get some missionary orphans out of the way of war, she falls into the hands of Nils Asther playing the title role.Unlike Warner Oland in Shanghai Express or Akim Tamiroff in The General Died At Dawn, Asther is an intelligent and articulate man who expresses the Chinese view of life better than was seen on film until Curt Jurgens in The Inn Of Sixth Happiness.
In fact Walter Connolly who works for Asther in procuring arms for his troops is a far better observer of the Oriental mind than any of the missionary people.There is a subplot in The Bitter Tea Of General Yen very similar to The King And I.
One of Asther's many concubines is Toshia Mori who really loves one of his officers, Richard Loo. Asther reacts the same way Yul Brynner did when Tuptim found him so non-appealing, a question of vanity and pride more than of the heart.The interracial theme and the ideas way ahead of their time did not augur well for The Bitter Tea Of General Yen. I think it can be better appreciated by today's audience than the audience of 1933..
Her performance here is no exception to that rule.Straight off the ship in a pre-communist Shanghai, Megan Davis (played by Stanwyck) arrives in China to marry her missionary sweetheart and convert the heathen millions to Christianity.
The plot, although including some well-filmed action sequences, (if you look beyond some of the rather flimsy low budget sets) is largely a psychological one, playing out relentlessly to the bitter end.While the film stereotypes the Chinese, Mah-Li, (Yen's mistress), is played beautifully by the 21 year-old Japanese-American, Toshia Mori.
Indeed, Mori turns in arguably the best performance in the entire picture (although Stanwyck has a far harder role to play which she does admirably.) Jones (Walter Connolly), as a mercenary American, in some respects pre-figures the Rick character in "Casablanca" some nine years later, sans (to all appearances anyhow) any moral scruples whatsoever.It looks like Stanwyck used a stand-in for the nude bath sequence, but this is no flesh-pot picture: everything's filmed in a restrained style.
Barbara Stanwyck and Nils Asther star in "The Bitter Tea of General Yen," a 1933 film also starring Walter Connelly and Toshia Mori.Stanwyck plays missionary Megan Davis who comes to China during their civil war in order to marry another missionary, Dr. Strike (Gavin Gordon).
Walter Connelly plays a different kind of character, a tough American siding with General Yen.Well worth seeing for its place in history as well as for Stanwyck and Asther..
Megan wants to be a good American, she starts, and ends by rescuing children, she uses the word 'child' when describing Mao-lin.The falling away of the conventional world of America, into a strange elaborate space, Megan is allowed to respond to her desire, and dressed up returns to Yen. The hanky motif is symbolic.
Instead, she falls in love with a sexy Chinese warlord, Nils Asther (as General Yen), who is winds up holding her prisoner.
Frank Capra's "The Bitter Tea of General Yen" isn't as offensive as it appears, on the surface; although, the story is, ultimately, unsatisfactory.Still, it's a fine looking production, with beautiful direction and photography (Joseph Walker).
And, supporting actress Toshia Mori (as Mah-Li) makes it a passionate threesome - when the three of them share a scene, on Asther's train, every movement sizzles.******* The Bitter Tea of General Yen (1/6/33) Frank Capra ~ Barbara Stanwyck, Nils Asther, Walter Connolly, Toshia Mori.
In strife-ridden Shanghai, American girl Barbara Stanwyck arrives to work as a missionary and marry her doctor-partner, but they are separated in the midst of the political chaos and she is kidnapped by an exotic Chinese General.
So Nils Asther (born in Denmark) was cast as General Yen. If you are a movie maniac, you might know about Richard Barthelmess in "Broken Blossoms (1919)".There is a very good chance that some films lovers might have missed this movie.
As a matter of fact its theme of interracial love already got handled in much older films so it's not like this movie is the first to handle it but nevertheless the movie feels like a breath of fresh air, when being compared to the usual love-story from the '30's.It seems like an odd thing that a Swedish, born in Denmark, actor portrays a Chinese actor but the make-up effects are convincing looking and the fact that Nils Asther is Swedish makes sure that the character has a typical distinctive accent that sounds also like a real Chinese person that is speaking in English.
The movie features a surprising amount of war sequences still and also some surprising action.Besides the surprisingly fine acting Nils Asther, the movie also features Barbara Stanwyck, who gives a real great and effective performance.
The only character I enjoyed was that of General Yen played by Swedish actor, Nils Asther, who gives us a wonderful campy performance..
Bitter Tea of General Yen, The (1933) *** (out of 4) Nice drama about an American missionary (Barbara Stanwyck) who travels to China in hopes of saving kids from a Civil War but she is soon held hostage by the evil General Yen (Nils Asther) who has a strange fondness for her.
Probably one of Stanwyck's lesser known films--is a rather peculiar, but interesting story of an American woman who becomes fascinated with the Chinese warlord (Asther) who kidnaps her.
During a powerful rainstorm, Megan Davis (Barbara Stanwyck) meets General Yen (Nils Asther) briefly after her rickshaw driver is run down by his automobile.
Walter Connolly as Jones is a sufficient oily profiteer who cares only for his master: money!Frank Capra, one of America's greatest directors, is noted for well- crafted movies and impeccable set designs (note Yen's palace), even with lower budgets.
A young Barbara Stanwyck is the fiancé of an American missionary who is rescued from Chinese Civil War violence by the notorious warlord General Yen (Nils Asther, extraordinary).
The Bitter Tea Of General Yen is directed by Frank Capra, is based on a story by Grace Zaring Stone and stars Nils Asther, Barbara Stanwyck, Toshia Mori and Walter Connolly.This is one of Frank Capra's best films with beautiful photography and costumes and magnificent performances from the two lead actors.
The film is quite daring for it's time in that it tackles the subject of interracial relationships and looks at how foreign cultures were perceived by westerners at that time.Young missionary Megan Davis(Barbara Stanwyck)arrives in China during the civil war to marry Dr.Robert Strife(Gavin Gordon),one night during a fight at a train station she meets the feared Chinese General Yen(Nils Asther).
"The Miracle Woman" and the witty "Platinum Blonde" were sparkling vehicles for Barbara Stanwyck and Jean Harlow, but it is "The Bitter Tea of General Yen" that remains Capra's finest film
This is an exotic romance in which Stanwyck's prim American missionary is held hostage by a sinister but seductive Chinese warlord
Its story of a converter converted is not only erotic a startling dream sequence reveals the woman's hesitant, nervous awakening to her physical desires but a complex, tragic investigation of culture clash.
Read at your own risk!Anyone expecting to see something shocking from this pre-code film - The Bitter Tea of General Yen - is going to be disappointed.
They become separated (great crowd scenes) and Stanwyck is rescued...or is it kidnapped...by warlord General Yen (Nils Asther, a European actor).
Frank Capra made an artistic masterpiece in The Bitter Tea of General Yen, but it didn't make money.
The American missionary Megan Davis (Barbara Stanwyck) arrives in Shanghai during the Chinese Civil War to marry the missionary Dr. Robert Strife (Gavin Gordon).
The cruel General Yen falls in love for the naive and pure Megan and accepts her request to spare the life of Mah-Li against the will of his financial adviser Jones (Walter Connoly).
The Bitter Tea of General Yen. I didn't actually know it was from director Frank Capra (It's a Wonderful Life) till I actually started watching it, it featured in the book 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die, that is why I watched.
Set during the Chinese Civil War, American missionary Megan Davis (Double Indemnity's Barbara Stanwyck) arrives in Shanghai to marry Dr. Robert 'Bob' Strike (Gavin Gordon), but they postpone the wedding to rescue orphans from an orphanage burning in the battlefield.
The group are separated in the chaos, and Megan faints, waking in the palace of the man who saved/kidnapped her, warlord General Yen (Nils Asther).
***SPOILERS*** Forbidden and eventually tragic love affair between the beautiful American missionary Magen Davis, Barbara Stanwych, and the brutal bandit General Yen, Nils Asther, that wasn't meant, according to the popular opinions of that time, to be yet still against all odds happened!Magen going to war-torn China to work with her fiancée Dr. Robert "Bob"Strike, Gavin Gordon, in Shanghai is separated from him during a pitched gun battle between General Yen's man and those rebel forces out to get him.
Like most of Capra's films, Barbara Stanwyck (playing Megan Davis) comes to China as a missionary with her husband, Dr. Robert Strike (played by Gavin Gordon) with good intentions, with the hope of helping the people.
But, in the process of rescuing orphaned children from a literal war zone, she is knocked unconscious and "saved" by General Yen (played by Nils Asther in yellowface, which is hard to see in the black-and-white film).
THE BITTER TEA OF GENERAL YEN may very well be Frank Capra's first great film - out of many.
This is a story that was ahead of it's time in dealing with human relationships and racial prejudice, and it has a wonderful performance by Nils Asther as a Chinese warlord; it is his best work, and perhaps his last good role.
The racism is even more blatant in the creation of a taboo sexual tension between the worldly, powerful, and menacing General Yen (Nils Asther) and the young, pale, virginal white girl Megan Davis (Barbara Stanwyck).
I was never quite sure while watching this film whether this was supposed to be a love story between a ruthless Chinese bandit (played by the underrated Swedish actor Nils Asther) and an American missionary (played poignantly by Barbara Stanwyck), or whether it was a film made to ridicule Christians and Christianity by mocking everything they hold dear. |
tt0226875 | Joshuu sasori: Kemono-beya | Nami Matsushima (Meiko Kaji) is set up by her boyfriend, a crooked police detective named Sugimi (Isao Natsuyagi) to win favor with the Yakuza. She is raped by several drug dealers. She makes a failed attempt to stab Sugimi on the steps of the Tokyo Metropolitan Police Headquarters. She is sentenced to do hard time in a women's prison. Matsushima is given the number 701. The prison is run by sadistic and lecherous male guards. The prisoners are forced to walk up and down a stair-like contraption naked with male guards watching from below. While in prison Matsushima meets inmates like Yuki Kida (Yayoi Watanabe) who was convicted for fraud and theft, Otsuka (Akemi Negishi), jailed for burglary and extortion, and Katagiri (Rie Yokoyama) who was impounded for arson and illegally disposing of a body. Outside the prison, Sugimi and the Japanese mafia orchestrate a plan in which Matsushima will succumb to an "accidental" death in prison. They enlist the help of Katagiri, pulling on her ties to both Sugimi and the mafia, and quickly set their plan in motion.
Matsushima is attacked in the shower but defends herself, wounding the attacker. She is punished by being held bound by ropes in solitary confinement. A group of trustees including Katagiri torments her. One of them torments her by pouring hot soup on her. Matsushima is able to trip the trustee and make her spill the vat of hot soup over herself, causing horrible burns. Matsushima is forced to dig dirt holes for two consecutive days and nights. She kills a woman who attempts to attack her during this digging by tripping her and breaking her neck. Matsushima is hung and tied from the ceiling while being beaten by her fellow prisoners.
After a riot, Matsushima escapes and kills all the Yakuza and Sugimi with a dagger. The film ends with Matsushima walking alone back in prison. | revenge, cult, murder, violence | train | wikipedia | I have been looking forward to the release of this DVD (and it's follow-up {Female Prisoner Scorpion: #701's Grudge Song}) for some time.
All three of these movies were directed by Shunya Ito. What is great about them, though, is that, even though they all feature the same lead character (wonderfully played by Meiko Kaji), they are each vastly different from the others.
The second movie (Female Convict Scorpion: Jailhouse 41) is a real tour-de-force.
Not so much a WIP movie as the bulk of the film has Scorpion and six other escaped inmates on the lam.
This movie (Female Prisoner Scorpion: Beast Stable) is the third in the series and the last one directed by Shunya Ito. This one plays out as much more of a crime drama.
But I think these movies transcend most exploitation films because the more disturbing elements are played in a straighter tone rather than being used exclusively for in-your-face shock value.
It also features Meiko Kaji as Scorpion but had a different director.
Without giving anything away I want to mention that FPS: Beast Stable ends in such a way as to make a sequel completely unnecessary.
The fourth film is still quite good but it seems to play as a superfluous footnote to a mind-blowing trilogy.I would highly recommend this movie to anyone interested in out-of-the-ordinary films.
FPS: Beast Stable can be enjoyed as a stand-alone piece (as can the first two movies) but I would also recommend watching the others first if you have not already done so..
The third film in a cycle of incomparably brilliant Exploitation movies, and the third masterpiece in a row, "Joshuu Sasori: Kemono-beya" aka.
"Female Prisoner Scorpion: Beast Stable" (aka.
"Sasori: Den Of The Beast" where I live) of 1973 is a film that differs from its predecessors in some aspects, but that equals (or arguably even surpasses) them in brilliance.
The entire original Sasori series with the wonderful Meiko Kaji stands out as the absolute highlight in WIP cinema, and all of the films, especially the first three, uniquely combine Exploitation and Art-house cinema like no other movie does.
"Beast Stable" is the third, and second-to-last "Sasori" film with Meiko Kaji, the last one to be directed by genius director Shunya Ito and, in my opinion, the greatest of them all.
The first film "Joshuu 701-gô: Sasori" of 1972 is an absolute masterpiece of Exploitation cinema and simply THE Definition of Exploitation-Art. In the equally brilliant first sequel, "Joshuu Sasori: Dai-41 zakkyo-bô" Ito added more surrealism and symbolism.
The third "Sasori" film, "Beast Stable" keeps up the surrealism (allthough not quite to the same extent as the second), and features even more social criticism than its predecessors.
This third "Sasori" film is ingenious and sublime in all aspects and arguably the greatest of the, generally brilliant, cycle (to me it's this one, with the first one as a close second).
The visually stunning film features an enormous amount of brutal violence and sleaze again, as well as sequences of enormous surrealistic beauty.
The musical score is the same throughout all three films, with "Urami-Bushi", sung by Meiko Kaji herself, as the main theme, which is great, since the score is, simply put, pure perfection.
As its predecessors, "Beast Stable" is an absolutely brilliant masterpiece of Exploitation-Art that no serious lover of film can afford to miss.
This is Shunya Ito's final entry in the FEMALE CONVICT SCORPION series, starring the great Meiko Kaji.
Over the course of two films, she escapes to wreak vengeance against the man who got her busted, is sent back for his murder, and escapes again; the second film ends with Sasori on the loose.This, the third film, focuses on Sasori's life as a fugitive outside the walls.
In an eye-opening first scene, Sasori evades detectives on a subway train; she comes out of it handcuffed to one of the detectives' arms, but not the rest of him.
Sasori tries to lead a normal life, taking a job as a seamstress and renting her own apartment, but she and Yuki soon meet again and are both embroiled in a plot that involves the Cruella De Ville-from-hell madam who runs the prostitution ring and the detective from the subway (Mikio Narita, a regular in Kinji Fukasaku films), who by God wants his arm back.What follows is an atmospheric noir/horror yarn--it takes elements from both and uses them well--that applies Ito's flair for the visual to a mood that is different from the first two SCORPION films, yet bears the same unmistakable signature.
Each of the three films has its own style, I realize now, and seeing this one made me go back and watch the first, appreciating it more than before.Meiko Kaji gives her usual amazing performance as Sasori, emoting silently, standing or moving or pouncing or maiming with a grace that switches seamlessly between human and animal.
Reportedly, Kaji, who did one more SCORPION film after this one, had as much to do with developing the character for film as Ito, not only in her performances, but off-camera as well.
After finishing the Zero Woman series, I was looking forward to the Female Prisoner Scorpion series; both based upon comics by Tooru Shinohara.
Unfortunately, I was not able to see them in order, as this is the third in the series.It starts great as The Scorpion (Meiko Kaji) is escaping from the police.
If that isn't bad enough, later on a dog digs up the arm and is seen trotting down the street before finding a place to enjoy his treat.Scorpion might as well go back to prison as life is no picnic on the outside.
(The story O Yuki (Watanabe) and her brother is a subplot that is very interesting, but only incidental to the movie.) They try to burn her out, but this is The Scorpion, and she has some unfinished business.Not the usual mix of sex and violence, this is a slow tale that is beautiful throughout..
Since the past couple of days I'm really hooked on the "Female Scorpion" series and I keep hitting myself over the head because I waited until now which is way too long before purchasing the whole box set.
"Beast Stable" is the third brilliant effort in a row, and the undeniably main trump of this series is how the writers always came up with something entirely new and different for each installment.
Never before, or after, has there been an exploitation series that offered so much variety when it comes to story lines, settings, themes and filming styles.
Her own retarded brother (!) impregnates the prostitute, while Sasori gets in trouble with the local pimping and underground crime network.
Our multi-talented director Shunya Ito formidably criss-crosses all these story lines to a powerful wholesome and never once loses grip on the visual aspects or ingenious filming style.
Those who know Sasori's character a bit are aware that the film seriously lacks memorable dialogs, but this always gets widely compensated with Meiko Kaji's wondrous on screen charisma and menacing grimaces.
The first three "Female Convict Scorpion" movies, which are the only ones directed by Shunya Ito, are part of the same series but are entirely different entities structurally.
The first one is a fairly straight-forward 'women in prison' flick, the second is a piece of great avant-garde film-making, and the third is a slow paced character study.
Its still a very colorful and stylish film, with some really memorable scenes, but it leaves you wondering why such an otherwise energetic trilogy had to end on a period, and not the exclamation point that its avid fans had all been expecting.6/10.
The original Female Convict Scorpion is an all time masterpiece.
Director Shunya Ito has managed to do the same thing again with this film; the story is a bit different here, but still he's managed to take what made the previous entries excellent and better than many films of this type and craft something fairly original around it.
After escaping from pursuing police officers, one thing leads to another and Scorpion finds herself getting it together with a prostitute and her retarded brother.
The prostitute ends up getting impregnated by the retarded brother (...), while Scorpion is kidnapped and caged up by someone who she made an enemy out of in prison.
But Scorpion doesn't like spending time behind bars and it's not long before she's back to doing what she does best.The film gets off to a great start as we see Scorpion hack the arm off a copper intent on taking her back to jail.
From there, however, the film slows down a lot and Beast Stable ends up being more of a drama than the previous two films.
That's not to say that there isn't still plenty of action - Scorpion still spends a lot of time in 'revenge mode' and the film isn't exactly short on general sleaze.
Overall, I would say this film is between the first two in terms of quality - not as great as the original and slightly better than the second..
Fugitive prisoner Scorpion (Meiko Kaji) is on the run, pursued by a relentless, vengeful, one-armed detective named Kondo (Mikio Narita).
However, when the local prostitution ring gives poor little Yuki a very hard time, our silent heroine decides to seek revenge, and, in doing so, reveals her whereabouts to the law.Judging by IMDb's current rating (7.6 out of 10), and some glowing comments by trusted, prolific authors, I expected to have my socks blown clean off by Female Prisoner Scorpion: Beast Stable.
Indeed, the first few minutes, in which protagonist Nami Matsushima hacks off Kondo's arm (which is handcuffed to her) and proceeds to leg it with the severed limb dangling from her wrist, did just that (I paused the DVD to pop them back on).Unfortunately, however, the remainder of the film proved to be far less impressive, never matching the sheer audacity of the opening scene.
Sure, director Shunya Ito comes close with some exploitative moments including incestuous sex between Yuki and her retarded brother, and a nasty, forced abortion, but, for the most part, Beast Stable is rather boring, being very slow in the telling and uneventful for long stretches.The film is, of course, very stylish, and always good to look at (the stunning lead actresses certainly help there, with Watanabe obligingly getting her kit off a few times), but compared with parts one and two, this third outing for Scorpion is a tad disappointing..
Actress Meiko Kaji returns once more in the third installment of the FPS series, Beast Stable, the last FPS film directed by Shunya Ito and the second-to-last film in the original series overall.
Based on the manga by Toru Shinohara, it's the seminal Women in Prison movie franchise, although you wouldn't immediately guess the sub-genre based on this third film alone.Unlike the first film, an entertaining exploitation sleaze-fest, or the second, the quasi-feminist trippy road film, the third one is a lot more serious and quite darker than the first two.
The pacing is much slower, the colors much dimmer, and the setting is mostly urban, except for the final 10 minutes which do take place in prison.Once again, Meiko Kaji barely says anything (on her request, because she felt that her character in the first film was too obscene), but still has a great screen presence.
Aside from exploitative elements such as a prostitute pregnant with her retarded brother's child, the entire film just feels like it packs lesser of a punch than the first two did.
She also keeps a huge cage of crows for some reason (which later gives way for a short but bad visual effect of a flying crow), maybe to resemble a comic book villain, but that feels out of place.The surreal elements are also fewer.
Unfortunately, Meiko Kaji doesn't sing a second theme song here (like she did in the previous film) and overall the movie just feels uneventful, despite the strong beginning and a stylish ending scene.
The second film already got rid of the prison setting for the most part and this time we don't even visit the cold walls until the very end.
Probably not even close to the crazy ideas in the first and mainly second film, but the almost (of course relatively) subtle approach feels spot on at all times.Matsu remains unforgettable and she makes me beg for more and more.
It's becoming hard to come up with new complementing words for every brilliant Scorpion film.
Unfortunately, the third film in the Sasori series isn't of the same quality as the first two films.
This is in stark contrast to the energy of the second film, Female Convict Scorpion: Jailhouse 41.
Female Prisoner Scorpion, Take Three.
Both the police and an ex-prison mate of Sasori's pursue her.Although part three of four, some consider this the end of the original series because the director did not return for part four.
At this point in the series, Scorpion is barely even a "prison convict" and we can no longer say this is a "women in prison" film (really that only happened in the first).This film has its ups and downs, and I suppose if you watched the first two, you should probably watch the third.
"Female Convict Scorpion - Beast Stable", the third in the series, is a magnificent piece of pulp sleaze.
Shinya Ito, the director of the first installment, returns for this surreal fable which begins with Scorpion (Meiko Kaji) cutting the arm off a cop she is handcuffed to and fleeing into the Tokyo subway with said arm still swinging from her wrist.
It is the superior of the three first Scorpion films and features one great scene after another.
Another Rewarding Entry In The FEMALE PRISONER series....
Many consider BEAST STABLE to be the last of the "true" FEMALE PRISONER films, as it is the last of the series directed by Shunya Ito, and is followed by one other film (GRUDGE SONG) by a different director.
The way BEAST STABLE ended didn't really leave a lot of room for another predecessor - but I guess I'll find out...This entry has Scorpion on the run from the cops, where she hooks up with a street-hooker who ends up pregnant with her retarded brothers child (oh yeah - that's no lie...gotta love these sleazy story lines).
Scorpion ends up being kidnapped by an old rival, but (as she is so good at...) ends up escaping and taking revenge on some people that wronged a few of her hooker friends...I agree with some other reviewers, that this one is a little slower at points and more "serious" then the previous two entries.
The story is somewhat confusing and convoluted at times, but a lot of these 70's era pinky films are - and I still love them.
BEAST STABLE is lacking pretty badly in the nudity area which was pretty disappointing - but I thought it strong in other areas - storyline, cinematography, some good sleaze,etc...Definitely worthwhile to fans of this sort of thing, or who have enjoyed the other FEMALE PRISONER films...8/10.
The third and final Female Prisoner Scorpion film directed by Shunya Ito. The series' star, Meiko Kaji, would complete the series in the fourth installment, Grudge Song, directed by the capable Yasuhara Hasebe (who also directed Kaji in the excellent Stray Cat Rock: Sex Hunter).
The original Female Prisoner #701: Scorpion is one of my all-time favorites.
Sasori (Kaji) eludes detectives in the first scene (she is handcuffed to one and lops his arm off and escapes with it in tow, which must be seen to be believed!) and hooks up with a freelance prostitute, Yuki.
BEAST STABLE is the third of the four-film FEMALE PRISONER SCORPION series and once again features the incredible acting talents of Meiko Kaji as the put-upon Sasori.
This one benefits from the best opening sequence of the series, in which Sasori is nearly captured by cops on a train and hacks off a man's arm to escape!
Mikio Narita, a firm presence in cult Japanese cinema (I remember him as Hiroyuki Sanada's evil uncle in ROARING FIRE as well as his turns in the BATTLES WITHOUT HONOUR & HUMANITY series) is great as the one-armed cop obsessed with tracking Sasori down..
Female Prisoner Scorpion: Beast Stable.
There's hell to pay when you cross Nami Matsushima(Meiko Kaji), Female Scorpion, and a dangerous group of thugs(..including their sadistic head pimp and his equally repellent lady), operating a prostitution ring with an iron fist, does just that.
Hell hath no fury like Scorpion, and a determined detective, Gondo(Mikio Narita), seeking revenge for decapitating his arm after handcuffing her, will do whatever it takes(..and that includes intimidating anyone who might know her whereabouts)to catch Nami.
Especially if Yuki comes to her aid?Trust me when I say there was no shackles binding director Shunya Ito or his film-making team because FEMALE PRISONER SCORPION:BEAST STABLE is yet another perverse, deranged, and ultra-violent entry in the very entertaining series.
His fate at the end, visiting another enemy of Nami's, in an isolated cell, while she looks on, perfectly encapsulates what makes these films so ridiculous yet so entertaining.
I imagine many will walk away from this scoffing at how unrealistic FEMALE PRISONER SCORPION:BEAST STABLE is(..specifically how Nami is able to escape capture time and time again, accomplishing her goals of revenge, paying back all those who have wronged her), but I looked at it as a violent action cartoon, much like the later 80's films, and enjoyed it for what it was.
My favorite scene has nothing to do with the plot, but is so wonderfully wrong, features a dog discovering Gondo's rotted severed arm, walking through a street eventually finding a resting place to chew on it! |
tt0113987 | Nixon | The movie starts in 1972 with the “plumbers” breaking into The Watergate and subsequently getting arrested. 18 months later (Dec.1973). Nixon's’ Chief Of Staff, General Alexander “Al” Haig (Powers Boothe) brings Pres. Richard “Dick” M. Nixon (Anthony Hopkins) tapes to listen to. The two men talk about The Watergate Scandal, and about what a mess it has become. After talking about the death of J Edgar Hoover. Nixon goes on to curse out John Dean James McCord and others involved in Watergate. As Haig turns to leave, Nixon asks Haig why he hasn't been given a pistol to commit suicide like an honorable soldier.
Nixon starts the taping system which trigger memories that start a series of time jumps. The first, takes us back to June 23, 1972 about a week after the break in. To a meeting with Halderman( James Woods) Erlichman(J.T Walsh) And Dean (David Hyde Pierce). Ehrlichman and Dean leave, Nixon speaks the “Smoking Gun” tape to Halderman.
The film covers most aspect of Nixon's life and political career. The film implies that Nixon and his wife abused alcohol and prescription medication. Nixon's health problems, including his bout of phlebitis and pneumonia during the Watergate crisis, are also shown in the film, and his various medicants are sometimes attributed to these health issues. The movie also hints at some kind of responsibility, real or imagined, that Nixon felt towards the John F. Kennedy assassination through references to "the Bay of Pigs", the implication being that the mechanisms set into place for the invasion by Nixon during his term as Dwight D. Eisenhower's vice-president spiraled out of control to culminate in the assassination and, eventually, Watergate.
The film ends with Nixon's resignation and famous departure from the lawn of the White House on the helicopter, Army One. Real life footage of Nixon's funeral in Yorba Linda, California plays out over the extended end credits, and all living ex-presidents at the time, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, and then-president Bill Clinton, are shown in attendance. | dramatic, flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0042397 | Dial 1119 | Homicidal escaped mental patient Gunther Wyckoff (Marshall Thompson) arrives by bus in Terminal City. As he gets off, he is confronted by the bus driver for stealing his Colt pistol. Wyckoff uses it to kill the driver.
Wyckoff tries to locate a man named Dr. Faron, at both his office and then at his home address - an apartment building - with no luck. As he leaves the building, it is a warm night, and he notices the Oasis Bar across the street. He goes into the bar and finds there is a good vantage point to observe the entryway to the apartment building. The bar is tended by Chuckles and his assistant/relief-person Skip (whose wife is in hospital about to have a baby).
Chuckles, seeing a news flash story on the TV, notices Wyckoff is one of his customers and tries, unsuccessfully, to reach a pistol he has stashed behind the bar. At this point, there are four patrons in the bar: the sluttish barfly Freddy; the young Helen, who is accompanied by an attentive older gentleman, Earl; and newspaper reporter Harrison D. Barnes. Chuckles then tries to telephone the police, but Wyckoff shoots Chuckles dead as he is placing the call. Wyckoff then orders the bar patrons to occupy one table, where he can keep an eye on them. Meanwhile, the gunshot and subsequent scream by Helen attracts attention. As a beat police officer approaches the bar, he is shot in the leg by Wyckoff. Bystanders rescue the officer, and a call is made for reinforcements to respond to a man barricaded in the bar.
The five hostages discuss what might be going on with Wyckoff. The relief barman, when asked, notes the gun holds eight rounds, but while he is speaking, Wyckoff replaces the magazine with a new one.
Wyckoff calls the police. He demands the police stay away, but deliver Dr. Faron to the bar within 25 minutes or he will kill the hostages. It is revealed that Faron is the local police psychiatrist. The press set up TV coverage near the bar, while the crowd of onlookers grows.
As police discuss tactics, Faron is found and brought to the bar. Being a newspaperman, Harrison reminds the others that Wyckoff's crime was a big local story three years before. As Faron pleads with the police to let him attempt to handle Wyckoff, they try to enter the bar undetected. Wyckoff becomes aware of the attempted breach and seriously wounds an officer. Faron again pleads with the police, and says, "I demand that you let me do my job!", which Wyckoff sees on the TV. The police captain resents Faron's success at getting Wyckoff a light sentence the first time around. The police prepare a breach en masse with two minutes left before Wyckoff's deadline, but Faron slips away and enters the bar. He tries to convince Wyckoff he is delusional, but after some discussion, Wyckoff becomes agitated and shoots Faron dead.
The phone rings, and Skip knows it is the hospital calling about his wife. Desperate to answer, he struggles with Wyckoff; at the same moment, the police detonate an explosive charge and extinguish the lights. In the confusion, one of the hostages uses Chuckles under-counter gun to shoot Wyckoff. In shock, he staggers outside and is cut down by police gunfire. As he kneels over Faron's body, the police captain rhetorically asks an officer, "How far does man have to go to prove that he's right?" | insanity, suspenseful, murder, claustrophobic | train | wikipedia | After killing a bus driver, the baby faced young man seeks refuge in a bar and holds its patrons hostage.
The film is also notable as it was one of the first movies put out by MGM under new management which turned the company away from solely making big budget events.
A deranged young man, Gunther Wyckoff (whacko with a gun, played menacingly by Marshall Thompson in perhaps his best performance), shoots a city bus driver with the driver's own pistol, then holds up in a local bar using the patrons as hostages.
Ironically, Wyckoff does his own negotiating with the law, demanding to see the psychiatrist that is in charge of treating him.What a crew of hostages: A barfly willing to bed anyone who buys her a drink, an old married fool making arrangements for a weekend tryst with a sweet young thing, a young man whose wife is in delivery at the hospital, a zealous reporter whose newspaper editor thinks he's a joke, and Chuckles, the bartender, played by the dour William Conrad of radio's "Gunsmoke" and later TV's "Cannon" fame.
An alternate title was "The Violent Hour," which basically describes the plot of the film, approximately an hour's standoff between the psycho and the police who work to free the hostages unharmed.
Items that were curiosities at the time but are now part of everyday life: A flat-panel big screen TV, TV news hype, and, alas, crazies that for no reason shoot patrons who are total strangers.The chosen title, "Dial 1119," which today reminds the viewer of "Call 911," is a fitting one.
Dial 1119 (1950)The simple premise here is transcended by gritty, real acting and some nice filming and editing to make a great minor movie.
But when he gets to the town where the doctor lives, things go wrong, and he ends up with a set of hostages in a second story bar.
Police arrive and surround him, and the standoff begins.What happens next is partly formula, as each of the hostages has some kind of encounter with the man, either in trying to talk him out of things, or make a phone call for help, or eventually physically attack.
This is more of the gritty truth of what it might actually be like.Outside the bar, as the townspeople gather and the police strategize, it's a believable situation as well.
Eventually the doctor takes a chance and goes in to talk to the criminal in what is now an established profession of crisis negotiator.One fascinating aspect here, for 1950 especially, is the role of live television.
The technology that is implied for this kind of very large device isn't clear (they mention something in the movie which doesn't explain it, really, but which makes clear they know it's unusual for the time).There are several excellent (and familiar) actors in this tightly woven plot.
This is a most effective little thriller from 1950 concerning a disturbed killer who holds a group of people hostage in a bar.
The actors playing the various hostages are capable, however, and there's a nice sense of what city life was probably like at around this time.
What I liked about "Dial 1119" is that it's basically ignored as an example of film noir yet, for a film made in 1950, this thing was ahead of its time.
Good cast with William ("Cannon") Conrad as Chuckles the bartender, Leon ("Mr. Ed") Ames and Marshall ("Daktari") Thompson as the central character, our friendly neighborhood psycho.
Finally, you've got a love a film noir selection that takes place in Terminal City..
Marshall Thompson broke new casting grounds in playing the criminally insane escaped mental patient in Dial 1119.
MGM was one of the last big studios to put out a realistic type noir film like this one.Time and circumstances get six people trapped in a bar in the fictitious Terminal City where Thompson after taking a weapon from a bus driver and killing him over it, he holds up in a bar.
When the news comes over the bar television, Thompson shoots bartender William Conrad and holds the other customers which include Virginia Field, Andrea King, Leon Ames, Keefe Brasselle, and James Bell as hostages.Thompson had been convicted once of murder, but was declared insane and given a life sentence at an asylum due to the work of psychiatrist Sam Levene.
They have a lot to say to each other during the course of the film.Dial 1119 moves at a pretty good pace and not a minute of its 75 minute running time is wasted.
The lack of really big movie names no doubt helps create the realistic aura of the film.Marshall Thompson usually played good guys and will ever be remembered as Daktari from the television show.
Opponents of capital punishment will not be pleased, but Dial 1119 is still a great noir film..
This sort of plot has been repeated several times in the 1950s with "Suddenly", "The Desperate Hours" and this film, "Dial 1119".The major difference with "Dial 9111" and these other films is that instead of a criminal holding everyone hostage, it's an escaped mental patient--a guy who has no compunction about killing people with his stolen gun.
The bar is made up of a variety of patrons (some of which have interesting back stories--like the creep played by Leon Ames) as well as the amazingly blunt and rude bartender, 'Chuckles' (William Conrad).Once the guy begins shooting people in the bar, there isn't a lot the police can do--he might be insane but he's also smart and has figured all the angles--and police are afraid to do anything lest all the captives be killed.
It stars Marshall Thompson, Virginia Field, Andrea King, William Conrad and Sam Levine.
A compact suspenser, Dial 1119 can be seen as very much a prototype of future thrillers where a hostage situation takes place.
Here the story basically sees Thompson as escaped mental patient Gunther Wyckoff, who takes a bus to Terminal City, grabs hold of a gun and holes up in a bar with a small group of hostages.
Once MGM gave the go-ahead for a sub-department to produce low-budget Film-Noir's they got it right.
Especially the usually ineffective Marshall Thompson as a man without a conscience and is completely fixated internally.The shots of inside the Media truck and the big-screen TV are infiltrations of a yet to be discovered, mammoth intrusion of the Fourth Estate.
So, now the crazy guy is loose in the city, headed for a late night bar sporting that new-fangled invention called television.
Anyway, it's a good, tight little B-film, with the novel idea (for its time) that movies and TV might get along, after all..
Bar patrons held hostage in slice-of-life noir.
In Dial 1119 -- the equivalent of 911 today -- clean-cut Marshall Thompson plays the most whacked-out of the bunch, a cold, disengaged psycho who kills without reaction or remorse.
Riding the Big Dog into town (the aptly named Terminal City), he steals the bus driver's gun and, when confronted, plugs him dead.
Seems he returned to town to meet with the police psychiatrist who knows the "real" story behind his shell-shocked persona....Dial 1119 is an engaging (if never quite gripping) drama, part of MGM's low-budget, black-and-white early 1950s productions under Dore Schary.
Out of the grayness of film noir drama comes a pondering on the gray area of social engineering.
MGM was known for "More stars than there are in Heaven." And therefore few people think of it in terms of film noir.But some of the very best noir came out of that studio in the 1940s and 1950s -- this being one of the bleakest and grittiest.It's kind of a "Grand Hotel" in a sleazy bar.
We have lots of types, but, with the exception of one dear thing on her way to the road to Hell with an older man, they're extremely convincing low lifes.We have a real prostie here, a tough bartender, a couple of guys on the make.The escaped killer is portrayed very brutally, with understanding but no phony-baloney tears.The cast could scarcely be better.
An engaging film despite a thin story line involving a psycho who's taken five hostages in a down-scale local bar.
In Dial 1119, as in so many noir films, the locations, sets, and artifacts, are usually more interesting than the plot line.
For me, the most remarkable feature of this film is the prominent TV set in the bar where most of the action takes place (the sport being watched is pro-wrestling).
The TV though is more than a prop--it often dominates the screen and begins to take on a key role in the film when a TV reporter and camera crew from the cleverly named station WKYL arrive to cover the police rescue action, which is then seen broadcast on the bar TV.
Having just watched this on TCM and after reading the previous reviews for this film all I can say is that although there may be limited moments of great suspense which does not take anything away from the film.The plot- insane man escapes from a mental institution and holds five people hostage in a bar.
Marshall Thompson stars in this interesting thriller as Gunther Wyckoff, a mentally unstable young man who has escaped from an asylum, killed a bus driver with a gun he acquired, then holds a bar hostage with several people inside.
Both the authorities and hostages try to work with and understand why Gunther is so crazed, with little success, though it does have something to do with his war record...
William Conrad is good as the bartender affectionately named Chuckles, who has a most surprising big screen TV in the bar, where they can see their drama play out live.
A man escapes from an asylum and holds people hostage in a bar, as the police try to meet his demands.
Conrad plays "Chuckles" the bartender and he's pretty good, as is the rest of the cast, featuring such reliable veterans as Levene and Ames.
It's 1950, and familiar TV faces abound in "Dial 1119": Marshall Thompson (Daktari), Sam Levene, Keefe Brasselle, William Conrad and Virginia Field.
Thompson plays Gunther Wyckoff, a deeply disturbed man who, after shooting a bus driver with his own gun, walks into a bar and takes the patrons hostage.The police have to figure out how to capture Wyckoff and free the hostages without any other people getting hurt.
They send in the doctor (Levene) whose testimony saved his life during a murder trial three years earlier.It's post-war, so there's some psychoanalyzing of Wyckoff along the way.The bar has a giant television, which is great to see, and the bartender controls it from what looks like a radio below.
This crazy person is played by Marshall Thompson, (Gunther Wyckoff) who is riding in a bus and sitting next to a lady who is trying to be friendly, but Gunther just looks straight ahead and views a gun that the bus driver had on his sun shade and just gets up and blows this driver away.
The studio was undoubtedly hoping that baby-faced Marshall Thompson would be just as ironically chilling playing a killer as Alan Ladd was a few years earlier in "This Gun For Hire".
This story seems to repeat itself over and over again in movies, TV, and real life.An angry war veteran seizes hostages and/or murders innocents, and gains media attention and feedback -- in this movie, by means of telephone and television.(Does the name Christopher Dorner ring a bell?)Perhaps this was one of the first depictions of PTSD.
The theme is the psychological destruction that comes from war, whether involved or rejected from duty, and here, it is the later, surrounding the already demented Marshall Thompson, a young man who believes it is his duty to kill, having wanted so much to do so when World War II came up.Killing a bus driver after he is discovered to have a gun, he then takes over a local bar where a new invention called television is presenting local news as the bartender (William Conrad) grumbles about it.
It is the local news that will soon be camping outside this bar when Thompson orders local police to send doctor Sam Levene there for one last confrontation in exchange for the hostages he has taken.
These are the most memorable of the hostages, the others (including a newspaper man whose own paper ignores his call for help) not as fleshed out.The film makes a few important comments on both the human condition and the issue of violence in society.
In only 75 minutes, the film's gritty and unapologetic violence takes several lives shockingly and seems to be written just to expose the growing violence in society rather than present a plot which is neatly wrapped up like the usual MGM fare.
This psycho rolls into town on a bus and shoots the driver with his own gun for no apparent reason.
He then wanders into a bar full of cast characters, and when his picture appears on tv, he shoots the bartender.
He then holds the bar patrons hostage and notifies the cops with a demand that he wants to see his shrink.
By this time, I wanted to see my shrink.The psycho is played - or should I say underplayed - by Marshall Thompson.
Anyway, the shrink finally talks his way into the bar and takes that high energy opportunity to confront this guy with the news that he was rejected by the draft and invented a story that the military taught him to kill in order to hide his own inadequacies.
Marshall Thompson as an escaped crazed killer and general all-round psycho?
A couple of bursts of hysteria and that's about it.The story takes place in a small, rather cozy bar in Terminal City (get it?) that looks like the Big Apple.
Thompson hold 6 people hostage, (well, really 5 since he guns down the bartender William Conrad right off the bat).
He wants to meet up with his former doctor, played rather badly by Sam Levine, who convinced a jury that Thompson was insane, thereby having him sent to an asylum instead of the gas chamber.
Needless to say, Thompson is ticked off, escapes from the asylum and threatens to kill the bar patrons unless Levine shows up for a face-to-face.
(There are Spoilers) Hostage drama that takes place in this bar with an on the loose psycho killer who just flew the coop from the local state hospital for the criminally insane wanting to see his shrink, psychiatrist, who got him off from being executed for the murder of a policeman three years earlier.The crazed killer Gunther Wyckoff, Marshall Tompson, didn't waste any time in making himself known to the public and police by gunning down a bus driver,John Damler, who's gun that was in full view of everyone on the bus was lifted by Gunther when everyone, including the bus driver, left the bus on a rest stop.
Gunther going to the local bar to dry out only gets even more crazy when the bartender Chuckels, William Conrad,who's only doing his job forces him to have a drink, which he of course doesn't pay for.
Within minutes Gunther completely loses it when he's spotted by Chuckels on the screen of his 3 by 4 foot remote control flat-screen projection TV set broadcasting a police bulletin with his picture, front and side, and then all hell breaks lose.Gunning down Chuckles who tried to pull a gun on him Gunther then takes center stage, and five hostages, in the movie as he calls all the shots, as well as giving them out.Gunther is determined to having a chat with Dr. Faron about his both mental state and military service.
This goes on for what seems like days, it's all supposed to take place in less then a hour, as Gunther terrorizers the customers who are now his hostages.
You can't help wondering why Gunther wants so badly to see Dr. Faron to the point where he already murdered two people to get an audience with him?You know right away that this guy, Gunther Wyckoff, is not only nuts but all his talk about his glorious and macho experiences in the US Army during the war, that he talks endlessly about to his captive audience, is all a pile of horse-sh*t.
It's Dr Faron himself who later, against police orders, makes it into the bar and finally has this important talk with the psycho.
Dr. Faron sets the now really off-the-wall Gunther off and jeopardizing not only his but the lives of all the people in the bar.Interesting but not at all earth-shaking movie about a mentally ill young man, Gunther Wyckoff, who just couldn't get it out of his head that he was a failure at what he loved most in being a blood & guts war hero.
Marshall Thompson breaks out of a hospital for the criminally insane, travels to "Terminal City" and after shooting the bus driver, barges into a saloon and holds the half dozen patrons hostage.
Levene and the cops surrounding this dismal joint believe that Marshall just wants to talk to his former shrink, but he doesn't.
He's come to kill him.So we wait, while Marshall kills the sour bartender who tries to dial 1119 and get the police, while the cops try to sneak a sharpshooter in through an air duct, and while some of the customers go through the varied tribulations familiar to fans of the airplane-in-danger movies.
Sam Levene is always a treat but he's been given a role here -- the police shrink who got Thompson out of the electric chair three years ago by spouting a lot of psychobabble -- that no actor on earth could pull off without sacrificing his dignity.In the lead role, Marshall Thompson plays the madman as if he'd never met one. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.